Skip navigation

'The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell' for Wednesday, September 3rd, 2014

Read the transcript to the Wednesday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

THE LAST WORD WITH LAWRENCE O`DONNELL
September 3, 2014

Guest: William Taylor, William McCants, Alfred P. Doblin; Jeremy Wade;
Ryan Gallagher


LAWRENCE O`DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: As the unintended consequences of
President Bush`s war in Iraq continue to mount, the seemingly unintended
consequences -- today, President Obama answered the question about what his
objective is in dealing with the latest unintended consequence of President
Bush`s war in Iraq.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Our reach is long and
justice will be served.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Stepped up rhetoric against ISIS.

JOE BIDEN, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We will follow them
to the gates of hell.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are we trying to contain this threat or defeat it?

OBAMA: Our objective is clear, to degrade and destroy ISIL.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The rhetoric is not matching the strategy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is this president, though, at this time, being too
cautious?

SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D), CALIFORNIA: Good Lord, I want a deliberative
president.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The U.S. is in fact in this for the long haul.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sending another 350 military personnel --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: To protect our embassy in Baghdad.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bringing the total to more than 1,100 troops in
country.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Obviously, we won`t be going in any combat.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It might be time to go back in there.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Americans can go in and clear the area. But
as soon as they leave, the Islamic State comes back.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Working with the allies in the gulf in the region
is critical.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Throughout Europe, there is growing concern.

DAVID CAMERON, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: We will not waver in our aim
of defeating terrorism.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We shouldn`t bear this -- shoulder this burden
alone.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are we at war or not at war?

JOHN KERRY, SECRETARY OF STATE: The United States will hold them
accountable.

OBAMA: We will not be intimidated.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

O`DONNELL: President Obama is in Wales tonight on the eve of the NATO
summit there. He will meet tomorrow with the British Prime Minister David
Cameron to discuss forming an international coalition to combat the Islamic
State.

At a press conference in Estonia this morning, President Obama was
asked about the objective.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: Our objective is clear, and that is to degrade and destroy
ISIL, so that it`s no longer a threat -- not just to Iraq but also the
region and to the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: President Obama also spoke for the first time about the
death of American journalist Steven Sotloff.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: Whatever these murders think they`ll achieve by killing
innocent Americans like Steven, they have already failed. We will not be
intimidated. Their horrific acts only unite us as a country and stiffen
our resolve to take the fight against these terrorists, and those who make
the mistake of harming Americans will learn that we will not forget and
that our reach is long and that justice will be served.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: A spokesman for the family of Steven Sotloff addressed the
media today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARAK BARFI, SOTLOFF FAMILY SPOKESMAN: He merely wanted to give voice
to those who had none. From a Libyan doctor in Misrata, who struggled to
provide psychological services to children ravaged by war, to the Syrian
plumber who risked his life by crossing regime lines to purchase medicines,
their story was Steve`s story. He ultimately sacrificed his life to bring
their story to the world. Steve was no hero. Like all of us, he was a
mere man who tried to find good concealed in a world of darkness.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Vice President Joe Biden said this this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: If they think the American people will be intimidated, they
don`t know us very well. When people harm Americans, we don`t retreat. We
don`t forget. We take care of those who are grieving. And when that`s
finished, they should know, we will follow them to the gates of hell until
they are brought to justice, because hell is where they will reside. Hell
is where they will reside.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Joining me now is former Ambassador William Taylor. He
served in the Baghdad embassy in 2004 and is the vice president at the
Institute for Peace. And William McCants, a fellow at the Brookings Center
for Middle East Policy, and a former State Department adviser on
counterterrorism.

Ambassador Taylor, we seem to be in the endless flow of unintended
consequences of the war in Iraq, and this flow of consequences seems
endless. What makes us think that we have the power to end these
unintended consequences here and now?

AMB. WILLIAM TAYLOR, SERVED IN U.S. EMBASSY IN IRAQ: Well, we have a
challenge that we have to face, and it sounds like this administration is
beginning to face up to that challenge and take some steps in order to deal
with it. It is -- it is a challenge that has threatened Americans, that
has killed Americans. As the president and vice president both said, this
is something that we deal with, that we respond to. We have forces in
Iraq, again, that can begin to deal with this problem.

O`DONNELL: William McCants, should we really be using the death of
two American journalists who went over there into that area knowing exactly
what the risks are, we should be using the death of those two individuals
as some justification for an escalation of some form of war?

WILLIAM MCCANTS, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: No, we shouldn`t. We should
be using the risk of the jihadists in the Islamic State to our allies in
Europe and to our allies in the region. We can`t allow the death of two
journalists, however horrific they may have been, to dictate our response.
And I think that`s why the president is taking a go-it-slow approach in
trying to figure out the right way forward. It`s one thing to take the
fight to ISIS in Iraq. It`s quite another to go into Syria.

O`DONNELL: Let`s listen to what Secretary of State Kerry said today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KERRY: The real face of Islam is not what we saw yesterday. When the
world bore witness again to the unfathomable brutality of ISIL terrorist
murderers, we have taken the fight to this kind of savagery and evil
before, and believe me, we will take it again. Those who have murdered
James Foley and Steven Sotloff in Syria need to know that the United States
will hold them accountable, too, no matter how long it takes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Ambassador Taylor, Secretary Kerry just said we`ve taken
the fight to this type of savagery and evil before. We will take this
fight again. When have we won this fight?

TAYLOR: Well, we fought this fight to a standstill, where there was a
chance for the Iraqis to put together a government. We then drew down our
forces farther than we probably should have. We should have left some
there.

But that was -- that was close to a success and giving the Iraqis the
ability to put together a government. They then did not do that.

O`DONNELL: How surprising.

William McCants, have we won one of these fights that we claim that
we`re now so capable of fighting and crushing the Islamic State?

MCCANTS: There`s been mixed results over the past 10 years. Look,
when one of these groups takes over territory, they don`t last very long.
Their ideology ends up being repugnant to the population that they control.
They end up making a lot of enemies among the local tribes.

We have to play this one smart. If we go in too strong, we`re only
going to rally people to their side. We have to take it slow and we have
to find the right partners on the ground to deal with the Islamic state.

Not just in Iraq but in Syria, because if you don`t remove their home
base in Syria, they`re just going to come right back into Iraq.

O`DONNELL: Well, we don`t have much of a record, Ambassador Taylor,
of playing it smart in this region. And I don`t see where the confidence
comes from tonight that we know how to do this, that we know how to take on
something like the Islamic State and take this fight to them and, as the
president has said, to degrade -- I understand the intention to try to
degrade. But then he goes as far as to say destroy.

What will come in its place if, by some amazing luck, we actually were
capable of destroying them?

TAYLOR: Well, what should come in its place is a representative
government across Iraq, eventually across Syria, but that may be farther
on.

But the Iraqis have the opportunity now to put together a government
that can control that territory, that can include the Sunnis, the Shia, the
Kurds, in a government that can really govern. That`s what should come
after the defeat, the destruction of ISIL.

O`DONNELL: So, William McCants, our new plan for nation building in
Iraq now is, all we have to do now for nation-building is to destroy and
defeat and eliminate the Islamic State. Then, nation-building will carry
on just fine?

MCCANTS: Well, the people on the ground get a vote too. I mean,
we`ve reached this point because the Iraqi government did not want to allow
the United States to leave troops in the country. We respected their
wishes, and they were also politically not able to get their act together
and make sure the Sunni voices were being heard. And that`s why we`re
being faced with this insurgency.

The threat is so dire now. Perhaps the parliament will begin to come
together and coalesce around finding the solution to bring the Sunnis into
a government.

O`DONNELL: Ambassador Taylor, since every action we`ve taken in Iraq
over the decades has led to a future down the road from that action that
was worse than prior to the action we took. What makes us think that the
next action we take there will somehow, for the first time ever, actually
make it turn around in another direction and make it finally better?

MCCANTS: Well, we probably -- we can assume we have learned some
things about what works and what doesn`t work.

You mentioned nation-building. Well, we didn`t do so well in nation-
building because the Iraqis need to build their own nation. It`s not
Americans or even the international community that`s going to build it.

It`s going to be the Iraqis. They have the opportunity to put
together a government that includes all the voices that have been excluded
in the past. So they may have learned something as well this time.

O`DONNELL: William McCants, how about the option -- the American
option of doing nothing? The one option that America has never chosen
whenever it`s in the crossroads in Iraq?

MCCANTS: I think that`s what we`ve done so far, and we probably could
have continued to do nothing had the Islamic State not taken over so much
territory in Iraq. They are now on the borders with Jordan and Saudi
Arabia. Those are two of our principal allies in the region. They`ve
gathered hundreds of thousands of foreign fighters that can go back to
Europe and wreak havoc in the homes of our allies.

The Obama administration is being pressed to act now.

O`DONNELL: Ambassador Taylor, who should we look to for guidance now
on what to do there? And who -- by that, I mean is there someone who has
been right about this situation there at every crossroads in just say the
last 10 years or so? Or has everyone who has been involved in the decision
making and opining about it at some point been wrong about something?

TAYLOR: Many people have been wrong about Iraq on all sides.
However, the Kurds have been pretty steadfast. The Kurds have put together
a government, a society, a military force that`s been able to accomplish a
lot of what they`re trying to do and develop an organization that can be
good for their people, the Kurdish people. So there are some people there.

There are people in the Iraqi government who are able to pull things
together, and they are making that attempt. But in general, the answer to
your question is, it has to be the Iraqis.

O`DONNELL: Let`s listen to what one observer, Phil Robertson of "Duck
Dynasty", has to say about what we should be doing now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PHIL ROBERTSON, DUCK DYNASTY: You either have to convert them, which
I think is -- would be next to impossible. I`m not giving up on them, but
either convert them or kill them. One or the other.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Now, Ambassador Taylor, this comment has gotten a lot of
ridicule today, but it actually is not that different from what Joe Biden
has had to say or what many senators have had to say. Kill the Islamic
State, wipe them out, because obviously converting them is a very unlikely
proposition.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAYLOR: We have no business trying to convert anyone. We do have
business trying to defend the United States, its people, and our allies in
the region. That may take killing some of the ISIS and indeed destroying
the ISIS organization.

O`DONNELL: William McCants, forgive me for not seeing that much
difference between what Phil Robertson of "Duck Dynasty" said and what is
being said on the Senate floor and what is being said in Washington every
day. They don`t say it as crudely, but certainly, you know, if the Islamic
State wants to surrender, which would be the conversion element of what
Phil Robertson said, that would be OK.

But if they don`t, what everyone in Washington I`m hearing is saying
is just kill them all.

MCCANTS: Well, you can kill them but you need to have a long-term
plan for what you hope to accomplish, both in Iraq and in Syria. And Syria
is the really difficult part of this problem. Vice President Biden talked
about going into the gates of hell, Syria is the hell and we have to figure
out who we`re going to work on -- work with on the ground and what it is we
are moving towards. We can`t just go after the Islamic State without a
long-range man for the future of Syria, because it`s going to shape the
nature of what we do in that country and who we support in the opposition.

O`DONNELL: Well, let`s see if it`s as good as our long-range plans
for any other country we`ve made long-range plans for in that region.

Ambassador William Taylor and William McCants -- thank you both very
much for joining me tonight.

TAYLOR: Thank you.

O`DONNELL: Coming up, why the Kansas Senate race just became the race
to watch this year.

And in "The Rewrite", Elizabeth Warren has a little something to say
about why Eric Cantor quit Congress early to go make some money.

And, good news tonight. We have some really good news, police news.
A couple of police officers you`re going to meet who are just real heroes.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O`DONNELL: NBC News has learned that tomorrow the Justice Department
will announce a civil rights investigation of the entire Ferguson, Missouri
Police Department. The FBI and the Justice Department Civil Rights
Division have been investigating the shooting death of unarmed teenager
Michael Brown by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson last month. The new
investigation will cover the last several years of operations in the
Ferguson Police Department. The Justice Department will also investigate
the St. Louis County Police Department.

Up next, so imagine you`re running for Senate. You`re a Republican
running for Senate and your Democratic opponent drops out of the race.

You`re happy, you`re thrilled, right? Game over.

Wrong. That story is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O`DONNELL: In a dramatic development tonight in a key Senate race
that could determine the control of the United States Senate, the
Democratic candidate in Kansas has dropped out of the race to unseat
incumbent Republican Senator Pat Roberts.

Senator Roberts immediately accused the Democratic candidate, Chad
Taylor, of making a deal with an independent candidate in the race,
businessman Greg Orman. Recent polling indicates that Orman has a better
chance than Taylor did of beating Roberts, with one poll showing Orman
ahead of Roberts by 10 points.

Tonight, the Roberts` campaign issued this statement, "Chad Taylor`s
withdrawal from the U.S. Senate race reveals a corrupt bargain between Greg
Orman and national Democrats, including Senator Harry Reid, that
disenfranchised Kansas Democrats. It makes clear what has been obvious
from the start, Orman is the choice of liberal Democrats and he can no
longer hide behind an independent smokescreen."

Joining me now is executive editor for MSNBC.com and MSNBC political
analyst, Richard Wolffe.

Richard, big doings in Kansas tonight. This is a gigantic moment here
for the Democrats in terms of trying to knock off Republicans in the
Senate. If they can possibly take Kansas out of the Republican column, it
could change the outcome for control of the Senate.

RICHARD WOLFFE, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, no question this is big
news, Lawrence. You know, who would have thought this would be the matter
with Kansas? Pat Roberts --

O`DONNELL: Yes.

WOLFFE: Pat Roberts looking at this big deficit, and railing look,
that statement is -- look, he`s trying to punch a number of buttons in that
statement. OK, it`s one thing to say my opponent is an independent, but
he`s also not just an independent, he`s a liberal Democrat. By the way, no
mentioned of Barack Obama, but Harry Reid is the button he`s trying to push
in that statement.

Yes, he`s troubled. If you look at how the polling is going, his
Democratic opponent actually was doing pretty well. So, there are good
reasons to be worried when the opposition congeals around him.

O`DONNELL: Yes, what was pretty clear was, with all of those
candidates in the race, the Democrat was not going to be able to pull this
off. So that decision to drop out was probably not ultimately that
difficult looking at polling.

Let`s listen to what Orman has to say, for example, he talked to Steve
Kornacki about, would he -- if elected as an independent, would he vote
Democratic majority leader or a Republican majority leader? Let`s listen
to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GREG ORMAN, KANSAS SENATE CANDIDATE: Ultimately, if elected, there`s
a reasonable chance that neither party will have a majority in Washington.
If that`s the case, what I`ve said is I`m going to caucus with which ever
party is willing to actually go to Washington and start trying to solve
problems as opposed to just pleasing the extremists in their own base.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Richard Wolffe, that sounds like the right answer for
Kansas.

WOLFFE: Right, such a liberal Democrat, compromising and finding a
middle ground. That`s how the politics has shifted.

Look, he`s obviously taken the right approach for Kansas, but you have
to understand that he`s riding this wave of really an anti-governor --
anti-Republican Governor Sam Brownback in Kansas, who has practically
bankrupt the state with his extremely ill-judged tax cuts. And when you
factor that in with a senator who was damaged on the right from his primary
who has been there forever -- you know, there`s room here for frankly the
let`s clean up Washington position, which is what every good independent
stands for.

O`DONNELL: Yes. And Roberts is coming out of a difficult primary
where he was portrayed as being out of touch, not a resident of the state
anymore he`s been gone so long.

Let`s listen to what Orman said about Governor Brownback and about the
Medicaid expansion.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ORMAN: Well, you know, I think the message that Governor Brownback
has sent to the working poor in Kansas is, if you have a health care
crisis, your best solution is to quit your job. I think that`s a bad
message to send. I think we have a real issue in Kansas with our critical
access facilities that are now underfunded as a result of Governor
Brownback`s decision. So, ultimately, I think he`s made a poor decision
there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: And, Richard, here he is running in a state where the
incumbent, Pat Roberts` approval rating is 27 percent among registered
voters, up 44 percent disapprove of him. That is an incumbent who is ripe
for defeat and it may well be that a Democrat couldn`t do it in Kansas, but
an independent.

WOLFFE: Yes, look, we often think that these states are so locked
into one kind of politics, we forget that absolute power corrupts
absolutely, and voters get sick of this kind of thing.

Then, you`re looking at states like Georgia. Again, when Democrats
have just written it off for so long, but the establishment -- the
political establishment starts to rot and get demographic changes,
different kinds of candidates coming in, the circle does turn here. It may
not be enough to breathe a new lease of life for President Obama, but if
the Republicans don`t get back the Senate this time, it will be 10 years,
five cycles that they will have been out of control in the Senate, and
that`s got to be devastating to a party that still cannot get statewide
office, never mind nationwide offers.

O`DONNELL: Well, if Orman wins, it could be (AUDIO GA) and his
decision who he votes for. It could be up to him about who controls the
Senate. That could be quite the drama.

Richard Wolffe, thank you very much for joining us tonight.

WOLFFE: Thanks, Lawrence.

O`DONNELL: Coming up, a new development in the George Washington
bridge scandal involving another friend of Chris Christie`s.

And now that Eric Cantor has gone to work for Wall Street, he`s now a
part of that same Wall Street that Elizabeth Warren wants to fix. And she
has something to say about Eric Cantor tonight. That`s in "The Rewrite".

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O`DONNELL: In "The Spotlight" tonight, once again, Chris Christie and
the George Washington Bridge. "The Bergen Record" is reporting today that
Port Authority police officers were told to the to open up lanes on the
Georgia Washington Bridge in the midst of last September`s massive traffic
jam created by team Christie. "The Record" reports, quote, "On the second
day of the George Washington Bridge lane closures last year, Port Authority
police officers stationed at the traffic clogged intersection near the
bridge picked up his radio that traffic was creating conditions, he told
fellow officers over the radio, and the lanes needed to be reopened. `Shut
up`, a Port Authority police supervisor at the bridge replied, instructing
the officer not to discuss the apparently secret operation over an open
radio channel."

That is just one account that 11 police officers stationed at the
George Washington Bridge last September have shared with investigators
about the lane closures, according to the record. The police officer who
delivered the orders not to touch the traffic cones on the very first day
of the lane closures was police lieutenant Thomas Chip Michaels. The first
time we all heard the name Chip Michaels here at MSNBC was when Steve
Kornacki this on February 16th.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE KORNACKI, MSNBC HOST, UP WITH STEVE KORNACKI: The name Jeff
Michaels may not mean to you. But if given a small world in New Jersey
politics, then you definitely do know that name. He`s a powerful New
Jersey Republican whose family had long and close ties to Chris Christie.
Someone who is power laid that connection into a wildly successful lobbying
practice. And who has invested tens of thousands of dollars of his owned
money in Christie`s political future. And it is his brother, Jeff
Michaels` brother, port authority police lieutenant Thomas Chip Michaels,
who was apparently on the scene when the Fort Lee lanes were shut down, who
drove David Wildstein around as the traffic mounted.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Today, the (INAUDIBLE) revealed that Chip Michaels did
more than drive David Wildstein around the traffic. According to the
record, after the 12-year veteran at the port authority was told to shut
up, this happens. Chip Michaels and a police sergeant then visited the
officer in person, at his post to tell him that his radio communication had
been inappropriate. "The Bergen Record" obtained a memos of interviews
that the New Jersey celebrity committee connected with witnesses, including
chip Michaels.

One memo reports quote "Lieutenant Michaels recalled that in the week
leading up to the Fort Lee lane closures, he received a telephone call from
Widstein. Wildstein asked what would happen if Fort Lee`s lanes were
reduced from three down to one. And Lt. Michaels explained it would create
a F***ing disaster."

Joining me now is Brian Murphy, a former reporter for
politicsnewjersey.com, which was owned by David Widstein. He is currently
an MSNBC contributor and has been reporting on the George Washington
scandal since the story broke. Also joining me, Alfred P. Doblin, the
editorial page editor of "the Bergen Record."

Alfred Doblin, a big scoop to the Bergen Record so we`re now at very -
- clearly now into the leak stage of the investigation. Your newspaper
able to obtain some memos from inside the investigation and connecting the
Michaels dots, the Chip Michaels dots that seemed to be laying out there,
just kind of obviously as they turned out to be, connected very directly to
not only the bridge closure but keeping the bridge closure, the lane
closure going.

ALFRED P. DOBLIN, THE BERGEN RECORD: Well, I think, you know, this is
I think very upsetting on so many levels. Because we were kind of used to
the idea that politicians may put politics in front of public safety. But
when we see that law enforcement has put, you know, politics in front of
public safety, you know, it goes from being business as usual to risky
business. And I think this is really upsetting that you have law
enforcement people on the scene, seeing the situation getting increasingly
out of control, being told to "shut up." I mean, that`s just -- that`s
beyond unacceptable. And I think this is going to resonate very, very
strongly with people all throughout New Jersey. This is very much appears
to be a flagrant abuse of power.

O`DONNELL: Brian Murphy, you knew about the Michaels brothers long
before any of the rest of us. Chris Christie grew up with these guys.

BRIAN MURPHY, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: That`s right. And the interesting
thing in this scoop today is that we didn`t know the extent to which Jeff
Michaels was playing -- or Chip Michaels was playing a role in actually
sort of maintaining and keeping this quiet during the week that this goes
on back last September. Steve and I figured out back in February that Chip
was the guy who drove David Wildstein around. We didn`t know, thought,
that Chip intervened and told this officer to keep quiet. We didn`t know
that Chip called his brother Jeff during the week before the lane closures
and mentioned, you know, that this might happen. Didn`t know -- says he
didn`t know quite what to make of it, but told nevertheless, told his
brother, Jeff, who is a big-time Republican lobbyist, good friend of the
governor, that this was about to go down.

So, you know, Al`s right that it is disturbing and alarming that, you
know, we know that the port authority police leadership, we know their
union is extremely close and supportive of governor Christie. We don`t
know the extent to which the officers and command structure of that police
department were a part of this operation.

O`DONNELL: Quoting more from the memos and the -- that are in paper
now, lieutenant Michaels said that he did not, at the time, think much of
the call, when he was called by Wildstein about asking about closing down
lanes and mentioned that he passed it along to his brother Jeff.

Alfred Doblin, this material that has been leaked is presumably just a
small set of things that are now available inside the investigation, given
how many people that they`ve spoken to. Can we expect a kind of a flow of
leaks over the next several months?

DOBLIN: Well, you know, from the point of the record, I would say I
would hope so. You know, I don`t know how the materials are going to
trickle down. There`s a lot of things that people expect will happen soon.
You know, I think people keep looking at what`s going to happen with the --
with the U.S. attorney Paul Fishman looking into this, you know, whether
there will be indictments, you know, whether that comes down because then a
lot of information that we don`t have I think becomes much more public, and
these people who are not talking and people not talking might want to talk,
like Bridget Ann Kelly, a name we haven`t used in awhile, you know, might
give us a little better clue as to the why, and really how this whole
operation, you know, came into being.

But I do think there`s a, you know, treasure trove of information
we`ve yet to see, and all of it, you know, is increasingly disturbing. And
I think we`re approaching the one-year anniversary. You know, it`s just
next week from when those lanes close. So I think scrutiny is going to
increase. And I suspect there will be more for us to find that will upset
us.

O`DONNELL: And Brian, Chip Michaels apparently told the investigators
that the plan was to close those lanes for a month.

MURPHY: That`s right. He did. He told the chief that. The chief
told me that back in February. I think I may be one of the last people in
the press that he spoke to. Because that was right around the time when
everybody lawyered up. But that was the word passed along the Fort Lee
that this was going to go on for a month. And so, the question we had back
then was how did Chip Michaels know enough to say that at the time? How
did anybody know enough when the story line has been that this was an
extremely closely held. The sort of the details of these operations were
extremely closely held among David Wildstein and Bridget Kelly and a very
small handful of people. But clearly they were more involved and we`ll
learn more.

O`DONNELL: And Brian, quickly before we go, the part where he`s
saying "shut up," which mean what`s going on here has to be kept a secret,
means that Chip Michaels knows there`s a reason why it has to be kept a
secret. He knows more than just, you know, someone says we`ve got to do
this to the lanes. He knows there`s some kind of motivation behind this
that the illegitimate and must be kept secret.

MURPHY: Which is why I think it`s OK for us to read malicious intent
into some of the emails that exchanged around that time by some of these
other secondary characters. We can give them generous reading when they
say they don`t know anything, that we can take them at their word or look
at how they behaved and it suggests otherwise.

O`DONNELL: Right. Brian Murphy and Alfred P. Doblin, thank you both
very much for joining me tonight.

MURPHY: Thank you, Lawrence.

DOBLIN: Thank you.

O`DONNELL: Coming up, what senator Elizabeth warren has to say to
Eric Cantor about Eric Cantor`s new job on Wall Street. That`s in the
rewrite.

And later, the good news. Two real hero police officers will join me.
That`s coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O`DONNELL: I`ve been watching a lot of TV ads here in Boston for the
New Hampshire Senate race, because when you run for Senate in New
Hampshire, you have to campaign in Boston, not exactly Boston, but on
Boston media. You have to do interviews on Boston TV, you have to buy ads
on Boston TV and Boston radio, because southern New Hampshire voters watch
an awful lot of Boston TV stations and they listen to Boston radio
stations.

And Scott Brown is very comfortable campaigning for Senate in New
Hampshire through the Boston media because that`s how he campaigned for a
Massachusetts Senate seat through the Boston media. Last week, Scott Brown
told friendly Boston radio host Howie Carr that voter fraud was perfectly
OK with him. Out of state voters coming to New Hampshire to vote for him
was OK. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: Ask Scott why people should vote for him
after the other, instead of the other group candidates, that from Vermont
actually.

SCOTT BROWN, NEW HAMPSHIRE SENATE CANDIDATE: Well, sure. Well, the
first, where`s that from? Vermont?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: Yes. 8-6-0- Yes.

BROWN: Well, they can come over and do same-day registration and say
they want to -- say they want to come down and vote. So if they feel
compelled to do so, some on down.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: Or is 8-6-0- Connecticut? That may be
Connecticut, I`m not sure. I get confused.

BROWN: Yes. Well, whatever it is, they can come up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: A little joking about voter fraud, only I don`t know if
Scott Brown was joking. 860 is actually a Connecticut area code. Brown
moved to New Hampshire in 2013 and registered as a voter there in December.
The last time Scott Brown made news on the campaign trail, he criticized
senator Shaheen for raise the debt ceiling, even though he too had voted to
raise the debt ceiling. And today at a town hall, Scott Brown told the
voters of New Hampshire that he -- what he would do to bring jobs to his
new state.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: When folks say what are you going to do to bring jobs, my job
is to make sure that the government stays out of your way so you can grow
and expand.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Up next in the rewrite, the senior senator from
Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren versus Eric Cantor.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JON STEWART, COMEDIAN: So don`t begrudge Cantor that $3.5 million.
If anything, that is not a salary for his new job. It is payment for
services already rendered.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Eric Cantor rewrites an electoral defeat into a $3.5
million win. $3.5 million is the minimum amount that Eric Cantor will be
paid in his first year as an investment banker. Investment banking is, of
course, not banks as we consumers know it. There are no drive-through ATMs
involved, no cash machines of any kind, and nothing that we would really
recognize as banking. It`s really just deal making, business deal making,
massaging money into more money and taking home huge amounts in the
process. And by huge, I don`t mean Eric Cantor`s starting salary of $3.5
million. I mean the hundreds of millions that far less famous investment
bankers routinely take home every year for doing nothing particularly
difficult or valuable.

The two best ways to get into investment banking are going to fancy
college or business schools, with a very old name or becoming a powerful
member of Congress. Eric Cantor had absolutely no intention of becoming an
investment banker, until this happened.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIC CANTOR (R-VA), FORMER HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER: I know there`s a
lot of long faces here tonight, and it`s disappointing, sure. But I
believe in this country. I believe there`s opportunity around the next
corner for all of us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Well, there was opportunity around the next corner for
Eric Cantor. That was Eric Cantor three months ago losing in a Republican
primary in Virginia. Congressman Cantor had seven months left to serve in
the House of Representatives before a new member would be sworn into his
seat. But Eric Cantor couldn`t wait to get out of Congress and Elizabeth
Warren thinks she knows why. Here`s what she told Katie Couric of Yahoo!
News.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KATIE COURIC, YAHOO! NEWS: Let me ask you about former house majority
leader Eric Cantor`s new job. He just landed a multimillion dollar job at
an investment bank. I saw you shake your head as soon as I mentioned this.

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D), MASSACHUSETTS: You know, how wrong can
this be? That basically what`s happening here is that people work in
Washington and, man, they hit that revolving door with the speed that would
blind you, and head straight out into the industry. Not because they bring
great expertise and insight, but because they`re selling access back into
their former colleagues who are still writing policy, who are still making
laws.

I just think this is fundamentally the wrong approach, and I think
it`s -- it worries me about what happens if people in government are
looking for that next job. Yes, I`m working now, you know, not as much
money as I could be making, but when I leave here, that`s where I`m headed.
That ultimately infects whatever it is that they`re doing. And I just
think this is wrong, just wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Never mind that Eric Cantor ran for a two-year term when
Virginia`s 7th district re-elected him to Congress in 2012. Why should
Eric Cantor hang out in Congress making $174,000 a year? That`s what his
paycheck was busted down to when he lost his leadership position, $174,000
a year when he could immediately hang his congressional mementos in his
congressional banking office and immediately start making $3.5 million a
year? Who would do that? Who would hang out for that low pay? Why hang
in there and represent the people of the 7th district for another five
months? Just because he said he would when he ran for that office?

If Eric Cantor had stayed in office until the end of his term, he
would have been paid an additional $72,500 for those last five months.
Instead, he will make $1,458,333 by running out of the door as fast as he
can.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CANTOR: Serving as the 7th district congressman and then having the
privilege to be majority leader has been one of the highest honors of my
life.

I`m honored that I`ve had the privilege to serve and represent the
people of Virginia`s 7th district.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: I`m sure Eric Cantor meant it every time he said it, that
representing the people of the 7th district was one of the highest honors
of his life. But for Eric Cantor and many other members of Congress, both
Democrats and Republicans before him, honor has a price.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O`DONNELL: Tonight, I have a very special police story for you. This
is a story of good cop, good cop, and it`s next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O`DONNELL: And now for the good news. In April, two Seattle police
officers responded for the second time in a week to a minor disturbance at
a home where two young sisters lived with their grandparents. The police
officers noticed that the only bed was in the grand parent`s bedroom and in
the girl`s bedroom, there was just a single blanket on a dirty floor. The
girls were 6-years-old and 12-years-old. The officers could see that the
grandparents cared about the children but they simply could not provide
more.

We left the house wishing we could do more for them beyond out regular
police duties said Office Jeremy Wade.

Joining me now to tell us what they decided to do are Seattle police
officers Jeremy Wade and Ryan Gallagher.

Officer Gallagher, you left that house, you were driving down the
street and started talking to each other about it. What did you decide to
do?

OFC. RYAN GALLAGHER, FOUNDER, BEDS FOR KIDS: Once we got to the end
of the block, we just -- we knew we had to do something. We talked about
it to each other and said, are there any programs or anything like that,
that we can think of? And there just wasn`t anything that could give --
fill their immediate needs. So we just took it to the next step after
that.

O`DONNELL: And Officer Wade, what was the next step?

OFC. JEREMY WADE, FOUNDER, BEDS FOR KIDS: Yes, we just got some of our
own money together. We went to IKEA and bought the two girls brand new
twin beds and bedding for them. And a couple days later, on our normal
shift, stopped at the house and asked if they could set up these beds in
the home for the girls. They were beyond excited and thrilled to have the
beds.

O`DONNELL: And Officer Ryan, you realized that you guys were out
there, you have seen things like this before and you know there`s a bigger
need than that. And so after doing that, for those two girls, you decided
to take this to another level. What are you doing with this now?

GALLAGHER: Yes, we talked about it to each other. And we talked to
the Seattle police foundation and we talked to our chain of command. And
we just said hey, is there any way that we can make this bigger, because
there`s a greater need and we see this as police officers every day. We go
to houses where, you know, you may not see something, but in our houses we
may take for granted, like a bed. And so, you know, we teamed up with IKEA
and got the word out to the Seattle police foundation and got a website
going and put it on facebook and everything, social media and we got a
number of requests for beds. And this Saturday, we`re going to be filling
about 50 of those orders, 50 beds for 50 different kids in the Seattle
area.

O`DONNELL: Yes, this is a fantastic program. What I love about it
is, you just -- Officer Wade, you just went into room and you saw a
desperate need there, and you realized there was actually something you
could do something about. A lot of something you see on the street you
can`t do anything about, but you realized you could do something here.

WADE: Yes, you know, it was something that hit home. You know, we`re
both fathers, kids, young kids at home as well. And just kind a put our
feet in their shoes. I couldn`t imagine, you know, my kids sleeping on the
floor. Just really want to do something for them. And you know, we know
it is a little above and beyond we really do in responding to 911 calls.
But we just felt the connection there and wanted to do something more.

O`DONNELL: Listen, I just cannot congratulate you or praise you
highly enough for what you`ve done. Really, to be able to do the jobs you
do and have to steel yourself against a lot of the things you see on a
daily basis, but to open in that moment of need, and respond to it, I`m
just really thrilled you`ve been able to do that. We`re going to link our
website to the website where donations can be made, and I`m going to be
making a donation tonight. Officers Ryan Gallagher and Jeremy Wade of the
Seattle Police Department. You make your department proud. Thank you
very, very much for joining us tonight.

WADE: Thank you, sir.

GALLAGHER: Thanks for having us.

O`DONNELL: Thank you. Chris Hayes is up next.


END

<Copy: Content and programming copyright 2014 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Copyright 2014 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>




Watch The Last Word With Lawrence O'Donnell each weeknight at 10 p.m. ET


Sponsored links

Resource guide