tv The 11th Hour With Brian Williams MSNBC May 2, 2017 11:00pm-12:01am PDT
the phony. and the dot, dot, dot at the end might mean that there is more tweeting to come to connect to that tweet. nine hours to get the response attack tweet from the president. "the 11th hour" with brian williams is up next. president. "the 11th hour" with brian williams is up next. tonight the russia investigation. fbi director comey about to face new questions on capitol hill as we learn what a key witness may reveal when she testifies next week. plus details on today's phone call between trump and putin. also hillary clinton citing comey, russia, the election hacking and her own campaign as reasons she lost, describing herself now as part of the resistance. and what may be the only voice in the west wing able to say no to the best. new reporting tonight on ivanka trump. "the 11th hour" begins now. good evening once again from our headquarters here in new york. day 103 for the trump
administration, and the story is back on russia. tomorrow fbi director james comey will face questions from the senate judiciary committee in an open hearing. the hearing meant to be a general review of the fbi, but it is quite likely some questions about russia will come up. comey is also on the hill again on thursday, this time with the national security agency director mike rogers. they will face questions together directly related to russia from the house intel committee. notably, it will be the first high-profile action for that committee since chairman devin nunes stepped aside from the investigation. we will see none of that, however. that hearing will be behind closed doors. also today, the associated press shed more light on what we're likely to hear from sally yates when she faces questions on the hill next week. the report says yates will recount in detail her january 26th warning to the trump white
house about ousted national security adviser mike flynn's meeting with the then-russian ambassador, sergey kislyak. a reminder, here is how sean spicer reacted just over a month ago now when asked about yates' testimony. >> i hope she testifies. i look forward to it. if they choose to move forward, great. we have no problem with her testifying, plain and simple. >> two and a half months in, you've got this yates story today. you've got other things going on. you've got russia. you've got wiretapping. >> no, we don't have that. you -- >> on capitol hill -- >> no. i get it. i've said it from the day that i got here until whatever that there is no connection. you've got russia. if the president puts russian salad dressing on his salad tonight, somehow that's a russian connection. >> as they say in the television business, meanwhile, president trump and vladimir putin spoke by phone today. already their third phone call in 103 days. on their agenda, the conflict in
syria and terrorism in the middle east. plus tensions with north korea. at least that is the white house version of the phone call. but the kremlin's readout of the same call added one more detail. quote, vladimir putin and donald trump spoke in favor of arranging a personal meeting during the g20 summit in ham burg on july 7-8. afterwards a spokesman for the national security council confirmed that detail to nbc news. the white house later stressed that details about such a meeting are not yet solidified. that is a quick turnaround given that three weeks ago the president said this about u.s.-russian relations. >> right now we're not getting along with russia at all. we may be at an all-time low in terms of relationship with russia. this has built for a long period of time. but we're going to see what happens. >> and hillary clinton today at a women for women international event here in new york had plenty to stay about russia, the
election, and president trump. >> every day that goes by, we learn more about some of the unprecedented interference, including from a foreign power whose leader is not a member of my fan club. he certainly interfered in our election, and it was clear he interfered to hurt me and to help my opponent. and if you chart my opponent and his campaign's statements, they quite coordinated with the goals that that leader who shall remain nameless had. >> so a busy night. an hour to talk about all of it. let's bring in our starting panel tonight. former u.s. ambassador to russia, mike mcfaul is with us once again. yahoo news and finance anchor bianna golodryga and white house reporter eli stokols joins us as
well. welcome to all of you. thank you for being with us. ambassador, i've wanted to talk to you all day. starting with the mechanics of how these phone calls work. you've been present for them presum presumedly. are there no takers? are there people listening on a dead key? does one speak first, the translator then translates the question and so on? >> well, of course i don't know how it happens exactly in the trump era and with president trump and president putin. but, yes, i did participate in many phone calls between president obama. the way it works is it gets set up. there is a translator, so there is a lag time. and in the obama era, there was people on the line including me, listening in and, you know, occasionally giving advice to the president depending upon what was said. >> was it in realtime so you would either be listening on a dead key or cup the phone and
write down notes for a follow-up question in front of him? >> i would be sitting on the couch in the oval office on the other phone, listening in, sometimes with somebody else in the room. and there were times, you know, more crisis times when we were talking about substantive issues when we would be writing talking points and guiding the president, giving him advice about what to do. this was not that kind of phone call, it seems to me looking at the readouts. this was more just a general discussion of syria and north korea. they weren't actually negotiating something. my guess is they're going to wait until they meet in person in july before they start doing that. >> and one more question about this business. i heard someone who studies all things russian tonight say that the russians have been anxious to get these two together asap because of the pattern they see. you've spoken about this. trump emerges from meetings. witness the president of china -- with this suddenly warm
personal relationship because of whatever the dynamic is with donald trump. >> that's right. in fact, well before the trump era, in the obama/putin era, the kremlin firmly believes that it matters a lot to president putin to have that personal rap port, to have that personal connection. and they believe that this works well with president trump, and you just cited some evidence to suggest that. so they want to get that meeting. they want to get that face time and not just a pull-aside at a g20 meeting by the way. they would prefer a one-on-one meeting without the distraction of g 20 because they believe putin will be able to persuade donald trump, president trump, to do things that are in russia's national interest. >> eli stokols, this was really the original story of the trump presidency. it keeps coming back. it never went away, and that brings us to tomorrow on the hill. comey appears.
if you're, it seems to me, a democratic senator on judiciary committee, you're going to try to get some answers out of comey. >> yeah, i think so. i think you can just tell that this is a story that on day 103 or whatever this is today, that it is still bothering this president, not getting past it. in fact, just moments ago my phone lit up here, and donald trump tweeted again. he says, i'm just going to read it from my phone. he said the russia story was an excuse used by the democrats as justification for losing the election. perhaps trump just ran a great campaign. i think you can read a lot of projection and vulnerability and security into a lot of what this president says and certainly into what he tweets. he's frustrated by this. he's sick of the questions about russia. and you can also see it, you know, throughout the entire campaign. he said over and over again, you know, putin's not so bad. wouldn't it be nice if we got along with russia? then you played the clip earlier tonight of the new, you know, messaging toward russia. oh, things are very bad. things are not going well. things have really deteriorated with russia. it seems motivated politically
by this perception, to change the perception that trump is cozy with russia because of the ongoing investigations here. today's white house readout didn't mention discussion of a possible meeting with vladimir putin coming up. it just said that it was a very good phone call. hard to know if that's just a standard sort of omission and painting this with a broad brush or if the white house in this case is also sort of trying to downplay any overtures that it might be making to putin. usually when the president is sort of cozying up to a foreign leader, it's usually pretty obvious the way he does that too. >> and so bianna, it is 11:09 eastern time, and the president of the united states is on twitter. again, to read these in order the way they just came in. 17 minutes ago, the president tweeted, fbi director comey was the best thing that ever happened to hillary clinton in that he gave her a free pass for many bad deeds. the phony, dot, dot, dot. trump russia story was an excuse
used by the democrats as justification for losing the election. perhaps trump, third person, just ran a great campaign. as we said, the russia story has a way of coming back. >> and he can't let it go, tweeting obviously knowing this ahead of comey's testimony tomorrow. it's interesting what came out of this phone call with vladimir putin because what wasn't discussed was what people are most alarmed about. ukraine wasn't discussed. sanctions weren't discussed. human rights abuses in chechnya were not discussed. all of these issues were discussed earlier in a meeting that vladimir putin had with angela merkel. not discussed in the conversation that president trump had with vladimir putin. we talk about inconsistent -- how inconsistent he's been in these 103 days. one thing he has been very consistent about is obviously the soft spot that he has not only for vladimir putin but for other so-called dictators around the world. >> ambassador, on that very point, i know you have spoken and written about this. the thing for totalitarians. let our audience in on your theory.
>> well, let's be clear. there have been times in history that democrat and republican presidents have had to cooperate with ought autocratic leaders. that's part of doing business in a difficult world. but i think every single -- not almost. every single president since world war ii has also talked about democracy, human rights, and being the leader of the free world. president trump doesn't seem to care about that mission statement for the president of the united states. he rarely talks about democracy, almost never talks about human rights. that is unusual. that is unprecedented. that is a departure from both the republican party and the democratic party, and i think it's dangerous. i think there's a lot of democrats, small-d democrats around the world that miss american leadership when it comes to these universal values. >> eli, heading into tomorrow, also the visit of abass. so you have the director of the
fbi on the hill. in short, you have the possibility of headlines and stories the white house doesn't have control over. most white houses in the modern era would be concerned about such a thing. what is tomorrow likely to look like? >> well, brian, i have no idea, and that's the story every day with the white house. really when you talk about the white house, you can't talk about it the way that you talked about past white houses because everybody in that white house whose name is not donald trump really doesn't have a ton of control over what the messaging that day is going to be when the president can just type out a tweet, fire it off, or decide to do an interview on his own without notifying his press secretary. so this is a president that's going to run his own messaging, really be his own press secretary, say whatever kind of comes to mind when he's standing there giving a statement tomorrow with the palestinian leader. and that's just kind of the way donald trump does it. it's worked very well for him up to this point politically. but being the president is very different, and i think, you know, the statements -- he can't just get away with speaking off
the cuff when he's the president of the united states, without having some repercussions in terms of how other people around the world view the united states, worry about the united states, and sort of struggle to take their diplomatic cues from a president who is oftentimes kind of contradicting himself and flat-out incoherent. >> it's been proffered that even the notion of russian involvement in our american election has just been normalized. it's become part of the political firm ament in 103 days. john dickinson, who conducted an interview with the president for this weekend, asked about hacking. i want to show that exchange. >> you don't think it's phony that they, the russians, tried to meddle in the election. you believe that? >> that i don't know. if you don't catch a hacker, okay, in the act, it's very hard to say who did the hacking. with that being said, i'll go along with russia. it could have been china. it could have been a lot of different groups. >> first to bianna and then to the ambassador. then we've got to scoot to a
break. still this effort to bend over backwards, to cut some slack. >> music to vladimir putin's ears. he said it earlier when asked about this. he said read my lips, nyet. i did not hack into u.s. elections. i'm not doing that in other countries even though we have evidence that he is, in fact, doing that. this president seems to be feeding into this narrative that we can have a relationship with vladimir putin with him having no rep ur kuercussions whatsoevh democracy around the world in europe as well as even south america. >> no fair being able to speak the language. ambassador, same question. >> well, i hate to contradict the president, but we do know, brian. we know that russia violated our sovereignty, okay? let's call it for what it was in 2016. our entire intelligence community agrees with that. most russians by the way agree with it. the fact that our president continues to deny it makes me
nervous not because to argue about whether he ran a good campaign or not, but we need to be protected for the next time that it's going to happen. and why do republicans, or why does president trump believe that the next time around, they're going to be on his side? this is a violation of our sovereignty, and it really -- if you can see, i get animated about it. it's really disheartening to me that the commander in chief doesn't talk about it as a violation of our sovereignty when everybody else already has come to that conclusion long ago. >> the former u.s. ambassador, a kid from montana whose life took him to moscow. he's now safely back in the confines of his alma mater at stanford. thank you as always, ambassador, for coming on the broadcast. our panelists, our thanks to you as well. we'll fit in our first break. in yet another break from tradition, the president of the united states advocates a shutdown of the federal government, but in quotes, when "the 11th hour" continues.
welcome back to "the 11th hour." we're going to talk in this segment about exactly what is going on at the white house, what happened in the briefing room today, say nothing about what's going on on capitol hill. let's bring in our guests, msnbc's alley vel xi. i'm going to read you a tweet by a colleague of yours at politico, matthew nus baum. it reads, let's recap. congress struck by partisan spending compromise. dems celebrated. trump got mad.
cabinet officials trotted out to say trump won. what happened in the briefing room today was reminiscent to a lot of folks of that first official day of the administration when mr. spicer came in to insist that more people had seen this inauguration, period, than any other. what is happening over there? >> the white house can't seem to decide to declare victory or defeat on this first spending bill. you have the budget director coming out and saying all the great things they got, and then you open the day and the morning with donald trump tweeting about all the terrible things -- not exactly the terible things but why they were confined to this type of deal. so this really complicated idea that they were somehow were boxed in by bad rules, and yet won. you can't have both things at the same time, and this left some confusion with white house reporters when they had this briefing today. and sean spicer after the budget director spoke left the room and didn't take questions.
>> shane, americans watching who have perhaps in their lifetime expressed to family or pollsters that they like it when people get along, and they like it when something like a government shutdown is averted. does there have to be a victory affixed to that? were there real winners and losers in this? >> anytime the government does not shut done, you have to think that's generally seen as a win for everyone involved. a government shutdown is bad for congress. it's bad for the president. at least that's been the typical view. but then you had again today trump talking about the possibility of a quote, unquote, good shutdown this september, which is the next big fiscal deadline to pass a budget package. he's basically floating the idea that maybe we need this kind of drastic action. i talked to some senior republicans today who were scratching their head at this idea. they said if for any reason the government happens to face a shutdown six months from now, the last thing you want is for the president to have suggested that maybe this is a good idea because you don't want to be the one holding a bag and blamed for such a thing.
this has been bad for the republican party before. it was bad under newt gingrich. it was bad when ted cruz and congressional republicans led that charge. it would be bad for trump, especially when you say maybe it would be a good thing. >> ali, i am old enough to have covered the clinton presidency during the first time this experiment. we used to call this back in the day a last resort. >> absolutely. >> it was considered a disaster. this hurts real americans when the government shuts down. >> it hurts them on several levels. first of all there are government services that are not offered. all non-essential government personnel don't get paid. more importantly, it hurts the reputation of congress. it's just sort of a bad thing to do. >> what reputation? >> this is a time when congress is important. so the idea -- and i want to remind people that there aren't a lot of responsibilities assigned to congress in the united states constitution. there is one for appropriations. no money can be taken from the treasury but by appropriations and such record must be made
from time to time. in other words, this is the one thing they have to do. they don't have to name post offices and bridges and things like that. they actually have to have a budget. this congress for the last several years has had a very bad reputation with that, number one. number two, donald trump comes from the world of business. the concept that you would shut a business down because it needs fixing or needs repair is unheard of. and, number three, when donald trump says these things, typically government officials don't back him up on that. but the omb director, mick mulvaney, came out today in the press conference and doubled down on this, saying a good shutdown is one that gets rid of the mess that we're in right now. so it's a bad way of going around solving a problem. there are absolutely budget problems in washington, but to suggest that a shutdown is a good way to deal with things, there's also by the way for an administration that wants to get to 3% or more economic growth, this kind of thing hurts economic growth. so you don't want to be, you know, putting out your leg when a runner is trying to get by.
>> the budget director, former member of congress. former freedom caucus member i believe, mulvaney came in and gave a rousing talk about spending and averting a shutdown and fixes to the wall on our southern border and then exited the room. the problem was that behind him -- and we'll play the sound of what happened -- was sean spicer. let's listen to the press corps. >> thank you very much again. and thank you for letting me have a shout out to my wife. >> will you guys just e-mail where that wall is from exactly so we can identify location? >> sean? >> sean! >> sean! >> come on, sean. >> so what you missed there, april ryan, whose seat is about center of the room, says to everyone else in the press corps, no one move. we're staying here until sean comes back. peter alexander, first row, all
the way left, goes and chases sean spicer up the hallway from the lower press office to the upper press office, comes back with word that sean is not returning. shane, it's your beat. what went on there? what was that? >> it was an unusual situation to say the least, and it was a little bit familiar. not quite the same because mulvaney did take questions, but a little familiar with sean's first day where he came and he spoke and then did not take any questions. again, this is the press's opportunity to ask the administration questions on the issues of the day. clearly there are a lot of issues out there today, a lot of tweets from trump on shutdowns, news around russia, none of which was addressed. and, again, this is sort of the press corps's pent-up frustration. i was in the room a few minutes after that and people were still sort of shaking their head in confusion of exactly what had happened there. >> we've had short press conferences a lot in the last week. something is going on where they're -- the same reporters are not getting a lot of questions. some of them are not getting
follow-ups. something is going on where the white house is decided they don't gain from having sean spicer out there taking tough questions from shane and peter alexander and april ryan and the rest of them. it's a strange development. i'm not sure where this goes because you can't ultimately hide from the press for too long. >> apropos, watching your show this afternoon, a brief list of what's not getting done. >> well, you know, in general in the government or -- >> everything else. >> this is the problem. there are lots of things. there's this myth coming out of the white house that this is a government in, you know, full speed ahead with the pedal to the metal. it's not. there are just things not happening. this house vote on the health care bill is, again, about to not happen. >> the whip counts don't look good. >> they can afford to lose 22. our count shows 21 are not there and there are a lot of undecides. we have a small menu of something that was said to be tax reform. it's tax cuts. it's not tax reform.
so there's not progress here, and that's the problem. the press is anxious to understand why these things aren't happening. and what happened is mick mulvaney came outside. shane is right. he did take some questions, but it was a little bit lecture-y. at some point they're going to have to answer questions. >> our thanks to both gentlemen for this panel. coming up, is ivanka trump the only way who can tell donald trump no? and if so, to what effect? that's next as "the 11th hour" continues.
whaaaat?!ortgage offer from the bank today. you never just get one offer. go to lendingtree.com and shop multiple loan offers for free. free? yeah, could save thousands. you should probably buy me dinner. no. go to lendingtree.com for a new home loan or refinance. receive up to five free offers and choose the loan that's right for you. our average customer could lower their monthly bills by over three hundred dollars. rates could rise again. go to lendingtree.com right now.
i would say not to conflate lack of public denouncement with silence. i think there are multiple ways to have your voice heard. but i think most of the impact i have over time, most people will not actually know about. >> first daughter and assistant to the president notably, ivanka trump on cbs this morning. a profile of her in "the new york times" this morning reports, in part, quote, she has one skill unmatched by almost anyone else, family members and aides say she can effectively convey criticism to a man who often refuses it from others. but can she influence his actions as president? in her 35 years, she has left little traceable record of challenging or changing the man who raised her. the co-author of the article is here with us in the studio tonight. rachel abrams, business reporter
for "the new york times." bianna golodryga remains with us. rachel, welcome. thank you for coming back on the broadcast. it is still bracing for people, especially people of a certain age and a certain mindset where these offices in the west wing were occupied by people with names like sorensen to read of how she has decorated her west wing office, to get used to the notion of her in the circle of power. what does she bring to the job, and what's her journey been like? >> well, the main thing with ivanka trump -- and she will say this as one of her strongest attributes -- is that she has her father's trust. she has his ear. and i think that there is a certain segment of the population that finds that very reassuring when we have what appears to be a president that is prone to impulsiveness, and you just have to look at his twitter to see that. i think that there is a thought to have someone that is a
leavening force in the west wing, that that do have a very big impact despite the fact she has no policy or political experience. >> bianna, they are enigmatic as a couple, and for democrats especially who took the election hard and have been casting about for some reason to feel good or look to the future, they've kind of latched on with their hopes and dreams to ivanka and her husband, hoping they can be a modifying and mollifying force. >> and moderating force as well. there were jokes going around saying that the reason the president will be tweeting crazy tweets, including the one about being wiretapped on a saturday night, was because jared kushner was away observing the sabbath. having said that, i think that people remain confused as to what her role is. she, in fact, seems to be confused and just figuring things out as well. one day she's just the daughter. the next day she's a close adviser. i was fascinated by your piece, to hear little tidbits about her having weekly meetings with
treasury secretary mnuchin. i think these are things we don't typically see in an administration, disregarding the fact we have a father/daughter relationship in the white house as well. i think people are puzzled as to whether this is an internship and is that okay to have an evolving role in arguably the most position in the white house, having your father's ear? >> rachel, is there any way she's more of an ideologue than her father? the piece, i think, casually mentions her being a democrat and, if not, certainly a holder of some liberal, social views. >> she has never seemed to have expressed really strong political or ideological beliefs before entering the political fray with her father's campaign. we interviewed a lot of people at various points in her life, whether it was school or work, and we said did you ever hear her talk about women's issues? did you ever hear her talk about politics? and the answer from most people seemed to be no. and, in fact, it seemed like she
really gained some kind of awareness of at least women's issues and obviously now she's advocating for parental leave with her brand. this seems to be the first time that ivanka trump has grappled with this idea of what women need in the workplace and women's empowerment, and basically the first time she's really thinking about feminism in a way that anybody can really recall. >> bianna, do you think it's weird? i've heard this from comics and serious writers, that americans don't know what jared kushner's voice sounds like. that this couple so close to power and charged with so many different parts of the administration's docket, are really still enigmatic? >> on the weird scale of one to ten, i'd give jared's voice a two or three. i'm not too concerned about it. he does seem to have a lot on his plate, so maybe that's a good sign he's busy working away and not just talking. i do think, though, in all seriousness, going back to her
brand, remember, ivanka is only 35 years old. we know her brand has really done well following this election, and she's really profited off of it as far as the brand name recognition globally. so she's thinking not only of her father's legacy but her own. four, eight years down the road, what does it mean to be a trum? are you a role model for women around the world? >> thank you both for participating in our discussion tonight. rachel abrams, "the new york times," and bianna golodryga of this very table. coming up, hillary clinton takes responsibility while sharing responsibility notably for her loss to donald trump. the author of the best-selling new book on the clinton campaign joins us as "the 11th hour" marches on.
but i was on the way to winning until a combination of jim comey's letter on october 28th and russian wikileaks raised doubts in the minds of people who were inclined to vote for me but got scared off. >> hillary clinton today still coming to terms with her loss in november. plenty of blame to go around for the clinton campaign. but when asked specifically if she took any responsibility, she said this. >> i take absolute personal responsibility. i was the candidate. i was the person who was on the ballot, and i am very aware of, you know, the challenges, the problems, the shortfalls that we had. again, i will write all this out for you. but i will say this. i've been in a lot of campaigns, and i'm very proud of the campaign we ran, and i'm very proud of the staff and the volunteers and the people who
are out there day after day. >> there was also something else, and we'll get to that in just a moment. joining us again here tonight, the co-author of the new best-seller "shattered, inside hillary clinton's doomed campaign." amy parns. of course, eli stokols of the "wall street journal" still with us. as i was saying, there was something else, and it had to do with the "access hollywood" video and the timing and the impact on the clinton campaign. we'll play this, and then we'll talk mr. about it on the other . >> and ask yourself this. within an hour or two of the "hollywood access" tape being made public, the russian theft of john podesta's e-mails hit wikileaks. what a coincidence. so i mean you just can't make this stuff up. so did we make mistakes? of course we did. did i make mistakes? oh, my gosh, yes. you know, you'll read my
confession and my request for absolution. but the reason why i believe we lost were the intervening events in the last ten days. >> amy, you and your co-author have pulled off something not all authors are able to do. you've taken a story that we know the end of. >> right. >> and yet in the reading of it, it is suspenseful and revealing every page on through it. what was it like to be you watching the candidate having arrived at her closing argument, how she sees this race in the rear-view mirror? was that about the way you thought it would go today? >> yeah. i mean it was kind of surprising. she was a little looser than i expected actually. >> but closer to the candidate you came to know on the road? >> i think so. i think her ackwledgement was something today that she was the candidate, that she actually made mistakes, that it wasn't a perfect campaign.
these are things that she stopped shy of saying earlier. she kind of blamed russia and comey the entire time and basically stopped there. today you heard a little bit more. you heard kind of an acknowledgement of what my co-author have written about in "shattered." so i think that was a nod to what we've been writing about in the book. >> and personality-wise, when you're writing a book like yours where it's so inside, you had obvious agreements in advance that people could participate and be protected until publication. was that, indeed, closer to the hillary clinton you saw if you were allowed to see that many unguarded moments? >> i think so. and i think this is the hillary clinton that people wanted to see. her aides are always talking about the gregarious, funny hillary clinton that you see behind the curtain, the one that always asks how your sick uncle is doing. that hillary clinton for whatever reason didn't really emerge on the campaign stage in
2016 or in 2008, and she had eight years to kind of remedy that. and she did. she tried her best to get a little bit warmer, to kind of show people who she really is. but i think that was really difficult for her in the end. >> eli, take the other side of this because you covered the other side. you spent most of your time talking about the trump effort. what would trump voters have seen in today's event with hillary clinton? >> well, the same person that they were horrified could possibly become president, the same person who isn't taking personal responsibility for the loss. they would probably tune out her statement saying of course i made mistakes and only hear, like a lot of people did, the statements that, but most of all, this was about russia. i think a lot of things that hillary clinton said today may be defensible on paper. it's just a matter of the tone and perhaps tone deafness of whether or not she should be the one saying them at this point. and i think, you know, if she were to step back and not really talk about this, i mean what we
see tonight in the tweets and what we've seen for 103 days is a president who is still deeply insecure about the legitimacy of his electoral win. that's why the russia story gets to him like nothing else. that's why he's out there compulsively tweeting. so she almost doesn't have to say, i think this was about russia, because she is the one person who could say that and sound like a sore loser of sorts when so many americans agree with her, believe that when congress, the intelligence community are investigating, not the degree to which this affected the election, but russian interference in the election itself. and so -- and you can see it every day, just how much this agitates the person who beat her, president trump, and how much it's sort of sidetracking his administration, his agenda. >> so much there to react to. this is what happens when you have a conversation with two first-class writers. we have to have a break. hillary clinton now saying she is part of the resistance. that is when "the 11th hour"
i'm now back to being an activist citizen and part of the resistance. >> welcome back to "the 11th hour." hillary clinton in what may be her most frank interview since losing to donald trump. and with president trump saying the job she wanted was, quote, more work and harder than he thought just last week, his former opponent further had this to say. >> i wasn't going to appeal to people's emotions in the same way that my opponent did, which i think is frankly what's getting him into all kinds of difficulties now in trying to fulfill these promises that he made because, you know, health care is complicated. [ laughter ] and so is foreign policy and other stuff that lands on a president's desk. i mean if it's easy, it doesn't get to the president's desk.
>> amie parnes and eli stokols remain here with us. i want to put a finer point on this, amie. you said during the break this is the most you've seen from her. >> mm-hmm. >> kind of an after action report. >> yeah. it was -- i think it's her first autopsy really because up until now, we only heard her talk about russia and comey. but as my co-author and i point out in "shattered," i think it's a whole slew of things. it was the candidate. she was kinds of a mismatched candidate for the time. people, you know, saw the rise in populism. they saw bernie sanders and the excitement behind him. she was sort of mismatched. it wasn't her moment, and yet she became the inevitable candidate again. and so there are so many reasons. you know, there was the reliance and overreliance on data analytics and how that was sort of a factor in her loss. so many things. so it was interesting to hear her talk about how it wasn't a
perfect campaign and how they maybe could have done better, how she could have done better. and that was -- that was fascinating to me. >> and this may call for a judgment on your part, but you are after all the co-biographer of this campaign. when she says she is now part of the resistance, is that something the resistance welcomes? >> i think so in a way. after all, you heard her talk about 3 million popular votes, and that's something to be -- there's something to be said for that. i think a lot of people want her to be an active voice in this party. people like her when she's not viewed in this political lens, when she's kind of off to the sidelines and she's really doing her thing. she had huge approval ratings while she was secretary of state because she wasn't on the national political stage. so i think, you know, i think her voice is a welcome voice here. i think people want it. i think, you know, in addition to bernie sanders and elizabeth warren and a slew of other people who are kind of following
them like kamala harris, all of these people who want to be the new face of the democratic party, but i think people will welcome her and her husband to continue this conversation going forward. >> eli, i will say while not quite at the level of donald trump handing out color-coded maps of the united states to journalists in the oval office to relitigate the election and his electoral college victory, it was interesting to hear hillary clinton remind the audience, and there might be some menon of this in her book, that sheon the popular vote by 3 million. >> she did, and that's a huge reason why donald trump is so insecure about his own legitimacy. that eats at him every day that it's brought up and talked about on the news, and hillary clinton being out there, it will continue to drive him nuts. i mean i think one of the fascinating things about his tweet tonight, if you step back from what he said about hillary, he just accused james comey, his own fbi director, of going easy on her, of doing something that
was wrong in his view. that's sort of stunning. again, this is just a president who sort of tweets freely. we've never seen that before. but she does really get in his head still, even though he beat her. that's unusual. maybe not for donald trump, and i think that is one purpose that she can serve going forward and continuing to be a public voice at the forefront of this resistance. >> eli stokols, who writes a new chapter of this unfolding book every day, and amie parnes, who is now literally the co-author of the book on this campaign. it's a best-seller, and it is called "shattered." our thanks to you both. again, what a great treat to have two first-class writers to talk about all this with. coming up after our final break, the story of an american life that all americans should know about when "the 11th hour" continues.
last thing before we go here tonight. a great american life came to an end today when a man named leo thors nus died at the age of 85. he was an eagle scout from minnesota who joined the air force hoping to serve in the korean war with his brother. instead he went to vietnam. on his 93rd combat mission, he was shot down, captured as a p.o.w., and thrown in the hanoi hilton for the better part of six years, some of that time in solitary confinement. he was treated in plain english like an animal, tortured and injured for life. he quickly realized he needed a way to retain his own dignity and sanity. so he decided to walk home to the states. he measured and started pacing in his cell. even at five by six feet in solitary, he walked, counting the steps, doing the math, until he was walking ten miles a day. and only when the guards weren't
watching as exercise, of course, wasn't allowed. in his mind and in his heart, leo was walking home, and that's how he survived. so when richard nixon placed the medal of honor around leo's neck in 1973, he told him, quote, we've been waiting for you for six years. he was aawarded the medal for sacrificing his own safety for p pilots who had been shot down. leo was a man his fellow heroes looked up to. as our friend and military consultant, his fellow medal of honor recipient jack jacobs said just tonight, i always thought leo would live forever. jack was not alone. and now for the rest of us, starting tonight, let's try to make sure leo's story gets passed on forever instead. leo thorsness has gone home. his death leaves 74 living
recipients of the medal of honor. that is our broadcast for this evening. thank you for being here with us. good night from new york. tonight on "all in." >> remember, i did win more than 3 million votes than my opponent. >> hillary clinton returns with a vengeance. >> i was on the way to winning until a combination of jim comey's letter on october 28th and russian wikileaks. >> tonight, as the president of the united states once again casts doubt on russian election sabotage -- >> i'll go along with russia. it could have been china. it could have been a lot of different groups. >> -- his former opponent raises the strongman alarm. >> i was your secretary of state, and we do speak out about rigged elections. then -- >> trump got rollrolled. it's sort of embarrassing. >> the president threatens to shut down the government and tries to change the narrative on the budget.