if a criminal suspect says i think i want a lawyer, the police can continue questioning them. it's a completely different process and it's unfair. these men who happen tor police officers should held accountable, just like anyone else. >> everyone else should be seth morris' article in "the washington post." thanks very much for joining us tonight. "hardball" starts right now. ♪ senator warren takes on president obama. let's play "hardball." ♪ ♪ good evening, i'm chris matthews in washington. tonight the democratic army of the future is on the march, led by senator elizabeth warren. members are attacking that trillion dollar spending bill agreed to by president obama himself. the issue, a provision in the bill that would pull back the

reforms created after the 2008 financial crisis. perhaps allowing more of the wall street shenanigans that brought the country into its worst economic collapse since the great depression. the word tonight is that the democrats, led by warren, are dead set against letting the republicans bring back the wall street games playing. they haven't forgotten what the bailouts cost them in the country, in dollars, and public confidence. so tonight, senator elizabeth warren is leading democrats into an epic battle against the republicans and the white house. will this mean a government shutdown? let's see. it's all happening as i speak. something else is happening in this insurgency. it may signal an historic turning point for the democratic party. senator warren took to the floor yesterday, called for house democrats to vote nay because of the fat benefit it offers to wall street. here she is. >> who does congress work for? does it work for the

millionaires, the billionaires? the giant companies with their armies of lobbyists and lawyers? or does it work for all the people. now the house of representatives is about to show us the worst of government for the rich and powerful. the house is about to vote on a budget deal, a deal negotiated behind closed doors, that would let traders on wall street gamble with taxpayer money and get bailed out by the government when their risky bets threaten to blow up our financial system. this is a democracy, and the american people didn't elect us to stand up for citigroup. they elected us to stand up for all the people. >> that's the bugle signaling charge. today the white house scrambled to contain the fod. just minutes before the scheduled vote, the white house

took the dangerous move of taking direct aim at the warren wing of the party by declaring that the president supported the big spending package which contains added funds for financial regulatory bodies. president obama is working the phones, trying to get enough democrats on board. the white house has dispatched denis mcdonough up to capitol hill. joining us, donna edwards of maryland. also with us, nbc's luke russert. give us the sense of this. what's at stake here tonight in this big battle led by elizabeth warren of the senate, against the white house? >> well, this is fascinating. because since president obama has took power back in 2009, january, we've never really seen this full on division between house democrats and the white house. and nancy pelosi, along with elizabeth warren decide to plant their flag in the ground about the dodd-frank provision that was inserted into the spending bill. i spoke to a lot of house democrats today and they all said, we're in a "no" mood. we don't want to go forward and help out the banks, but we're sick of being cut out of the

process. this deal was negotiated primarily by harry reid, barack obama, and it is house gop leadership. house dems felt they did not have a seat at the table, and they want to stay here and fight. and you talk about the future of the party. the long i heard from these members today, chris, i had not heard even back in 2009 when we were in the midst of a recession. what's that language? they were privately saying to me, you know what, wall street, they were the villains in all this. they stole people's money and homes. we're sick and tired of this. we're not going to go along with it. early in the day, we thought there was a clear path to 218 votes, that democrats would supply anywhere in the neighborhood of 50 to 70, i spoke with a gop aide who knows the count. they're going to need to provide about 40 or 50 votes at least and that's not looking likely. denis mcdonough is in a meeting trying to get that support and it's going to be difficult. i think it's significant. i think it's a turning point where you could see nancy pelosi dig in.

she said she was disappointed in the white house today. we might see economic inequality be front and center in the next congress. democrats don't have a lot to lose. the white house wants this bill because it protects ebola funding, funding to go after isis, consumer financial protection bureau. there's things in here that they like and they believe it's the best deal they can get before a more super majority gop congress comes in. but for house democrats, this is not good enough. they want to fight here, they want to fight now. that's what maxine waters, who is an ardent supporter of president obama said, she doesn't care if he's defending it, she'll fight him too, if this dodd-frank thing is in the bill. >> let me go to congresswoman edwards. what do you think? it looks like a revolutionary spirit on the hill tonight among democrats. >> well, i think that's true, and i think it's because in 2008, we bailed out the banks. they stole our retirements, they

stole our homes, they stole our future and we said we would never do that again. so there's no way we're going to open up the door to big banks so they can do that once again. i think that the spirit inside the democratic caucus is strong and it's tight. and on this one, the white house may be between a rock and a hard place, but we don't have to go there with them. >> this is a couple weeks before christmas. it's exactly two weeks before christmas tonight. what do you do if you lose the big bill? what's next? how does this fight go on? >> well, you know what, the fact is that if republicans put a bill on the floor that took out these provisions to bail out wall street banks, and took out the provisions to give $300,000 contributions to political parties, we would have a bill today that democrats, even though we might have to hold our noses and vote for it, that we could support to continue to fund the government. republicans know what they need to do to get a bill passed out of this congress. they need to put that on the floor and ask for democratic support for it, and we will be there.

but if they think for one minute that we are going to support a bill that bails out wall street and then gives unlimited money and campaign contributions, opening up the floodgates. first you give the keys to the bank and then you bail the banks out. we are not having that. i think the vote today shows that, shows the unity of the democratic caucus and republicans are going to have to go someplace else if this is the garbage they're going to put on the floor. >> it's both the quid and the quo, talking about corruption it's got money coming in to the democrats and republicans to pay for loopholes and shenanigans on wall street. senator warren took the floor again today to rally against the carve-outs for the big banks. here she is. >> a vote for this bill is a vote for future taxpayer bailouts of wall street. when the next bail-out comes, a lot of people will look back to this vote to see who was responsible for putting the government back on the hook to bail out wall street. why in the last minute, as you head out the door, and a

spending bill must be passed, are you making it a priority to do wall street's bidding? who do you work for? wall street? or the american people? >> congresswoman edwards, i want to know what you see. you're the politician of the three of us. is this the future of the democratic party? a truly populist party again, not a go-along party that makes deals with the worst elements in our society and wall street? your thoughts? >> one thing the last election told us, it told us the american people need to know we're prepared to get in there and fight for them, fight for their paychecks and their bank accounts. stop fighting for wall street and special interests. frankly, there's no question about it, this bill absolutely stinks. the american people know it. when i came into congress in 2008, i said i would never again vote to bail out big banks.

we protected the consumers and the american people in dodd-frank, and we need to continue to protect them. i just feel so good about where we are as democrats, showing the american people that we are prepared to go to the mat for them. >> i guess one of the motives amongst the democrats, because i was thinking about it today, you have paid the price politically, ever since 2009 for all the bailouts. the republicans have rubbed it in your face. they caused the corruption of wall street. they protected it by deregulating. and then the democrats bailed out wall street so they could bail out the country's economy. and then they shoved it back at you and said you were the bail-out party. >> well, i think that's right. i think we're sensitive to that. like i said, we held our noses and voted because we knew we needed to save the american economy. we knew they had taken retirements, homes, our future. we're not doing that again.

and the american people need to know that, they need to hear this loudly and clearly. we are not doing it again and we're not going to stand by while republicans in this congress take the american people down the bank road again. we will not do it. >> luke russert, it would take 50 or 60 votes to get this pass. who are your colleagues? what are they saying to you when they're voting for the bill? >> they would say this is a good bill -- >> go ahead, luke, i'm sorry. >> they say it's a good bill because it leaves the democratic imprint on the funding through the rest of the fiscal year on everything with the exception of the department of homeland security. and they'll have the immigration fight in early march and the rest of the government is funded and they're not worried about shutdown politics. that's really their point. this is the best they can get before the super majority comes in next congress. however, what you do, you talk to other democrats who say, you know what, republicans have shown they have an awfully

difficult time getting to 218 to fund the government on any priority. we're more than happy to go at it with them and go to the ring a few more times because it makes them look bad. i want to say one thing that i think is important when you talk about the future of the democratic party. when this was negotiated by harry reid, and the other preept reetors on the senator side with the house gop leadership, the reason why there wasn't a freak-out over the dodd-frank language because this thing passed in the house in october of 2013 with 70 democrats supporting it, including steny hoyer, the difference in campaign finances that was negotiated between reed, mcconnell, and boehner. what you're seeing tonight is the liberal wing standing up to something that was directly negotiated by reid and the white house, and was supported by them before. they're not taking it. >> also, could there be another factor here? you've lost both houses of congress now. you're the opposition on the hill.

you're not worried about carrying the water on debt ceilings and all the rest and budget deals. you lost the house a while ago. you're losing the senate. is this a revolutionary spirit fueled by the fact, you don't have to run the show, you just have to drive your ideas? >> i think what's really clear, chris, is the fact is, the american people are expecting us to fight for them. they're depending on us to fight for them. we're prepared to do it. you know, if you look at that deal that was negotiated, i don't know that the white house frankly was clearly in the room on this. and clearly some deals were cut with mitch mcconnell because he's always wanted to raise those political campaign contribution limits. he wants to throw the individual limits out the window. but we can't let them. we can't let wall street walk away with the store, and on the other hand, give them the open keys to the government by allowing all these political contributions. and like i said, if the republicans really want a

bipartisan bill over here in the house, they know they can get democratic votes, but they have to get it with a clean funding bill. >> thanks so much donna edwards and luke russert. coming up, guess who is defiant in the face of the cia torture report? dick cheney. the man who once said we'd have to work through the dark side. he's unapologetic about what the cia did. he said he'd do it all over again in a minute. big surprise. that's ahead, this is "hardball," the place for politics. kids they get stains like you wouldn't believe. this tide ultra stain release and zap!cap helps me get out pretty much any stain can i help? aww try our newest ultra stain release helps remove 99% of everyday stains. and cialis for daily useor you. helps you be ready anytime the moment is right. cialis is also the only daily ed tablet approved to treat symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex.

do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any allergic reactions like rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a free 30-tablet trial. >> chris christie, like many of the potential 2016 presidential candidates isn't talking about the torture report one bit. he refused to answer questions about it. now a new poll finds the people in his home state say they don't think he'd make a good president. 53%, a majority of new jersey voters say government christie would not do well in the white house. of course it's a blue state. and even though christie is the

strongest republican against hillary in the garden state, new jersey is still deep blue. clinton would beat christie by 11 points up there, 50-39, and we'll be right back. you've tried to forget your hepatitis c. it's slow moving, you tell yourself. i have time. after all there may be no symptoms for years. no wonder you try to push it to the back of your mind and forget it. but here's something you shouldn't forget. hepatitis c is a serious disease. if left untreated, it could lead to liver damage and potentially even liver cancer. if you are one of the millions of people with hepatitis c, you haven't been forgotten. there's never been a better time to rethink your hep c. because people like you may benefit from scientific advances. advances that could help you move on from hep c. now is the time to rethink hep c

and talk to your doctor. visit hepchope.com to find out about treatment options. and register for a personalized guide to help you prepare for a conversation with your doctor.

i think that what needed to be done was done. i think we were perfectly justified in doing it, and i'd do it again in a minute. >> welcome back to "hardball." former vice president dick cheney, he mingsed no words in his interview with fox news. describing his preferred approach to terror. here he is. >> he is in our possession. we know he's the architect. what are we supposed to do? kiss him on both cheeks and say, please, please, tell us what you know. no, of course not. we did what needed to be done to catch those who were guilty on 9/11 and prevent a further attack.

we were successful on both parts -- >> this report said it was not successful. >> this report is full of crap. >> director of harvard's project on public narrative and author of the 1% doctrine. and also former rnc chair michael steele. what do you think is in the makeup of a guy who dismisses all different opinions as crap? >> cheney will go to his grave denying everything that is very clear at this point. this is the moment they feared, that there would be an official inquest that would prove right everything people were saying. now it's happened and cheney is digging into his final position. he's in a shrinking country, cheneyland, that gets smaller and smaller. and even now you can hear him shooting at president bush as to who knew what.

this is cheney's last stand. >> let me ask you about policy. i'm a big believer, as mike dukakis said, the fish rots from the head. an old greek expression. whatever it is, i believe the boss sets the tone. i worked in politics for 15 years. when staffers did something, i knew the boss wanted it done, or they wouldn't be there. that's the operative. and i was one, an operative. you are the boss's guy. so when somebody says somebody at the cia did something, my view is, they were told to do it. what's your view? where did the water boording come from and all that stuff, how did it work its way down to the bowels or the dark place -- >> this came directly, chris, from bush and cheney, both of them. at the start, it was ordered by the president and the vice president. the cia didn't just wake up one day and say, hey, we're going to do a lot of extra legal and extraordinary things. it came from the white house. they were ordered to take off

the gloves as the white house said right at the beginning. don't worry about what people say when they find out. go to the dark side. they were following orders. now, ultimately, the president and the vice president were briefed intensively about exactly what cia was doing from the beginning and throughout. bush was quite engaged in this as was cheney. they got regular reports, what is the yield of the interrogation, is it successful, is it not? both men are directly driving this. >> to the extent their cruelty involved, michael, essentially, torture, whatever you want to call it, there's torture, cruelty involved, you're hurting people, causing them pain and fear and all the mix of horrors you get in your mind when you're being tortured, where is it going to end, is it going to end with me ending, all that, did they do that with an attitude of we want to do this, we don't like these people, they are bad people, was it personal? ron? that's to you, ron. >> you bleeped out.

the fact is, they engaged president bush only when things were made personal. cheney and bush viewed this as an affront to them personally, which was kind of the way bush was managed, the tapping of blood lust. this was about managing bush. by cheney, by others. but also doing what they felt need be done. don't worry about the consequences. of course cheney creates the 1% doctrine, that idea that we should do everything. everything essentially we can think of. don't worry about these issues of ends and means. now what we find is of course the worst nightmare, that not only was this morally reprehensible, cashiering america's moral authority, but it was of no value at all, which they were warned about at the beginning. >> you're sure of that? >> absolutely. >> we got nothing out of it?

>> absolutely nothing of value that couldn't be got in a hundred other ways. >> but they didn't get it in a hundred other ways. let me have michael in here. i want to set this up politically. cheney isn't hiding. >> no, he's not hiding. cheney has never hidden. i think that's what frustrates a lot of people. he puts it out there and you have to deal with it. he makes it easy for you to unpack it, as he's done again. there's a lot that ron said that, i wasn't in the room, i don't know what's inside these men's hearts and heads. i do know how the process -- i do not think that the president and the vice president were sitting around over a cup of coffee saying, we're just going to start waterboarding, out of thin air. we know what the cia's business has always been about. this is nothing new. this is nothing transcendent in terms what the cia has done in terms of black ops. >> what about going into the dark areas of intelligence, we got to go back in there in the

quiet, where there's no discussion -- >> absolutely. >> why is cheney saying to do that? >> why are we laying it out on the table? >> i want to make the point that came from the top. cheney exhibiting no moral qualms about the acts revealed in the report. let's listen. >> did the ends justify the means? >> absolutely. >> no doubt in your mind? >> no doubt in my mind, i'm totally comfortable with it. >> doing his job there. cheney previewed the at any cost mentality. yet days after 9/11, let's listen. >> we also have to work the dark side, if you will, we have to spend time in the shadows, in the intelligence world. a lot of what needs to be done here will have to be done quietly, without any discussion, using sources and methods that are available to our intelligence agencies, if we're going to be successful. that's the world these folks operate in.

and so it's going to be vital for us to use any means at our disposal basically to achieve our object. >> how do you read that? >> that's the way this works. >> don't blame it on the cia. it guy looks like he was ready to do it from the top. >> exactly. that's where the buck ultimately stops. you laid it out very well at the opening of the segment. that at the end of the day, it's going to start at the head. if there are good things that come from it, you're going to the head. that's how cheney saw this. this is all in the context of what happened post 9/11. this is that world that was created. again, we have a history. whether we're trying to go after castro in the kennedy administration -- >> they didn't do the job, did they? >> no, they didn't. or whether you're going after osama bin laden, it's the same type -- >> who is still the head of cuba right now? anyway, let's go back to ryan. what is it in cheney's being? what's in his head that makes him curl the lip and talk about torture and stuff like that with

such delight and relish? what's that all about? >> cheney has always believed that tactics matter. he's arguably one of the finest tact itions at the top of government for many years. if cheney believes that his position cannot be challenged, as long as he digs in and doesn't flinch, he'll do that. that's where cheney is sitting at this point. many people are turning on him at this point. john mccain and others are saying, cheney's wrong. but cheney at this point will be the last man standing with this position if that's what it takes. that's what he's thinking about. history's record, i didn't flinch. >> and i think ron is absolutely right about that. that's the one thing about the man, he's consistent from the very beginning to this moment. and now one has to unpack that. >> i don't know about love, but in his view, all's fair in war. ron, thank you for being the expert. michael steele, thank you very much. up next, a "hardball" farewell to michele bachmann. we're going to the ridiculous,

this is "hardball," the place for politics. and also, where you can hear the debate. over 200,000 people are hospitalized every year with flu complications. so to kill the germs that may make your family sick, we recommend using lysol disinfectant spray every day. lysol is approved to kill 80 germs, including hard to kill viruses that can live on surfaces for over 4 weeks. it works on hard and soft surfaces to help

stop the spread of bacteria. so help keep your family healthy with lysol.

debate. ♪ ♪ [ applause ] ha! >> thank you that i could have that privilege of also being a stepping stone to look to the future, so that the next generation would live better than we do today. thank you for the privilege. >> time now for the side show. that was, of course, the departing congresswoman michele bachmann, giving her farewell address on the house floor tuesday this week. tonight we're recognizing her for the many outrageous, absurd and down right scary things she's said. didn't take long for bachmann to make a name for herself as the de facto queen of the hard right clown car.

in fact, it began right here on this show, "hardball," when she questioned then candidate barack obama's patriotism. and called for a new era of mccarthyism to rule out anti-american lawmakers in the democratic caucus. >> how many people in the caucus are anti-american? you already suspect barack obama. is he alone, or are there others? >> what i would say is that the news media should do a penetrating expose and take a look. i wish they would. i wish the american media would take a great look at the views of the people in congress and find out, are they pro-america, or anti-america. i think people would love to see an expose like that. >> bachmann was a vocal opponent of the president, attacking the affordable care act with a fervor. >> this egregious system that will be ultimately known as "death care," must be defeated. it will be very unpleasant if the death panels go into effect. >> let's repeal this failure

before it literally kills women, kills children, kills senior citizens. >> of course there were no death panels, but congresswoman bachmann rare let the facts get in the way of good fiction. he famously campaigned against vaccinations, making the unfounded claim that the hpv vaccination was unsafe for young women. >> i will tell you that i had a mother last night come up to me, here in tampa florida, after the debate. she told me that her daughter took that vaccine, that injection, and suffered from mental retardation thereafter. it can have very dangerous side effects. >> it was rated false after it was denied by the medical community at large. congresswoman bachmann liked to cite the founding fathers, but basic american history alluded her at times.

when she claims that our founders were the ones who ended slavery. >> the very founders that wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the united states. >> remember how ben franklin won the civil war? anyway, at a campaign event, she mistakenly credited new hampshire as the site of the first battle of the american revolution. >> the love of new hampshire and what we have in common is your extreme love for liberty. you're the place where the shot around the world. >> the battle of lexington and concord as everyone watching knows, was in massachusetts. with that, we say farewell to the queen of the right wing clown car. up next, the director of the cia agency defends the agency in the wake of the report. the roundtable joins us in a minute.

you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. here's some news you may find surprising.

we're for an open internet for all. we're for creating more innovation and competition. we're for net neutrality protection. now, here's some news you may find even more surprising. we're comcast. the only isp legally bound by full net neutrality rules.

here's what's happening. back to "hardball." ♪ ♪ welcome back to "hardball." two days after the release of

that damning report by democratic senators and the senate intelligence committee, the director of the cia spoke to reporters today. he was asked whether the program put in place by the bush administration, did it work? which included torture, did it produce useful intelligence. here's what brennan said. >> there's no way, to know whether or not some information that was obtained from an individual who had been subjected at some point during his confinement, could have been obtained through other means. it's just an unknowable fact. so what the agency's point has been consistently and what certainly my view is, after having reviewed the documents, is that there was useful intelligence, very useful, valuable intelligence was obtained from individuals who

had been subjected to eits. whether that could be obtained without the use of the eits, is unknowable. >> michael steele, melinda henden berger and republican strategist hogan gitly. one question, is torture, any kind of torture right or wrong? should we do it? >> in my opinion? >> that's what i'm asking for, should we do it? >> is torture really the act, or is it the motivation? >> we're trying to save the country from disaster and one guy that we know knows the answer to what's coming next, do we torture him? >> to get you the information you want -- >> do you think we should do it? >> i think you should do it. >> i'm with my catholic church on this. they say it's an intrinsically evil act. so i say no, the ends never justify the means. it's always wrong.

and i don't care if it gets you absolutely everything you want, the keys to the kingdom, which it does not. [ all speak at once ] >> our president says the same thing, this is not who we are as a country and i agree with that. >> so you wouldn't do it? 24 hours, explosion coming, you're not going to do it. your thoughts? are you with her? >> i've got my intrinsically catholic view as well, but i side with hogan. i think the policy and personal implications beyond that one individual are too great. i think if you're in executive leadership in particular, you have to weigh it in totality. and yes, sometimes that requires you to do it. this is the justification in the church for things like just war. so you cannot say that, oh, if i torture that that's morally wrong, but if, you know, i bomb an entire village of innocent

individuals that somehow that justifies the means that you're trying to achieve with the war. so what that requires is the moral leadership lays out the parameters and the political leadership has to wade itself through that, keeping its eye on those things that cross the lines, and you saw with the cia director, he was not -- he was not getting into the policy. that's not his job. his job is to do the implementation of that policy and those leaders that we entrust with the -- >> he was talking out of both sides of his mouth. >> -- have anything to do with what is done when the time comes? because when the time comes, a president, a dick cheney, a barack obama, a george bush, whoever they are, has to make a decision how to save the country. they have to make a decision on the spot. we got this guy in custody. we know he knows. what do we do? mr. president, he's our only source of information right now. and you have to decide then whether to throw the rule book out. >> but how can it be a message

to the world that we're no better than the terrorists we are fighting? and we are not isis. we don't do that. that's not who we are. [ all speak at once ] >> i don't think it's practical. >> are you against capital punishment? >> i am. >> see, these are values. i can appreciate that. >> i think capital punishment didn't work to deter crime in the same way torture doesn't work to -- >> i think there's a false argument here. >> i think it's too neat. it's convenient to believe -- >> it's actually not neat. it's so satisfying on an emotional level to say, let's do what it takes. but where's the proof that we got anything out of it? >> but see, you're trying to prove something that is not going to be fully disclosed in the course of any period of time. you're not able to say, we were able to do x, y, and z because we tortured this individual. it's just a false argument. >> he said it worked.

but he leaves the caveat, we could have got it from somewhere else. >> but that was the view today. republicans wanted to hear brennan say, we got the information that got bin laden. they did, right? the democrats wanted to hear, we weren't sure if that really came from here, we just got the information. they heard that too. he said both things. so both sides are able to glom on to the points they want to use and use that politically, however they choose. >> it's not knowable to know if we could have gotten the same information, means it wasn't even a last resort. i mean, that to me, suggests that they didn't even try very hard otherwise to get that information. >> bases loaded, bottom of the ninth, guy hits a home run. you could say, somebody else could have done that. it's true. the pitcher could have hit a home run. the shortstop, the least likely. but you don't know. anyway, yesterday colorado senator mark udall gave a fiery

speech on the floor of the senate, calling for president obama to purge from his administration people who were part of the cia's interrogation program, people like the director himself, john brennan. this is tough stuff for a guy on his way out. but here he is. >> torture just didn't happen afterall, contrary to the president's recent statement, we didn't torture some folks. real actual people engaged in torture. some of these people are still employed by the cia and the u.s. government. they are right now people serving in high level positions at the agency who approved directed or committed acts related to the cia's detention and interrogation program. it's bad enough not to prosecute these officials. but to reward or promote them, and risk the integrity of the u.s. government, to protect them, is incomprehensible. >> the best thing about our country, we talk about this in the open.

i always talk about, when we were growing up, we had the space program. we said there's a guy on the board. before the ship took off, the russians, you never knew if the ship came down, blew up in the air, poor monkey, or not even that. we were honest and we think of ourselves as the good guys. >> we think of ourselves, but it's ten years later we're talking about this. >> we're talking about it and a lot of other countries never do. so what could will come of this hand-wringing, which i think is morally important? will it shorten the leash on future cias or not? >> i do know, when you're talking about this program, that the senate democrats, senate republicans knew about this. this wasn't new to them. they understood this. for them now to be outraged is a little disingenuous. now that we know about it, the program's over. it's been ended. what are the 2016 candidates going to say about it? because now it's in the forefront again?

>> what torture will do is stop people from coming on the show and looking at the camera instead of looking at me. did you learn that at the virginia leadership school? >> i was in news before. >> okay, go ahead. >> well, the republicans are mostly, as i understand it, expressing outrage that it's out in the open now, even though the terrorists have been recruiting on this stuff for years. so i don't think -- >> cheney's making the case for it. how will this find its way into party platforms? will the democrats say we're against it? will republicans say, we're for torture? >> they're not going to say they're pro-torture. >> do you think cheney will actually say -- >> no, no. >> he is something. isn't he something? i think if anybody thumps their nose at this guy, i've been through this, you take on cheney, and he wants to

dismember you. anyway, the roundtable is staying with us. when we come back, the war on insurgency. this is hot for the democrats elizabeth warren leading the charge for the future of the democrat party. she wants them to be a populist party that keeps a tough rein on wall street. this is "hardball," the place for politics. one day, it started to rain. the house tried to keep out all the water, but water got inside and ruined everybody's everythings. the house thought she let the family down. they just didn't think it could happen. they told the house they would take better care of her... always. announcer: protect what matters. get flood insurance.

rick perry, the governor of texas is talking about another presidential run.

he's looking to put the mistakes of the past campaign behind him. here's what he told kasie hunt about what matters in a presidential candidate. >> running for the presidency is not an iq test. it is a test of an individual's resolve. it's a test of an individual's philosophy. it's a test of an individual's life experiences. and i think americans are really ready for a leader that will give them a great hope about the future. >> said he probably has less margin for error after his oops moment in the debate in 2011 when he couldn't remember one of the three federal agencies he wanted to close down if he got elected. we'll be right back.

we're back. the democratings between the white house and senator elizabeth warren. back with the round table right now, michael, melinda and hogan. i think this is one of those big nights in politics. i think the fact that senator warren, in a manner somewhat leek ted cruz saying cause of trouble. don't go along anymore. >> well, nobody wants to see a government shutdown. but, i don't think -- >> ted cruz wasn't afraid of one. >> but nobody wants to see a check on wall street and roll backs, either. it isn't just liberals on the

hill. i don't think you see people say boy, i wish we'd get off the backs of wall street and carried interest. i think that's where the public is. there's a lot of that kind of populous feeling among ordinary republicans, not the ones on the hill. >> well, one of the charges on the right, if the dem kraic party doesn't get populous, they're going to get snaked by the republicans. they'll come from the libertarian right saying you guys will be in bed too long. >> i think that's accurate. what's interesting to me is if you get this bill to the house rngs you're going to have some weird relationship between elizabeth warren and ted cruz. they're going to be against the bill. it could both sink in the senate for just about every issue. but they're against the same bill. i don't know that it gets out of the senate.

>> we could be here through christmas. >> we could be here through christmas. i still cannot find this more odd than to hear, you know, elizabeth warren coming off as the joan of arc of the left to go and fight wall street. >> and let me finish my thought. and poor ted cruz who was making the same principle charge as somehow methuzala. >> he was called the political terrorist. >> political terrorist. >> let's discriminate here between somebody whoa's trying to make sure wall street doesn't get another bite out of the apple that shouldn't have. >> but she needs to go reconcile that attitude and that approach with the rest of her party who's taken checks from wall street

for e for the last seven years. so don't give me this holier than thou in wall e wall street. >> you have just said something here. the democrats money comes from new york and it comes from where ever people from new york go during the rest of the year and san francisco and l.a. it's a coastal party. now, they're attacking big money. this is fascinating. >> both parties on the hill are in the pocket of wall streetment and i think that anyone who took them on could get a lot of support among average mrp e mother-in-laws. that's why people don't -- that's why congress is held in such low remarks. skbh thank you. >> i think it's good for the country. we could stay on a few more days. thank you very much. and thank you, michael stooel and hogan.

when we return, let me finish with the revolution in a democratic party we're witnessing tonight. you're watching hard e "hardball," the place for politics. n't that the dog's tow? (dog noise) hey, mi towel, su towel. more scent plus oxi boost and febreze. it's our best gain ever!

man (mr. mucus: tore do you work, with you.ing? it's taco tuesday. man: you're not coming. i took mucinex to help get rid of my mucusy congestion. i'm good all day. [announcer:] mucinex keeps working. not 4, not 6, but 12 hours. let's end this

we're for an opens you internet for all.sing. we're for creating more innovation and competition. we're for net neutrality protection. now, here's some news you may find even more surprising. we're comcast. the only isp legally bound by full net neutrality rules. this will society the courts for the months and years ahead. the one thing we know is that it stands in the shadow of recent defeat. last month, it reversed the composition of the senate from

55-45 democratic to 55-45 republican. it enlarged the republican lead to the point that it would be very hard for the democrats to win back control in 2016 even with a strong standard running for president. the other thing to say is that say e they seem stuck in place. they look to be simply holding on, sticking to the usual positions and phrases hoping for salvation by adherence to their most basic con stitch whenty e sills. both of these factors, the fact of defeet and studded thinking meets makes tonts's wide open assault on this big spending bill and its little give away to wall street all the more important. remember this date, december 11

thd, 2014, it may be the birthday for a democratic party that's ri gained its reason to be. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. kwt all in" with chris hayes is that rights right now. >> tonight on "all in" whatever your views, this agency did a lot of things right. >> the c.i.a. strikes back. >> they did what they were asked to do. >> c.i.a. chief john brennan issues a stunning rebuttal to the senate report on bush era torture. then, the crohnibus revolt. joining elizabeth warren to fight the big bank give away.