that is our show. we are done. i'll see you back at 6:00 p.m. eastern. "hardball" with chris matthews starts now. more drama for the trump white house. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm steve kornacki in for chris matthews. another day, another drama for president trump and his cabinet. attorney general jeff sessions telling congress he will not appoint a second special counsel to look into political bias in the fbi, something the president made clear he wanted. this comes after yesterday's shake-up with the president firing his veterans affairs secretary. early in his terp, trump promised his cabinet would be the finest group of people ever

assembled. >> we have a lot of smart people. i tell you what, one thing we've learned, we have by far the highest iq of any cabinet ever. >> there are those that are saying it's one of the finest group of people ever assembled as a cabinet. we're very proud of it. we have a phenomenal team of people, a great group of talent. >> since then though, the president has fired or forced out more than half a dozen of those people he was including in that praise. yesterday, president trump announced the firing of va secretary david shulkin. he did this through a tweet. "i am pleased to announce that i intend to nominate admiral ronny jackson m.d. as the new secretary of veterans affairs. i am thankful to dr. david shulkin's service to our country." dr. jackson who has no management experience will be tacked with fixing the

government's second largest agency plagued with scandals. according to "the new york times" trump feels more job that he understands the job of president and relying on his own instincts putting a premium on his personal chemistry with his people rather than on their resume or qualifications for the job. recent he told reporters change isn't such a bad thing. >> they wrote a story about staff changes that was very false. >> i think you want to see change. i want to see the different ideas. >> the news marked the end of secretary shulkin's time an the va given the president's public backing before this. >> i also want to express our appreciation for secretary shulkin who is implementing the dramatic reform throughout the va. i have no doubt it will be properly implemented. right, david? better be, david.

we'll never have to use those words. we'll never have to use those words on our david. >> and according to nbc news, president trump who built his career in part on telling people you're fired on reality television, he tasked john kelly with firing shulkin before the president tweeted the news himself. i'm joined by kristen welker, white house correspondent with nbc news, nick confessore with the "new york times" and a political analyst and elise jordan. kristin, over to you first where the news happened yesterday and the president put that tweet out. that's a pattern we turn on twitter and learn something big happened through the president's account. when and why the president turned on david shulkin because you heard the praise before this. when and why he turned on the va secretary and how it was he then turned to his personal physician.

>> right. well, i think that this was not necessarily a surprise. part of the pattern we're starting to see in addition to everything you just mapped out is sort of bubbling up to the surface, frustrations that the president starts talking about with his advisers. we learn about it in the press. and then it's a matter of weeks or months before the person ultimately winds up leaving the white house. in this case, there were a couple of issues. one, i think the president clashed with the va secretary on policy issues including how the va should be run. the president wanted to see more privatization. david shulkin was as opposed to that. then there were ethical concerns and questions surrounding the va secretary including this trip that he took to europe with family members. it was an official trip. he mixed in some personal activities. he did wind up reimbursing the va. but only after all of that had been exposed in the press and had been heavily scrutinized. i think there were a lot of things at work here.

it goes back to another point you made, the fact that the president clashed with him. what you're seeing increasingly is this president who wants to be surrounded by people who agree with him, who he has faith in and that is where we then turn to ronny jackson. he's someone who has earned the president's trust. we met him for the first time really when he had that remarkable press conference in which he gave the president a clean bill of health and said he wanted to put him on a diet. a lot of questions surrounding his confirmation process because he's never headed an agency much less the second largest in the federal government. so there is some concern, some criticism he's not necessarily the right person for the job. again the president trusting his gut on this and the fact he has a relationship and good rapport with admiral ronny jackson. >> again, it is such an unusual move when you just take a step back like many moves we've seen. it is unusual for the president to turn to a personal physician for a spot in the cabinet.

so tell us a little bit more about what you know about the relationship between trump and dr. jackson. this is somebody who didn't come to the white house with trump. he had been there under obama starting in 2013. where did that relationship come from? how close is it? what do we know about that? >> this is, as you point out, someone who served in the obama administration. it is notable that he was able to forge this relationship with president trump. this is someone who's spent a lot of time with the president, again suggested putting him on a diet. someone also able to give him truth talking, as well. but i think that this developed over time. he also is someone who looks the part. he was very strong in that briefing that we had. and remember, the president sometimes likes to pick people who look the part who he thinks are strong characters in front of a camera. he thinks that's part of being a part of his administration. there were a range of different

farcs that played into this. how is this going to play once he needs confirmed on capitol hill? that's where the real question lies now. i think we'll have to wait and see how it unfolds because again, there is skepticism about his lack of experience. >> those confirmation votes early on in his presidency, a lot more dissent than we've seen before. a couple ways to think about this with ronny jackson. let me give you two basic schools of thought. one is, it is consistent with what we've seen with trump, an unconventional pick, seemingly announced spontaneously. catches everybody off guard. continues can the palace intrigue arrest show the effect. or this idea that trump is turning a little bit as president and asserting himself more in these personnel decisions putting a little bit more of his personal stamp op these personnel choices. how do you understand this one? >> so a bit from column a and a

bit from column b. the president is always casting a reality show. it's not "the apprentice," it's "survivor." he values what, fortunes and loyalty and stars on the shoulder and people who are good on tv. that's how he casts his show. i also think for the first year of his job as president, he was untrusted by people in the establishment people put around him, people experienced in the ways of washington not always synced with him on policy. is he basically pushing most of those people out. he is the president. he doesn't have to have -- >> the proposition here where ronny jackson going to the va, a troubled and massive part of our government, the proposition is really almost the same that trump offered in the campaign in 2016. it was, there's big problems here. the folks who have credentials, the folks you normally turn to have screwed it up and not going

to get you out of it. you need an outsider to do it. >> it's unfair to lump dr. ronny jackson in with some of the more inexperienced cabinet picks because he is a lifelong military doctor, a rear admiral equivalent to a one or two star. you don't rise within the pentagon ranks and not know how to manage people by the time you're at that level of promotion. there's a lot that could be gained by having a military doctor run the va just because the regular military health care system isn't synced with the va system necessarily. a lot the more exploratory treatments pioneered on the military side such as to combat ptsd aren't necessarily available to veteran. i think this is dr. jackson is someone who is trusted by president bush, president obama and clearly president trump and i think it's an exciting picking. > other news today on the personnel front, the president saying good-bye to one of his longest serving aides and someone who was one of his

strongest defenders. hope hicks. this is video of the president wishing her well before he departed for an event in ohio today. it is unclear who replace hicks. politico is reporting the president sees no urgency to fill the position. according to two officials, nobody can fill hicks' shoes. behind the scenes new york magazine reporting there is a brutal competition between mercedes schlep, director of strategic communication and the treasury department spokesman tony saeh. kristen welker, we're talking about the changes here in the administration, the idea the president as nick was saying in some cases jettisoning some of the folks who came in with him, some of the folks with the institutional knowledge. hope hicks came to washington with him and didn't know it before he got there. in terms of somebody very close to him who understands him, this departure probably does leave a big hole. >> it's a big hole. i have spoken to a number of

people here about hope hicks departure. who is going to replace her. and everyone says the same thing. no one can replace hope hicks. why? she has been with president trump since day one, since he launched his improbable campaign. she was there through the highs and lows. she helped him to get his campaign back on track, helped him to win the white house frankly. she's someone who has a relationship with him that extends far beyond a communications director, one official said she plays a number of different roles within this administration including maybe his closest adviser. so who is going to relays her now? i'm told the president isn't going to replace her with great urgency. he's thinking about it but sarah sanders the current press secretary along with mercedes schlep as well as kellyanne conway i'm told are likely going to fulfill that role together. they will basically serve in the role of communications director.

the three of them while the president determines who if anyone specifically will be naxd lead communications director. >> nick confessore and elise jordan here with me in new york. thanks to all of you. could special counsel mueller use the news that trump's attorney floated the idea of a pardon to build an obstruction case? lots of new developments in the russia investigation is coming up. plus, if you want to understand the new face of the democratic party, look no further than the march for our lives last weekend, the people that took to the streets are the ones taking charge of the grassroots politics of the democratic party and they are not all teenagers or not necessarily what you might expect. we'll show you what the big board says. it has been a year of memorable parodies on "saturday night live." the new one was from a former "snl" star. and finally, the round table will be here with three things you might not know. this is hsh where the action is.

that's because roundup for lawns has arrived. finally, there's a roundup made just for your lawn, so you can put unwelcome lawn weeds to rest. draw the line. with roundup for lawns, there is no better way to kill lawn weeds to the root without harming a single blade of grass. it's a great day to be a lawn. draw the line with roundup. trusted for over 40 years. ♪ ♪

>> late this evening, savannah guthrie sat down with russia's new ambassador to the united states. despite ongoing hostility between the u.s. and russia are, he described the recent phone call between trump and putin as a warm exchange. let's watch. >> what i know i know official reports from kremlin. from minister of foreign affairs. it was constructive conversation could i add even that it was warm conversation. >> warm? >> yes, it's my position. it was not mentioned in the statement but how i read it. and if you look at the substance of this conversation, our two presidents have discussed the real problems we face today and how it is important to unite our

efforts to tackle these challenges to our security to security of the united states people as well as russian people. >> more of that exclusive interview will air tomorrow morning on "today." we have the latest developments in the russia investigation right after this. rise higher than ever. as the world leader in unmanned aerial systems, we're attracting the world's best talent to central new york. and turning the airport into a first-class transportation hub. all while growing urban areas into vibrant places to live and work. across new york state, we're building the new new york. to grow your business with us in new york state, visit esd.ny.gov. to grow your business with us in new york state,

if his denture can cope with... a steak. luckily for him, he uses super poligrip. it helps give him 65% more chewing power. leaving brad to dig in and enjoy. super poligrip.

the revelation that donald trump's former lead attorney, john dowd discussed pardons for michael flynn and paul manafort last summer raised new concerns about the president's potential legal exposure. dowd's overture was intended to silence flynn and manafort or discourage them from cooperating with investigators, it may theoretically represent obstruction of justice. what specifically dowd offered and whether trump approved the idea could become part of robert mueller's investigation. trump's lawyers have denied that dowd had those reported

conversations about pardoning flynn and manafort. however, we've seen president trump and associates have not denied a pardon is possible in connection with the russia probe. every time they've been asked, they've been careful not to completely rule it out. >> would you consider a pardon for michael flynn? >> i don't want to talk about pardons for michael flynn yet. we'll see what happens. >> would he consider pardoning him? >> i'm not aware that has come up or any process or decision on that front. >> are you going to pardon manafort? >> thank you. thank you, everybody. >> will the president consider or rule out pardoning either of them? >> i haven't had any conversations with him about that. >> the pardon power is quite broad. i have not studied it. i don't know whether that would be appropriate or not, frankly. >> will the president rule out giving pardons to people like michael flynn, paul manafort, and any others in this investigation? >> i have not had the conversation with the president about any of that.

>> i'm joined by daniel goldman, former assistant u.s. attorney and natasha ber tram a staff writer at the atlantic. danny, quite a revelation the idea of these conversations dangled by trump's lawyer about pardons last summer but didn't happen. manafort and flynn ultimately the special counsel took legal action against them. from that standpoint when you look at the idea of an obstruction of justice case, the fact nothing seems to have come of this, how does that affect it? >> that's actually worse for the obstruction of justice angle. the fact you would dangle this constitutional and broad power and yet not exercise it is an indication that you're using it for ulterior or alternative purposes. let's hypothetically say they had this conversation and he dangled the idea, hey, if you don't testify, then you know, maybe you'll get a pardon down the road. by not actually executing the pardon, he's not dealing with

the ramifications politically that should come with it and so what he's got is a situation where he's floating it out will for his personal use. and that is not the purpose of the pardon power from -- that's in the constitution. and the other point, steve, that's really important here is, this was wat not white house council don mcgahn having these conversations. ordinarily pardons, commutations of sentences run through the white house counsel's office. this was donald trump's personal lawyer having these conversations who is defending him in these investigations. so it directly links it to the investigation which makes it a little bit more suspect from an obstruction perspective. >> i guess the part i wonder about and you just broadened this out and think about it a little, presidential power to parred is pretty absolute. we've seen presidents exercise this in any manner of different ways over the years. you've got the president in the clips we're just playing. he has kind of talked about this, said not the time to be

talking about a pardon yet. if you got that the power and you're out there publicly even just sort of generally saying it, where is the difference between that and the kind of obstruction you're talking about? because anybody in a jam and potentially has something on the president is going to take that message. >> right. let's use jim comey as an example. the president has the authority to fire the fbi director. but the argument in favor of an obstruction of justice charge would be you cannot use your power whether it's executive power or constitutional power corruptly with a corrupt intent. if you're using it as it's designed to be used and you face whatever political ramifications you face which is how it was designed, then that's fine. but if you used it with a corrupt intent, then it's obstruction of justice. so they're different sources of the power but it's an aal gus situation. >> natasha bertrand, what do we know about the state of pardon

politics if you want to call it inside the white house right now? you've got, we know what's happened to flynn and manafort since the discussions. we still have the russia probe ongoing. do we know what's going on in terms of consideration? >> we know that they haven't ruled out. they have not stated categorically this has never been discussed and that it won't be discussed again in the future. i think it's above all a really important window into trump's state of mind. if indeed he did speak to john dowd about potentially pardon michael flynn and paul manafort which would be surprising if he didn't, surprising if john dowd freelanced on all of this it would just be one more thing in mueller's toolbox when he's considering whether or not trump wanted to end the investigation in order to protect himself. in the white house, i'm sure this is something talked about. the idea that he was dangling this in exchange perhaps for them not to testify against him really raises questions about

what was his intent when he fired james comey, when he was going around capitol hill last year asking senators to cop out and say publicly that he had not colluded with russia to asking his nsa director and cia director to publicly exonerate him and say he was not under investigation. all of these things put together will allow mueller to pursue an obstruction case pap we've seen that's exactly what he's doing. >> des bright pressure from the president's allies on capitol hill in, jeff sessions today said in a letter to house republicans he was declining to appoint a second special counsel to investigate alleged bias at the fbi. this setback for the president and defenders who claim the fbi abused the surveillance process and mishandled the clinton e-mail investigation sure to irritate the president who already blames sessions for allowing the special probe to begin. when sessions recused himself and it led to the appointment of

mueller sessions tells time nagz magazine in an interview for a cover story he has no regrets. he says "i think i did the right thing. i don't think the attorney general can ask everybody else in the department to follow the rules if the attorney general doesn't follow them himself." jeff sessions was one of trump's earliest most flooungs influential supporters. we have seen the tension publicly between trump and sessions. this refusal to go along with something trump has been agit e agitating for, what do you make of it? >> as jeff sessions following the rule of law and the diplomat of justice policies and regulations. and that's exactly what jeff sessions has generally done. one may disagree with his policies. they're very different from what eric holder and the obama administration had. but he has really done a pretty good job of following the policies and there is no reason

in this particular case for a special counsel. and i think he's right because there's an inspector general. he has all the powers that you need and in fact, that's the job of the inspector general to investigate violations of laws or regulations within the department of justice and he even went one step further, steve. he assigned this investigation to the "uss attorney in utah to look into it further which is an additional step that may not be necessary but it is an additional step. and the notion that you need a special counsel for any wrongdoing to investigate any wrongdoing in the department of justice would turn the special counsel regulations on its head. >> meanwhile, there are new developments on that collusion side of the russia probe. reuters is reporting today that investigators are asking witnesses about key events that took place during the 2016 republican convention. specifically "mueller's team has been asking about a convention related event attended by both russia's u.s. ambassador and jeff sessions," and they're also

asking how and why republican party platform language hostile to russia was deleted from a section of the document related to ukraine. natasha, can you shed more light on what's going on here? >> it's interesting this is coming out after we know rick gates is cooperating with the special counsel. he was an aide to the trump campaign, a deputy to then campaign chairman paul manafort. what we know now is mueller is probing these ves very significant campaign events. what happened at that event at the an mayflower hotel where sessions met with sergey kislyak? what happened and led up to this change in the republican platform in which an amendment that called for providing lethal defense weapons to ukraine in order to defend themselves against russian aggression was taken out and actually watered down and changed to provide appropriate assistance to. so these are questions that -- and we actually saw that carter page who was on the campaign, he congratulated the campaign staff for their success in changing

that platform. so all of these clues are coming together. they are going to be of interest to mueller because he of course, is investigating whether the trump campaign was trying to appease russia during the election and if so, why was that. >> natasha and daniel, thanks to both of you. up next, no one loves big ratings more than president trump. two shows brought in very big audiences this week and elicited very different reactions from the president. this is "hardball," where the action is.

if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis and you're talking to your rheumatologist about a medication, this is humira. this is humira helping to relieve my pain and protect my joints from further irreversible damage. this is humira helping me reach for more. humira has been clinically studied for over 20 years. humira works for many adults. it targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers,

including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. talk to your doctor and visit humira.com. this is humira at work.

the president watches "60 minutes." if he's watching tonight, what would you say to him? >> he knows i'm telling the truth. >> how could you have voted for him? >> he talked about jobs, jackie. he said he would shake things up. i mean this might come as a shock to you, but we almost lost our house the way things are going. >> have you looked at the news, because things are worse. >> not on the real news. >> welcome back. it's hard to imagine a more politicized week for network primetime ratings. stormy daniels earning huge numbers with her interview on "60 minutes" on sunday night. 22 million people tuned in to that. the biggest audience for that show in a decade. then a couple nights later on wednesday, 18 million tuned in to watch roseanne barr's return to primetime, her character a trump supporter according to nbc, president trump called her

to congratulate her on the show's revival. here's what she said about that this morning. >> we just kind of had a private conversation but you know, we talked about a lot of things. and you know, he's just happy for me. i've known him for many years. he's done a lot of nice things for me over the years. and so it was just a friendly conversation about work and you know, television and ratings. >> he does focus a lot onraitings. >> he really understands ratings and how they measure things. and that's kind of been an interest of mine too for a long time. >> donald trump has frequently brought up television ratings both as a candidate and as a president as they were just talking about there. let's watch. >> i've had a successful life. "the apprentice" became one of the great shows on television. >> that was some crowd. we had the biggest audience in the history of inaugural

speeches. >> do you have similarities with putin? >> the biggest thing we have is we were on "60 minutes" together. >> the ratings were like through the roof. >> he had his highest ratings in 4 1/2 years. >> the ratings were phenomenal. >> how would you like to be at a party where trump wins? where trump gets, by the way, the highest ratings in the history of television. >> they said the other day, why are you always talking about ratings? you're always talking about ratings. isn't it terrible? nobody else does. i said that's because i'm in first place. >> joining me now is ted johnson, senior editor at variety magazine's d.c. bureau. thanks for joining us. peek of ratings when you look at roseanne" and that audience of 1 million and look at the markets where the show did the best, tulsa, kansas city, pittsburgh area, you're talking about red america markets. i haven't seen, you can see some of them up on your screen right

there. you're not seeing it new york, l.a., the heart of blue america. i haven't been able to see where this is for "60 minutes." i'm tempted to look at this week and said red america got a big event on roseanne's debut and blue america got something they wanted with "60 minutes" on sunday. is that part of the story? >> sure is. part of the reason roseanne did so well is abc did market this as kind of a show for the trump, the trump voter. roseanne was out there. she was very up front about her support of president trump and the fact that the show would have her as a trump voter. and that's something we just don't see the in primetime. i think that really made the show stand out. we're in this period right now where we're seeing some revivals of sit-coms from the '80s and '90s. we're going to see murphy brown next season actually.

and roseanne" is definitely one of them. there's the built-in audience. i think they were able to use this as hey, this is something that you don't see in primetime every night. it also refutes the idea that liberal hollywood only makes liberal content. >> yeah, and i take your point on that. i guess what i wonder, is it possible in this day and age when you think back to a lot of people mentioned all the in the family" in the '70s. there were four channels on television in the '70s. liberals and conservatives both watched "all in the family." the roseanne premiere the other night, there's a liberal on that show and her sister. you plenty of anti-trump commentary from her and plenty of pro-trump commentary from roseanne. is there comment tritt can you bridge the divide in the ratings these days? >> i think so. you mentioned "all in the family." that was a show that definitely bridged the divide at a time when there weren't a lot of

choices on tv. this is the show that is still on a broadcast network television. which you know, the audience isn't what it once was but it's still commanding two times, three times, four times the audience that you'll actually see on a more nich platform like netflix. so i think that the networks still are looking to really command, to gain those viewers who are from both sides of the political spec frum. they're not so much into argumenting like you may see in content that's on hbo or showtime. >> we know folks in your world and anfolks in the network executive suites make judgments about the world based onraitings. but it seems we have a president who does, too. >> he sure does. in fact, he used to when he was doing the antren e prentice" he used to call our ratings guy at variety and find out the numbers the previous night and have a

little chat about it. definitely, this is his currency. i don't think it's much of a surprise then when he sees a hit show, it's almost as if he's trying to take some of the credit for it because it was so heavily promoted with roseanne talking about her support of president trump and the show beinging what a family deals with in, quote unquote, trump's america. so i guess you know, the fact that this is a hit and that he would actually pick up the phone and call the start of show really didn't surprise me a whole lot. >> that's a very interesting anecdote, a president very curious about ratings long before he was president, too. ted johnson from variety, thanks for joining us. >> thank you. >> up next, hundreds of thousands turned out for last weekend's march for our lives. contrary to popular belief, they weren't all teenagers. far from it. we'll look at a statistical break down of who was there, why they were there and what it means for the future of the democratic party. you're watching "hardball." ndfa,

you were persecuted, and forced to flee the country of your birth. but you started a new life in a brand new world. when i built my ancestry family tree, i found your story... then, my dna test helped me reclaim the portuguese citizenship you lost. i'm joshua berry, and this is my ancestry story. combine the most detailed dna test with historical records for a deeper family story. get started for free at ancestry.com historical records for a deeper family story.

you may be at increased risk for pneumococcal pneumonia, that can take you out of the game for weeks, even if you're healthy. pneumococcal pneumonia is a potentially serious bacterial lung disease that in severe cases can lead to hospitalization. it may hit quickly, without warning, causing you to miss out on the things you enjoy most. prevnar 13® is not a treatment for pneumococcal pneumonia... it's a vaccine you can get to help protect against it. prevnar 13® is approved for adults to help prevent infections from 13 strains of the bacteria that cause pneumococcal pneumonia. you should not receive prevnar 13® if you have had a severe allergic reaction to the vaccine or its ingredients. if you have a weakened immune system, you may have a lower response to the vaccine. the most common side effects were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site, limited arm movement, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, joint pain, less appetite, vomiting, fever, chills, and rash. help protect yourself against pneumococcal pneumonia. ask your doctor or pharmacist about prevnar 13®.

if you were watching this channel or anything on television news over the weekend, you know all about the march for our lives. you had thousands of people turning out in washington, d.c., other cities around the country in response to that massacre, that tragedy at that florida school a few weeks ago. of course, it did raise a question, those seas of people you saw on your screens or that you saw in person, who were they? what brought hem there? what does it mean for the future of american politics really? guess what, a political scientist was on the scene there in washington, d.c., someone who is studying the resistance movement to president donald trump and decided to do a study to try to do a demographic profile of the folks who turned out in washington, d.c. it's very interesting what she found and tells us what maybe wasn't happening we thought

might be happening and what really was happening and what it means for the future. first of all, this was not necessarily at least according to this research, not necessarily a big bipartisan event. basically almost eight out of ten at this one in d.c. identified themselves as left leaning, almost nine out of tin vote ford hillary clinton. you're not going across the political spectrum. we're really talking about democrats, democratic leaning voters. what else did we learn about them though? also, there were plenty of young folks there. there were 10% under the age of 1. we talked a lot about students getting politically active as a result of that shooting. but look, the average age was significantly older than that, 49 years old was the average age of the folks turning out. maybe a little older than we thought. maybe on one side of the political spectrum a little bit more or a lot more than the other side. how about this, 70% of them were women. seven out of ten. more than two out of three were women at that march in washington according to this

study. also a very educated group, 72%, almost three in four had at least a bachelor's degree. this one surprised me the most, 27% had never protested before that. that means 3% had. so this is a group of folks who weren't just by and large turning out for the first time. but folks who turned out before. put it together, what you're seeing here maybe is the face of democratic party activism in the trump era. democratic party activism at the women's march before and some of these other protests. it's very educated. it's female much more man male. that's about middle age when you average it all together. is that the future of democratic party activism? are we seeing that take shape? what would that mean for the future of the democratic party and the future of american politics? i'm going to walk and hopefully not break my -- i'm going to talk about this with our panel. laura bassett, "huffington

post," carrie sheffield had, and christina greer, associate professor of political science at fordham university. christine, i'll start with you. when you see that demographic profile, what do you make of that? >> i want to remind everyone we have had lots of protests in the past 15 months. there are lots of americans protesting well before the election of donald trump. they weren't greeted with the same response from the media. they were greeted by thanks and militarized police officers from the u.s. federal government. we have to remember this is also an extension of protest movements that have been seeding the ground for some time. there is a partisan element obviously. there are a lot of democrats who feel incredibly frustrated by the shenanigans and wholly incompetent nature of donald trump as president right now. hopefully it will maintain itself not just in november for the midterms but all the primaries coming up in a lot of these states especially for

democrats honestly who some have been asleep at the wheel. that's a real wake-up call for a lot of elected officials who see democrats are galvanizing to be on message. >> within a democratic primary, if that's it the mobilizing force now. carrie from a conservative standpoint, you're looking at masses of people turning out for not just this, the women's march, a lot of other events looking at that demographic political profile. what do you make of that? >> it would be foolish for republicans to not see the level of energy and enthusiasm. the enthusiasm was for the liberal leaning candidate. that being said, democrats would be smart if they want to win and i don't want them to, however, they need to look at pennsylvania '18 and say this playbook in terms of the candidate who ran there he was much more centrist than these marchers. they're not representative of where the center of the country is and not representative in

terms of this grassroots march. 23% of the country is under 1. this was clearly not reflective of the demographic arc of the country. republicans you know, they need to be serious about making sure that they are targeting who in their district, they're shoring up their base and making sure the energy is being focused on bringing people to the middle honestly. a lot of people are upset how polarized the country is. so if the progressive base is going to nominate a bunch of left leaning incredibly leftist people, they're going to lose. >> laura, to try to reduce this to the basic election terms, when we look at the trouble republicans may be in, we'll see what happens, but maybe in heading into november, a lot of discussion comes back to women with college degrees. suburban women in this massive gender gap we've always talked about a gender gap. we're looking at a bigger gender gap than in the past, at least right now. when you look at the folks out

there, that's what i'm seeing in statistics. >> absolutely. women have always leaned a little bit democrat while the majority of men leaned republican. this year we're seeing it's a very specific moment. what happened in the election in the 2016 election was that we came so close to having the first fee may president and whatever you think about hillary clinton, that was a huge milestone for women's rights. instead we got this president who bragged on tape about having grabbed women by the you know what and hired people who feel the same way about women, people who have been domestic abusers and he's been accused by more than 12 people. women were awakened by that moment and woke up. we're seeing that in the women's marches, 2017 and '18 which was almost as powerful and the march last weekend. women are leading the resistance and twice as many women are running this year as did in 2016. so i think republican dozen have something to fear. and i think it's women. >> that's the sea change we

could be seeing at the end of this year. if these women win these democratic primaries and if this wave actually does emerge, then you're going to having this, you talk 1992 they called the year of the woman. that might be nothing compared to this. we'll see though. the roundtable staying with us. we've seen plenty of great impersonations of trump administration officials. we got a new one. might be the funniest one yet. you're watching "hardball." s, but we make more than our name suggests. we're an organic tea company. a premium juice company. a coconut water company. we've got drinks for long days. for birthdays. for turning over new leaves. and we make them for every moment in every corner of the country. we are the coca-cola company, and we're proud to offer so much more. you or joints. something for your heart... but do you take something for your brain.

with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember. a golf clubthat only hits is that some kind of magic wand? not quite... just the result of dell emc working with callaway to gather data - and design best-in-class clubs, transforming the player into a bonafide golfer. oh! maybe it is a magic wand. magic can't make digital transformation happen... but we can. that's the power dell emc, part of dell technologies. when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night, so he got home safe. yeah, my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. what?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

well, political impersonations are nothing new but they've seen what you might call a renaissance in the age of trump. let's watch. >> i'd like to begin today by apologizing on behalf of you to me. >> halloween is over but i see some of you guys are still in your journalist costumes. >> the thing to remember about russia is that we won and i don't know why you keep bringing up the election. >> i fired him because of russia. i thought he's investigating russia. i don't like that. i should fire him. >> did you meet with any trump surrogates about russia? >> i -- i do not recall. you know i recall. >> i convinced this country to elect donald. and i can do it again. >> come on. everybody loves the mooch. you know how you miss me. i'm like human cocaine. >> well, i think the problem is

that the words that were coming out of my mouth were bad and that is because they came from my brain. >> it's just crazy how one day you're the ceo of exxon, a $50 billion company and the next day, you get fired by a man who used to sell steaks in the mail. >> working at the white house was like going to summer camp. you know? you make all these new friends. you barely get any sleep and then everybody leaves after eight weeks. >> well, last night, there's a new one that came out to add to that pantheon. it is coming up next. the "hardball" roundtable. the n? i hired some help. he really knows his wine. this is the new guy? (dog growling) hello, my name is watson. you know wine, huh? i know that you should check vineyard block 12. block 12? (bark) my analysis of satellite imagery shows it would benefit from decreased irrigation. i was wondering about that. (barking) easy boy. nice doggy. what do you think?

not bad. (dog growling)

the toothpaste that helps prevent bleeding gums. if you spit blood when you brush or floss you may have gum problems and could be on the journey to much worse. help stop the journey of gum disease. try parodontax toothpaste. ♪ of important for me that nobody thinks president trump has handed the keys to the war machine as some sort of hair trigger lunatic. >> well, that's very reassuring, sir. >> because if i heard someone say that, i would blow them up quick. trump's giving me the nukes,

bada boom. bam. >> i'm a rational man and reason dictates whether some rogue king of denmark or the person taking too long in line at the airport tomorrow, you hit them first! >> welcome back to "hardball." that was comedian dana car have i underneath that big bushy moustache as john bolton. we're back with the "hardball" roundtable. i see him doing an impersonation, i still see george h.w. bush there. we played before the break all the other impersonations we've seen. wherever your politics is, a rich time for this kind of parody. in this administration, there are so many characters. >> it's such a cast of characters. we laugh so much just in the newsroom just every day. there's a news story that's hilarious. these skits can decide themselves. i can't decide if the "snl" writers have a hard or easy job. trying to write something

funnier than what's happening, i think back to sean spice ser hiding in the bushes. they put out the clarification saying he was among the bushes. we had the best day in the newsroom today. melissa mccarthy was not even as funny as sean spicer. >> no shortage of material. >> i've got to hand it to "snl," they do a better job of being bipartisan whereas steven colbert and jon stewart were so hard left, i make the wager they helped contribute to the rise of donald trump because they were not bipartisan and left a lot feeling marginalized. you look at the overall tilt of the culture what's coming out of leftist hollywood. the conservatives are left behind. that's why trump feels this huge vacuum for so many decades the conservatives have been shut out of hollywood. >> quickly, kristin, do you have a favorite of all these we've seen? >> i'm going to say jeff sessions because he does lie. i think the way kate mckinnen

portrays him is quite accurate. we're in the land of cast away dolls. the onion seems like "the new york times" somes because of what's coming out of the white house. >> there is no precedent for a lot of it. a program note at the top of the hour, the ousted va secretary david shulkin going to join chris hayes on "all in." you're watching "hardball." can make you feel unstoppable. but mania, such as unusual changes in your mood, activity or energy levels,

can leave you on shaky ground. help take control by asking about your treatment options. vraylar is approved for the acute treatment of manic or mixed episodes of bipolar i disorder in adults. clinical studies showed that vraylar reduced overall manic symptoms. vraylar should not be used in elderly patients with dementia due to increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, which may mean a life-threatening reaction, or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be permanent. side effects may not appear for several weeks. high cholesterol and weight gain; high blood sugar, which can lead to coma or death; decreased white blood cells, which can be fatal; dizziness upon standing; falls; seizures; impaired judgment; heat sensitivity; and trouble swallowing may occur. you're more than just your bipolar i. ask your doctor about vraylar.

we're back. laura, tell me something i don't know. >> i.c.e. immigration enforcement decided today they're no longer going to

automatically release pregnant women from detention. >> carrie. >> lincoln is an organization in silicon valley tells us how to fix it. >> if you're watching new york state politics, cynthia nixon is going to give andrew cuomo a run for his money. >> that does it for us. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. tonight on "all in." >> we say hey, jim, you're fired. get out of here, jim. >> the fan fired by a trump tweet yesterday blows the whistle on the president today. >> they don't want to talk about it. >> tonight, senator bernie sanders on what he says is a koch brother project to dismantle the va. breaking news from the special counsel. robert mueller is investigating trump campaign contact with russians at the convention. >> did you meter is guy kislyak in cleveland? did you talk to him. >> i'm not going to deny that i talked with him. >> my guest