up. >> thank you. >> chris matthews -- >> you're a great lead-in as we say in our business. love your lead-in. he's right before me. >> and he might be working on a memoir too. so he can get tips from you. my special thanks to debbie harry and chris matthews. again, go out and get the book. it is "face it." barr to trump, stay off my lawn. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews. in washington in an extraordinary move today attorney general william barr is standing up to president trump. late today barr hit back at his boss saying the president is making his job impossible. with his public nosing into justice department business. barr had been derided for his intervention and reduced to

sentencing recommendations of trump's long-time political adviser roger stone. especially after the president congratulated him for taking charge in the matter. in an interview with abc news today barr said the president never asked him to intervene in the criminal case but condemned trump's tweets. here he goes. >> public statements and tweets made about the department, about our people in the department, our men and women here, about cases pending in the department, and about judges before whom we have cases make it impossible for me to do my job and to assure the courts and the prosecutors and the department that we're doing our work with integrity. >> well, barr was also asked if he's prepared for blowback from the president for speaking out this way. >> i am responsible for everything that happens in the department. but the thing i have most responsibility for are the issues that are brought to me

for decision. and i will make those decisions based on what i think is the right thing to do, and i'm not going to be bullied or influenced by anybody. you know, i think the -- i cannot do my job here at the department with constant background commentary that undercuts me. >> barr's remarks came as trump was again praising his attorney general in a radio interview with geraldo rivera. >> do you ever wonder what your life would have been like if you had picked william barr instead of jeff sessions when you -- >> yeah, my life would have been a lot easier. >> a lot of the country's life -- >> yep. my life would have been a lot easier. >> what about -- >> but i might have been less popular. because they say they like that i fought it, they like that i won. they like that -- my base is much more energized. >> according to the "new york

times" today, barr's criticism of the president was a shock. "people close to the president said they were caught off guard by the interview." in an interview white house press secretary stephanie grisham said, "the president wasn't bothered by the comments at all and he has the right just like any american citizen to publicly offer his opinions. president trump uses social media very effectively to fight for the american people against injustices in our country including the fake news." well, the president has full faith and confidence in attorney general barr to uphold and defend the law she says. i'm joined by white house reporter, greg barr senior fbi aofficial and u.s. attorney. and jason johnson, politics editor at the root. jill are we to believe -- first of all, i don't generally believe this press secretary. with are we to believe that the president's jolly about being rebuked by his own attorney general? >> what we know right now, and there are still a lot of unanswered questions, is that the president knew that barr was going to do this interview but did not know what barr was going to say. >> what does it mean when you say knew -- this is the justice

department for the "new york times." why would that even be brought to the president as tension? there's something fishy about this -- >> white house knew ahead of time. >> of course they knew. it's an interview. did they know he was going to trash the president? >> they did not know he was going to go there. >> why dhe put out the word they knew he was going to have the interview? this looks like they're putting little kissing cousins together. they're making it look like we're all in this together when they just took a shot from the attorney general. >> it's unclear at this point, a lot of questions about how -- whether it th was a disingenuous kind of statement from bill barr, who you have to understand was under a tremendous amount of pressure from doj employees, from republicans to act. >> i think barr, whatever you think of him, knows what's coming next when he does something. he's a very careful person. he's a classic washington lawyer. he must know if he tells the president to shut up and stay off my lawn, if the president goes back on his lawn again and starts talking about justice cases, which he will do, they're going to have a reckoning. >> i don't believe any of this, chris. i don't believe it at all. >> are we on a different planet?

>> i believe the earth is round. that's about -- look, i don't believe they didn't know about this. they knew about the interview. >> you think they knew ahead of time he was going to take a shot at the president? >> i believe that somebody in the white house had an idea one way or another. william barr has done everything that donald trump has wanted him to do. and the idea that he's suddenly mad now about trump -- >> you don't -- >> he's been doing this for years. he never had a problem pvp. >> you don't think he made a point i'm not going to be made a fool of anymore, i'm not going to look like the president's puppet? >> i've always assumed bill barr has that point, but there is a lot of cynicism in town right now about this particular episode. i for one don't think the president's ego can handle even an orchestrated wink and a nod criticism. but the bottom line is still that we still don't know what happened. why was the supplemental sentencing memo filed? the first memo, some 25 pages, made perfect sense to me. it was aggressive. i'll tell you as a former u.s. attorney i've never read a sentencing memorandum that was not aggressive. that's what federal prosecutors do -- >> is seven to nine years a lot

for lying to congress and intimiding witnesses, tampering with witnesses? >> yes and no. for lying to congress alone, yes. that would be a lot. the guidelines wouldn't provide for that much. but for threatening a witness with physical violence, that's the kind of thing that changes this equation. and that's what happened here. never mind the fact that the audience to that threat says i'm not sure i believed it. >> yeah, he did. >> but nevertheless, when targets of criminal investigations threaten with physical violence witnesses, federal prosecutors take that seriously, and i think americans want them to take it seriously. so that's what happened. >> my view is i'm skeptical. i'm not cynical. i don't laugh at everything. i think he is tired of being -- looking like he looks. reputation is everything in d.c. among the other lawyers. you ever walk into the metropolitan club or somewhere, some nice restaurant, they'll be laughing at you. anyway, even though they're all frauds and say great to see you. anyway, in a radio interview today trump again attacked the four prosecutors who withdrew

from the case, the stone case, in apparent protest over the justice department's reduction of their sentencing recommendation. here he goes. >> i don't think they quit the case. i think what they do is they felt they got caught. if you want to note truth. i don't think they quit for moral reasons. i think they got caught in the act by me. now, what am i going to do? sit back and let a man go to jail maybe for nine years when murderers aren't going to jail -- look, you have some of the most serious horrible rapists and everything else, they don't go to jail for nine years. >> so he's acting as if we in the public and the press believe that these prosecutors were trying to sneak this sentencing guideline by him. like he wouldn't know that his lackey, his henchman roger stone getting nine years, up to nine years, wouldn't be noticed by the president. that's what he just said. they were trying to sneak it by me and they got caught. >> that's indeed what he said there. the president hasn't just gone after these prosecutors.

he's also gone after the judge in the case. >> who has yet to sentence. >> who's going to sentence next week. >> why would he do this? this is the wacky part, greg. why would he publicly tweet he wants the sentences reduced? and why does he publicly threaten the judge, who has yet to render a sentence? >> none of it makes sense. of course what he could do is simply let the process play out, let the judge sentence stone, and then if he doesn't like it exercise his constitutional prerogative to issue a pardon or commute the sentence. but of course this president doesn't do anything the way that normal presidents do anything. and so it makes no sense at all. >> well, let's try to figure out -- is barr on the level or is barr playing a game? >> i think barr's playing a game and i think this is working the refs. this isn't just about roger stone. this is about this larger message, i am donald trump and if you do anything, if you investigate anybody, if you prosecute anybody, if you look into anything, if i don't like it i'm going to come after you so you better keep your head down and do what i want you to do. >> is it a joke? is barr playing a game here,

pretending to challenge the president when he's simply in bed with him? >> i honestly don't know. but i think a lot of people will point to barr's previous conduct again and again coming to the president's defense, declaring that he didn't obstruct justice in the mueller investigation when that's not something that mueller's team actually concluded on. he has come to the president's defense again and again. he's described this all as a hoax. he has described the ukraine investigation as unfounded. he is somebody who's continuously stood by the president's side. and clearly regardless of his intention here the president, at least according to the statement tonight, is taking this -- >> so you don't believe he's on the road to damascus here? >> no. >> timing is everything. there are no coincidences. you have the president's criticism and then you have this inexplicable supplemental filing which the interview today, as tough as he was on the president, i didn't think that the a.g. adequately explained the supplemental filing. that makes no sense. >> he didn't explain why they lessened it. >> why a supplemental filing had to be made the day after the original filing. the original filing made perfect sense -- >> what do they want to give

stone? at his age, he's almost as old as me, he's in his late 60s. four or five years is a long time in your late 60s to face prison. >> well, you could make that argument with a lot of white-collar, purely white-collar criminals. is bernie madoff really a threat to society? or does he deserve to be in prison for a long time because of the way he victimized innocent people? >> and the amount of money involved. >> exactly. i prosecuted large ponzi scheme type cases where -- >> ask kevin bacon. >> victims who lost their life savings have come to me and they asked why isn't the death penalty being imposed in this case? i said we don't do that in white-collar cases. >> they do in china. >> well, that's a whole other story. look, the sentencing recommendation made sense under the federal guidelines. it's ultimately up to the judge. there was simply no reason for the president to weigh in. but when he did for the a.g. to direct a supplemental filing is making everybody very cynical about this. >> i would think that normally

in a normal presidency which we may get back to in a year or five years, maybe one year hopefully, maybe, a president would stay away from a case directly affecting himself. when your henchman is caught, your henchman is caught working for you not robbing gas stations but doing dirty work for you and covering up for you, i would stay away from the prosecution. >> especially since the president has indicated every time he has asked, been asked whether he intends to pardon stone, he's really suggested that that's something he's at least considering. >> stay in there, roger. hang in there. anyway, according to the "new york times," the handling of the stone case has had a chilling effect inside the department of justice. "prosecutors across the united states who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid reprisals," that's cool, "said this week they've already been wary of working on any case that might catch mr. trump's attention and that the stone episode only deepened their concern. they also said they were worried mr. barr might not support them in politically charged cases." greg, this is your piece of work here. you're working on a top case,

you've got to bring a 2u6 case against a scary guy and you've got to wonder is the president behind me and the attorney general? >> any u.s. attorney out there in the country worth his or her salt should just simply do their job, they should be explained to the ausa today -- >> ausa. >> assistant united states attorneys. they need to know they're going to be supported by the u.s. attorney, they're going to keep their heads down, do their jobs, they're not going to worry about what washington and certainly not what the president thinks. yeah, there are certain reporting requirements that u.s. attorneys have to do through the deputy attorney general and the attorney general. but they should not be worried about the tough cases and certainly not worried about political cases. they should just do their jobs. >> key word by barr in his statement to the reporter for the "times," integrity. he wants it back. whether he deserves it or not, he wants it back clearly. >> i don't think he has any, and i honestly think -- his statement to me was look, i'm already doing what you asked, don't make it so obvious. i think it was a performance. he's already doing what the

president wants. and this isn't just -- >> are you comparing it like the guy did in "goodfellas," went out and bought a big fancy car. don't buy expensive cars after you steal the money with me. >> exactly. you're making it too obvious you're working with me. >> jill colvin. i love the commentary. thank you, greg brower. thank you, jason johnson. tuming up, since last week's impeachment acquittal, president trump has been freewheeling in pursuit of his enemies. and a new report tonight indicates he's using the doj to undermine the mueller report. here he goes again. and one those perceived enemies, one of them is former cia director john brennan. he's coming next right here. plus a blistering escalation in the ongoing duel between trump and former white house chief of staff general john kelly. they're at it. kelly's speaking out again with trump responding to kelly, just can't keep his mouth shot. who's talking about that? and later two polar opposites. the democratic socialist bernie sanders on one side and the

billionaire businessman michael bloomberg on the other. michael moore's here to take -- make his case for sanders. and thomas friedman joins me on why democrats should choose michael bloomberg. we've got much more to get to tonight. stick with us. o ore to get t tonight. stick with us. ggle? introducing ore-ida potato pay. where ore-ida golden crinkles are your crispy currency to pay for bites of this... ...with this. when kids won't eat dinner, potato pay them to. ore-ida. win at mealtime.

(sensethe lack of control when iover my businessai,. made me a little intense. but now quickbooks helps me get paid, manage cash flow, and run payroll. and now i'm back on top... with koala kai. (vo) save over 40 hours a month with intuit quickbooks. hi with the world'se first invisible trailer. invisible trailer? and it's not the trailer right next to us? this guy? you don't believe me? hop in. good lookin' pickup, i will say that. oh wow. silverado offers an optional technology package with up to 15 different views - including one enhanced view that makes your trailer appear invisible. wow. - that's pretty sweet. - that's cool. oooohh! that's awesome. where'd the trailer go? i love it. it's magic. ♪ ♪

wherever we want to go, autosave your way there with chase. chase. make more of what's yours. oh no, here comes gthe neighbor probably to brag about how amazing his xfinity customer service is. i'm mike, i'm so busy. good thing xfinity has two-hour appointment windows. they have night and weekend appointments too. he's here. bill? karolyn? nope! no, just a couple of rocks.

download the my account app to manage your appointments making today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. i'll pass. welcome back to "hardball." president trump has made clear his goal of using the government to fulfill his political goals. he's weaponizing the government, you might say. but now after being rebuked by his own attorney general late today for intervening in the case of roger stone, trump's still trying to intimidate the federal judge who will decide stone's fate next week. believe it or not, he's still at it on stone's case. yesterday he targeted judge amy berman jackson about another case of that of his former campaign chairman paul manafort. trump said, "is this the judge that put paul manafort in solitary confinement, something that not even mobster al capone had to endure? how did she treat crooked hillary clinton? just asking." i don't think hillary clinton

was in prison. anyway, now "the new york times" is reporting that the ongoing investigation into the origins of the russian probe itself also appears to be driven by trump's political interests. according to people familiar, the u.s. attorney leading that inquiry, john durham, appears to be pursuing a theory that the cia under its former director john brennan had a preconceived notion about russia or was trying to get to a particular result and was nefariously trying to keep other agencies from seeing the full picture. however, fbi and nsc officials "have told mr. durham and his investigators that such an interpretation is wrong and based on a misunderstanding of how the intelligence community functions." i'm joined now by john brennan, former cia director in the obama administration, and paul weather, former prosecutor. how do you respond to this inquiry? >> i think it's kind of silly. is there a criminal investigation on analytic judgments and the activities of cia in terms of trying to protect our national security? i'm certainly willing to talk to

mr. durham or anybody else who has any questions about what we did during this period of time in 2016. so i don't know -- i have not talked to him yet. i understand that i'm on his list of people to be interviewed. but it clearly i think is another indication that donald trump is using the department of justice to go after his enemies in any way that he can. >> could his indictment against you, at least what's leaking out about it, could it in fact be the effort by you as director of cia to protect sources perhaps even in the kremlin? from other agencies that don't need to get their nose into it. >> well, obviously it was a counterintelligence investigation that was under way at that time, and that is the most sensitive type of investigation, particularly when you're talking about the possible involvement of u.s. persons. so there has been a history of trying to keep information very tightly held because you don't want to expose sensitive sources and methods and you don't want to put them at risk of being exposed and therefore not giving you the insight you that need in order to prevent russian troublemakers -- >> how does he interpret that

method of keeping information secret when you're going after somebody who doesn't know they're being gone after, how does he interpret that to mean covering up evidence? >> i have no idea. i have a lot of questions about this investigation and what was the predication for it and what they're trying to uncover. >> i'll give you a predication. he's trying to expunge the whole hellishness he went through in 2016 with the russian zblpz yeah, i don't think there's any legitimate predication for it. but i do think this is donald trump directing william barr and the department of justice to go after those individuals that he wants to punish for speaking out against him. but no matter what donald trump does i'm not going to stop talking out against what i think has been a trampling of our democratic principles. >> paul, what's going on here? >> the department of justice -- >> in this particular case of going after the cia, trying to go back and backfill and somehow undermine the whole mueller report. it seems that's what he's up to. he can't live with it. >> it's political. the president is weaponizing the department of justice to bring cases against his enemies and to

support his friends, to give favors to his friends like roger stone. here's how we know this is political. there has been an investigation about how the russian investigation started. the inspector general of the department of justice looked at it and said that the russian investigation origins were in good faith, that there was nothing criminal about it and in fact it was a legitimate investigation that found that the russians did in fact interfere with our election. that was not good enough for trump. so he wanted a do-over. so he asked this other person, this u.s. attorney in connecticut, some random guy, look and see what you can find. and remarkably, when the inspector general said that everything was on the up and up with the beginning of the russian investigation, william barr and john dowd, the guy who's doing the investigation in connecticut, publicly dissented.

that never happened. and here's the relationship with what happened today. it's public dissent, so barr talks the talk. does he walk the walk? so today barr said trump's -- implied trump's a bully, he needs to watch it. does he just say that on tv or does he say that to trump? we have don mcgahn tell mr. trump no, you cannot fire robert mueller. even jeff sessions told trump no, i'm not going to unrecuse myself. does bill barr ever tell trump no, you can't do that? he's an enabler. >> well, we'll see. he did say in public he thinks trump thinks he didn't mean it. >> i think in this case it's all about public relations. the department of justice is in an existential crisis. four prosecutors quit a case. that never happens. >> they have to get some kind of look of integrity. anyway, meanwhile, trump's former chief of staff general john kelly is blasting the president's request of ukraine to investigate the bidens. according to the "the atlantic," kelly praised lieutenant colonel alexander vindman for reporting his concerns on that july call,

saying "vindman did exactly what we teach them to do from cradle to grave. we teach them don't follow an illegal order. and if you're ever given one you'll raise it to whoever gives it to you that this is an illegal order and tell your boss." what do you make of that? i mean this guy kelly's not going to walk away. >> no. and i worked very close with john and i'm friends with john. and i don't agree with everything he's done or said, but he is somebody who i think really believes in defending the people who are under assault by donald trump. john kelly is someone who's going to speak out. i wish others would as well, former officials. there needs to be more people who have actually witnessed what donald trump has done inside of the white house to speak out against it. and john kelly, you know, good on him for speaking out because it's overdue. >> he walks like a general and he's talking like a general. anyway, president trump struck back at kelly today, tweeting "when i terminated john kelly, which i couldn't do fast enough, he knew full well that he was way over his head. being chief of staff just wasn't for him. he came in with a bang, went out

with a whimper, but like so many x's," it's not clear what he's talking about, "he misses the action and just can't keep his mouth shut." i don't know what he's talking about. that is show viv from how trump described kelly in 2014 when announcing kelly's departure. here he is. >> john kelly will be leaving, retiring -- i donate know if i can say retiring. but he's a great guy. i appreciate his service very much. >> he's made a lot of enemies, this president, john. i'm speaking to you. >> rightly so. because again, he is just so self-centered, donald trump, that anybody who has the audacity to challenge him or to criticize him is going to be in the line of fire. and that's why i do have questions about what happened today with william barr, whether or not this was coordinated with the white house. as paul was saying, i think paul was trying to -- >> if it's real, if he really is rebuking the president in public -- >> even trump would recognize that if he were to can barr at this point there's going to be

reverberations on this. >> so trump needs barr more than barr needs trump. so i think barr has some room. but again, the question is how will he exercise his power? and from everything we know he will continue to be the president's roy cohn. >> yeah, that's pretty bad, isn't it? >> he was preventing a full-scale revolt within the department of justice. >> the scary thing about this, the scary thing, is four more years. john? >> bite your tongue, chris. >> no, because he's not going to get more hesitant in his use of power. >> what the house managers said is if the senate failed to remove the president from office he would be unhinged, he would be unstraind. we see that. the only check now is he wants to win re-election. if he does win re-election, if this is how he's acted the first week after the senate acquittal, what's he going to do if he's re-elected? he will be out of control. >> and if he's re-elected, he'll think that's a confirmation of

everything he's done is right. >> absolutely. he's not going to learn lessons, as senator collins said after he was acquitted or so in the senate. he is just going to continue to do what he's always done in the past, which is to lie, cheat and steal to get his way, but also do it with greater impunity because he believes that he can get away with it from the republicans in congress. >> so that's a lesson he learned. because when the senate failed to remove him that was a clear sign he can get away with it. >> you know, i've said it before here but i like to repeat it. a couple thoughts. one is there were no character witnesses in the entire impeachment process. nobody stood up and said he's a good man, he wouldn't do this sort of thing. because there wasn't anybody who thought that. thank you, john brennan, sir. thank you, paul butler. sorry, professor. trump is shifting his focus from joe widen, i guess he thinks he's beaten him, to mike bloomberg. but bloomberg isn't taking trump's attacks lying down. his cutting edge social media campaign is spinning out some zingers of his own. and later on this show michael moore joins us live. there's still a lot to get to tonight on this program.

you're watching "hardball." ram. you're watching "hardball. (howling wind) it's got all my favorite shows. i wish my trading platform worked like that. have you tried thinkorswim? this is totally customizable. now this is what i'm talking about. focus on what matters to you with thinkorswim. ♪ you ever wish you weren't a motaur? sure. sometimes i wish i had legs like you. yeah, like a regular person. no. still half bike/half man, just the opposite. oh, so the legs on the bottom and motorcycle on the top? yeah. yeah, i could see that. for those who were born to ride, there's progressive.

yeah, i could see that. i must admit. i had a few good tricks to help hide my bladder leak pad. like the old "tunic tug". you know it, right? but i don't have to, with always discreet. i couldn't believe the difference. it's less bulky. and it really protects. watch this. the super absorbent core turns liquid and odor to gel, and locks it away. so i have nothing to hide. always discreet. for bladder leaks.

little shifty schiff. he's got the little, little ten-inch neck. >> little rocket man. >> look, george, you're being a little wise guy. >> mitt romney is like this. he's a little tiny peanut. little.

l-i-d-d-l-e. little. little marco. you know, you have to brand people a certain way when they're your opponents. >> you have to? you have to make fun of people's height? welcome back to "hardball." president trump has consistently used his opponents' height as an insult, even if they're not actually that short. he's recently focused his attacks on democratic presidential candidate mike bloomberg. >> what happened to mini mike? where is he? >> mini mike has spent a fortune. >> there's nobody i'd rather run against than little michael. that i can tell you. >> well, this morning he took his attacks to twitter, the president did, posting his altered image of the man he's dubbed mini mike and calling him a loser who has money but can't debate and a 5'4" mass of dead energy. put a lot of thought into this, mr. president. bloomberg is actually 5'8". though "the new york times's" maggie haberman noted the height thing is one of the few things that actually does bother him if f. that's important to you. bloomberg quickly hit back saying " @trump, we know many of

the same people in new york. behind your back they laugh at you and call you a carnival barking clown. they know you inherited a fortune and squandered it with stupid deals and incompetence." and he said this at an event today. bloomberg did. >> the president attacked me again this morning on twitter. thank you very much, donald. he calls me little mike. and the answer is donald, where i come from we measure your height from your neck up. >> bloomberg has shown that he can hold his own against trump as you just saw. but can he win the democratic nomination? we have two high-profile guests coming up to answer that question. first i'll talk to "new york times" columnist thomas friedman, when says bloomberg "has the right stuff to beat trump." then i'll talk to filmmaker michael moore, who supports bernie sanders. you're watching "hardball." dbal.

you clean dishes as you cook, to save time and stay ahead of the mess. but scrubbing still takes time. now there's new dawn powerwash dish spray. the faster, easier way to clean as you go. it cleans grease five times faster. on easy messes, just spray, wipe, and rinse. on tough messes, the spray-activated suds cut through grease on contact, without water. just wipe, and rinse. get dishes done faster. new dawn powerwash dish spray. spray. wipe. rinse.

we stood up for the rule of law. for the america we love. eight-point-five-million strong banded together to impeach donald j. trump. president trump has just been impeached on both article one, abuse of power, and on article two, obstruction of congress. and we're not done yet. senate republicans voted for a cover-up... ...but the american people know the truth. we can stop this corruption. join us at needtovote.com because now...we need to vote. need to impeach is responsible for the content of this advertising.

welcome back to "hardball." "new york times" columnist thomas friedman says that

democrats must nominate the right person if they want to defeat president trump in november. in his column today in the "new york times" friedman writes, "an age when political extremists go all the way and moderates tend to just go away, michael bloomberg has the right stuff. a moderate progressive with a heart of gold but the toughness of a rattlesnake for what is going to be an incredibly big, brutal task, making donald trump a one-term president." i'm joined right now by thomas friedman, nrkts nshlths foreign affairs columnist and the author of "thank you for being late." thomas, you're highly respected. your big thoughts about politics. i don't know. the question is are you right? what gives you the confidence to write today's column that mike trump -- mike bloomberg's the right candidate and bernie sanders is not? >> well, i think mike has the experience. i think he has the right values. and i think he has the capability to take on what is just an incredible machine, which is going to be the trump

re-election campaign. i'm a moderate democrat. i think if you look at the polling, chris, the way it's come out, if you add buttigieg and biden and klobuchar together and sanders, you know, it's about a party that's split. probably about 2/3 you'd call moderates. about 1/3 you'd call more liberal and progressive. i would love to see bloomberg paired with a liberal and progressive candidate so you have a wall-to-wall coalition. because i think what is at stake right now, chris, is not medicare. it's not any particular policy. what's at stake is the whole ball of wax. the norms, standards, and institutions that have sustained and shaped this country, you know, since it's founding. we have a man who is unhinged as president. and if you let this man rule for four more years unencumbered by the need to get re-elected, i think he will do permanent damage to this country. and i've simply made a cold hard calculation of who i think has the ability to pull the party

together and also has the resources and capability to take this man down. and that's where i come down in a very unsentimental way. and what i've noticed in the reaction to the column, which had over 4,000 comments in the "new york times" before they just stopped the comments, was that so many people are making a similar calculation. they might not be in love with mike. mike's a tough guy. he's not cuddly. he's had controversial positions on stop and frisk. but they're making the calculation that we cannot allow four more years of a president without shame, a party without spine amplified by network without integrity. >> what makes you confident that bernie can't win a general election against trump? >> you know, i think he will be so easily caricatured by this trump machine. bernie, who avowedly calls himself a socialist. i realize he's not a socialist in a russian sense or chinese

sense of the word. he's more of a european social democrat, a point my colleague paul krugman has made. but he will be so easily caricatured by them. number one. number two, this is not -- i think his positions are outside the mainstream of the country. i think this is a center-left, center-right country. and you cannot win this election without appealing to independents, suburban women, and moderate republicans, the very people who voted for trump over hillary in 2016, then shifted their vote in 2018 when enough moderate democrats appealed to them, abandoned trump, and we have to have them if the country is going to retake the white house with a sane, rational, decent moderate person. if you -- >> let's talk politics for a second. because i do worry and think about it all the the time. they say in massachusetts that the shape of the field determines the winner.

even a couple weeks ago it looked like there would be two people in the democratic left. that would be bernie sanders and elizabeth warren. warren for whatever reason has faded for a while. maybe she'll come back in nevada. but she's faded. so bernie owns that lane right now. on the other side, as you mentioned, we've got klobuchar, we've got buttigieg, and now mike bloomberg. if they split the moderate vote in california, for example, and the rest of the 14 states that vote on super tuesday, bernie could win the whole thing because if you own the left wing, even if it's only a third of the vote, if he owns that third how do any of the other three beat him including bloomberg? >> i don't know. i assume we're heading for a brokered convention, highly likely. who knows? we might get a combination where klobuchar -- bloomberg-klobuchar ticket or bloomberg and a progressive that before the actual convention, who knows, bloomberg may name a vice presidential candidate, someone from the progressive camp. i don't know. but i could imagine that.

i think in general, chris, we are about to see the most unusual election in so many dimensions that we have ever seen in our lifetime. and this will only be part of it. what goes on on the trump side will be the other side of it. >> i think the oddity of it is the nature of the background of the two people. certainly bernie sanders has chosen -- i'm not knocking him. i'm trying to figure out why he's been like this. but he never wanted to actually join the democratic party. he said he would last time. that's his call. that's your decision. but mike bloomberg ran as a republican. his office that he won, new york city mayor, he ran as a republican. you have two people vying with different means, different strengths. money against ideology perhaps and youth. not his youth but the people behind him, the kids behind him. and neither have actually said i'm a democrat. it's strange. what do you make of it historically? >> well, i think actually what's going on, to be honest, and i'm actually writing a book about it, is every major political

party in the industrial world has actually blown up in the last five or six years. the conservative party blew up in england. the liberal party blew up there. the republican party has blown up. france is the only country in the world ruled by a president with no party. it has an opposition with no leader. the israeli political system has blown up. they've all blown up. i can explain why. there's a reason -- >> changing parties every four or five years. you never know, social credit party, the reform party, what is it this time. thomas friedman -- >> both -- in italy and ukraine are both governed now by former comedians. something's in the water. and we can talk about it next time. >> we're too close to that. thank you so much. thomas friedman, it's great to have you on tonight. people read the column. they'll keep commenting on it i'm sure. up next filmmaker michael moore tells us why america needs, there he is, bernie sanders. you're watching "hardball." at fidelity, online u.s. stocks and etfs are commission-free. and when you open a new brokerage account, your cash is automatically invested at a great rate.

that's why fidelity leads the industry in value while our competition continues to talk. ♪ talk, talk thouwhich is breast cancer metastthat has spreadcer, to other parts of the body, are living in the moment and taking ibrance. ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor is for postmenopausal women or for men with hr+/her2- metastatic breast cancer, as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole significantly delayed disease progression versus letrozole, and shrank tumors in over half of patients. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. ibrance may cause severe inflammation of the lungs that can lead to death. tell your doctor right away if you have new or worsening symptoms, including trouble breathing, shortness of breath, cough, or chest pain. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems,

are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. be in your moment. ask your doctor about ibrance. and my lack of impulse control,, is about to become your problem. ahh no, come on. i saw you eating poop earlier. hey! my focus is on the road, and that's saving me cash with drivewise. who's the dummy now? whoof! whoof! so get allstate where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. sorry! he's a baby!

hi with the world'se first invisible trailer. invisible trailer? and it's not the trailer right next to us? this guy? you don't believe me? hop in. good lookin' pickup, i will say that. oh wow. silverado offers an optional technology package with up to 15 different views - including one enhanced view that makes your trailer appear invisible. wow. - that's pretty sweet. - that's cool. oooohh! that's awesome. where'd the trailer go? i love it. it's magic.

we are the strongest campaign. we'll defeat trump because the way you defeat trump is by having the largest voter turnout in the history of this country. i think if you look at iowa and you find that we saw a 33% increase in voting for younger people, voting at a higher rate than ever. in new hampshire you saw us doing extremely well in worki working-class communities.

>> welcome back to "hardball." that was bernie sanders the senate from vermont off the campaign trail today back in washington. of course no matter where he is he can't get away from questions surrounding his campaign for the white house. that's the issue. and here's the answer to answer your questions about sanders is michael moore filmmaker and host of the podcast "rumble with michael moore." moore has endorsed senator sanders for president. michael, thank you for coming on and making the case. we just heard thomas friedman. do you have any reaction to what thomas wrote, wrote and said? >> yeah. everything he said about trump is true. everything else, i can't get behind it because michael bloomberg -- i'm going to post this actually on my podcast this weekend. from his speech at madison square garden 2004 at the republican national convention where he endorsed and gave some sort of a keynote in favor of george w. bush and the war in iraq. that's who he is. he ran as a republican for the mayor of new york and then he

didn't just inherit the stop and frisk program, which i don't like that name anyway. it wasn't stop and frisk. if you ask any african-american in this city, in new york, they will say that it felt like they were being hunted by the police. and the -- it rarely gets said in these last few days how many people under bloomberg got stopped. 5 million black and brown mostly men, mostly young, stopped by the police as bloomberg said, thrown against the wall. and it's so repulsive. charles blow, the wlofshl columnist -- >> he's great. i love him. >> in the "new york times." when bloomberg announced in november he was running charles wrote in the "times" that no one who is black or brown or is an ally of the minority community, white people, should not ever think of voting for this individual considering what he

did. >> but what do you make of the latest polling? at least it's internal polling. you've got to give it some credibility. that there's 14 states coming up on super tuesday, march 3rd, a little less than a month from now, that the african-american vote's running about even between biden and bloomberg overnight it seems. >> well, quite a -- yes. ads help, by the way. that's why we're going to cut to one here in about five minutes. they work. and so i'm not surprised that bloomberg has done well with that. but the fact is that this isn't going to happen. i don't understand why we don't talk more about the fact that bernie sanders is the front-runner. he's gotten the most votes now in two states. >> yeah. he won the popular in iowa and he won the popular in new hampshire. in any other country -- >> they call it the vote. in any other country that's a democracy it's called the vote. the fact that the democratic party in iowa, i did not know this until i went there, that

they have an electoral college type system where they weight the votes for the rural counties over the urban counties or the college town counties, that -- a vote -- but bloomberg, not just the racism, not just his support of bush, how about the fact -- you know, a lot of liberals will say, oh, they're really worried that trump won't leave the white house or won't -- he's going to demand a third term. well, that's exactly what bloomberg did in new york city. you remember that? it's a term limited two-term mayor in new york city and he said i don't want to go and got the city council to vote to let him run for a third term. >> i know all about it. i know all about how it was done. i didn't like it, either. i didn't like it either how he pulled -- used his money and clout. i want to know what you think of the other candidates. you're with senator sanders then there's also, you have buttigieg in the race, came out of

nowhere. amy klobuchar ran i think a stellar campaign lately. she doesn't have any money. she rides around with one staffer. >> yeah. >> she seems to have no money. >> yeah. >> and yet she seems to be doing something and then bloomberg , going to be a four-way going into california, are you going to campaign for sanders? i mean, i guess you will. will you? >> yes. i have. i've been out to iowa. i've been to new hampshire. i've -- i've listened to people. i know why he's number one. i know why he's number one in all these polls, the morning consult poll. >> tell me. >> this morning. he's ten points ahead of number two which nationwide is still biden. it's -- people are -- this is also why you guys talk a lot on this network, too, about the bernie bros or the anger from bernie supporters and it's not so much the bernie supporters that are angry, the country is angry. they're angry that they're having to live under the rule of donald j. trump. they're angry because they have to live from paycheck to paycheck. they're angry because they can't afford the day care. they don't know whether if they

end up in the hospital they're going to have to lose their home as a result of it. yeah, people are angry. and they don't want half measures anymore. obamacare was great for what it did. you know, got rid of pre-existing conditions. the kids get to stay on until they're 26. but it did not -- it didn't go all the way. we have to go all the way. we can't -- no more half measures on these things. >> okay. i understand. let me ask you about politics because -- >> yeah, yeah. >> -- if you read machiavelli who is birilliantbrilliant, but. it's hard to sell new krideas a new program because people who have what they have want to hold on to it and never know how they're going to do under the new system. 140 million people with health care they pay for it, may not be the best health kay, they got it. you got the culinary workers out in clark county out in vegas who are going to vote next week, they have refused to endorse. now, that's a pretty progressive union. a lot of working people. waitresses. all kinds of people. >> yeah. >> in the gaming industry. >> sure. >> why are they not endorsing?

how do you -- they're afraid of losing their health care plans. apparently. that's what they negotiated for. >> no, they're not. the leadership of the union, they did negotiate really good health care. the problem with that is is that the employers, just as we saw with general motors during the strike in the fall, the third or fourth day into it the chair of general motors ended all health care for all uaw workers. the ceo could do it just like that because it's not a right. it's not guaranteed by the law. if you are leaving your health care up to the fact that your employer is going to actually follow through, if you think that's something that's permanent, if you tink it's a system that works, i mean, i made whole movie about this about just people who have health care and how the insurance companies, the private insurance companies will fight you tooth and nail if you get sick, if you have a family member in the hospital, they will try to deny every single claim because it's the only way they make a profit. so they have to do that. that's just why we have to remove profit and private health

insurance from the system. >> i know. >> we would not allow a private police force, a private fire depart, a private library. the things that we consider to be rights in a democratic society. this is -- this is where -- and the union -- ask any uaw member in detroit or flint what -- on that day when the ceo just said, that's it, health care, over. you're not covered as of this minute. they have the power to do that. you can never put the power offier health care in the hands of your boss. >> let me ask you this. senator sanders who you endorse says he'll back any winner dockidock i coming out of thesanders who yo fight, all the wait to milwau e milwaukee. will you? >> of the people who are running, democrats on that stage, yes. >> okay. thank you, michael moore. it's an honor. >> i have to say, let me just say this. george wallace won the gn begun p michigan primary the first time i got to vote in 1972. i'll never say i'll just support anybody. wouldn't support george wallace or david duke or any of that.

of the people who are running -- >> when he won the maryland primary, too. that's not funny. that's even worse. anyway, thank you, michael moore. you're always welcome here. spread the word among bernie people, we want the surrogates like ro khanna. we want dina turner. please come again and again and again. please come back. >> we want to assure you we'll never take you into central park and do any harm with you. >> i knew that was coming. you and i can argue about that at a digfferent place. whatever my opinions are, don't ask me, don't ask me, this place is for the argument. not for my views. >> we love you, chris. 30 years. >> taunk you, michael moore. up next, there's a reckoning lo loomeniing in washington tonigh. you're watching "hardball." (howling wind)

(howling wind) othroughout the country for the past twelve years, mr. michael bloomberg is here. vo: leadership in action. mayor bloomberg and president obama worked together in the fight for gun safety laws, to improve education, and to develop innovative ways to help teens gain the skills needed to find good jobs. obama: at a time when washington is divided in old ideological battles he shows us what can be achieved when we bring people together to seek pragmatic solutions. bloomberg: i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message. with hepatitis c... ...i ...best for my family.my... in only 8 weeks with mavyret... ...i was cured. i faced reminders of my hep c every day.

i worried about my hep c. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret... ...i was cured. mavyret is the only 8-week cure for all types of hep c. before starting mavyret your doctor will test... ...if you've had hepatitis b which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b, a liver or kidney transplant,... ...other liver problems, hiv-1, or other medical conditions,... ...and all medicines you take. don't take mavyret with atazanavir... ...or rifampin, or if you've had certain liver problems. if you've had or have serious liver problems other than hep c, there's a rare chance they may worsen. signs of serious liver problems may include yellowing of the skin, abdominal pain or swelling, confusion, and unexplained bleeding or bruising. tell your doctor if you develop symptoms of liver disease. common side effects include headache and tiredness. with hep c behind me, i feel free... ...fearless... ...because i am cured. talk to your doctor about mavyret.

can you help keep these iguys protected online?? easy, connect to the xfi gateway. what about internet speeds that keep up with my gaming? let's hook you up with the fastest internet from xfinity. what about wireless data options for the family? of course, you can customize and save. can you save me from this conversation? that we can't do, but come in and see what we can do.

we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. ask. shop. discover. at your local xfinity store today. attorney general william barr declared today, late today, he cannot do his job, cannot ensure the integrity of the justice department if president trump keeps attacking its officials and their judgments. so the reckoning looming this night in american history turns on an earlier declaration made during the recent impeachment hearings. remember what lieutenant colonel alexander vindman said about our country? he said that america right matters, that good behavior and truth wins the argument against bad behavior and lies. here in this country, an orwellian term, a word used to mean the opposite of itself,

here in america, justice actually means justice. so let's watch how this plays out. will it be barr who stands his ground and forces trump to back off? or will the attorney general of the united states be squashed like a bug? like all the other trump cabinet secretaries who dared to take seriously their trusted roles in the world's greatest democratic republ republic? and that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. tonight on "all in." >> the president is again trying to manipulate federal law enforcement to serve his political interests. >> the attorney general complains he can't do the president's bidding while the president keeps publicly asking him to do his bidding. >> i cannot do my job here at the department with a constant background commentary. >> tonight, neal katyal on what congress can do to rein in trump's abuse of power and how one state's attorney general is standing up