political gold right there. electric movement on a cold, windy night in iowa tonight. that will do it for wednesday night broadcast. with thanks for spending time with us, on behalf of all my colleagues in nbc news, good night. happy to have you here, just over two months ago that former vice president joe biden said his choice to fill the job he had before, kamala harris. in the nine weeks since that announcement, it feels like the world has gone around the sun several times. biden's polling advantage over the president has only grown larger. the president -- and we now know his wife and his teenage son were both infected with the coronavirus. the president was hospitalized for coronavirus.

the president pulled out of the second presidential debate after a disastrous performance in the first presidential debate. senator harris and vice president pence held a debate in which a persistent housefly that appeared to be trying to nest in mr. pence's hair earned more headlines than any one clash between the vice presidential candidates. also over the course of these nine weeks, no small thing. at least 12.7 million americans according to nbc news took time to already cast their ballots for who they want in the white house. these nine weeks since senator kamala harris was announced as joe biden's running mate have been an era unto themselves. in that time, though, while all that has happened, i haven't yet had a chance to speak to senator kamala harris since she has been the democratic party's vice presidential nominee, until tonight. senator harris will be joining us live tonight for the first time as the vice presidential nominee of her party. she's joining us live tonight from washington, d.c. senator, it's such an honor to

have you here tonight. i know you have a choice to be anywhere you want to be. thanks for being here. >> thank you, rachel. it's great to be back with you. thank you. >> i want to jump right in with some news that we just learned today. today the first lady announced in a written statement that her and the president's teenage son, barren, also tested positive for covid in the wake of her and the president's own diagnoses. >> oh, no. >> barren, according to the first lady has recovered. he's since tested negative. it's such a dramatic piece of news to learn and of course we're all grateful about his recovery. but i just have to ask your reaction to the fact that the white house itself really does appear to be a significantly sized covid cluster of its own, including infecting the whole first family now. >> well, i wish the best for -- for the first lady, for her son, and for the president. you know, i know too many people -- i think we all do --

who have contracted the virus, horrible stories of people who have lost family members, and i don't wish it on anybody. the suffering that people are experiencing is really quite significant. but i will say that, you know, it's what i've been saying, rachel. the president and this administration have been the greatest failure of any presidential administration in the history of our country. you know, you just go back to what they knew and when they knew it, and let's start with january 28th when the president, the vice president were informed that this thing was deadly, that it could hurt children, that it was five times more deadly than the flu, that it was airborne, and they covered up that information. they didn't share it with the american people. and, you know, when i look at the over -- i think it's 7.5 million people who have contracted the virus with, as we now know, potentially serious lifelong consequences in terms

of lung scarring and things of that nature. when we look at the over 215,000 people that have died in just the last several months, and they have families and friends, and they had life to live, and you put that in the context of the president's failure to tell the american people what was going on so they could protect themselves and their families, much less so that we could have a president and leadership in our country who had a plan to deal with it. and now look where we are. it has been a -- a failure of a magnitude that is causing millions and millions of people to suffer because of the public health consequences and because of the economic consequences. and frankly that is why we need a new president in the white house who will embrace science, who will be guided by fact and truth and speak truth to the american people and have a plan, because this administration still has no plan, rachel. they still have no plan. you contrast that with joe biden, who is saying we're going

to have a national plan for testing and for treatment and for vaccines, which will be free, contact tracing. this was avoidable to the extent that the american people have now suffered. they didn't need to suffer like people have been suffering if there had been leadership guided by science and guided by truth. >> if you win, you and joe biden would be taking over control of the federal government in late january. the university of washington's current projection is that we could be close to 400,000 americans dead by that point, by the end of january. and i know, as you say, that you and joe biden have a plan to tackle covid that is much different than what the current administration has been doing. but particularly because it has been so bad, because of the criticism that you are levying, i think, rightly about the president's approach to this,

particularly because of what we have recently learned from the white house, that they are approaching this now with this sort of fringe, half-baked herd immunity idea, which basically means they want as many americans as possible to get infected and somehow we'll still protect the elderly and other vulnerable people from dying from it. do you -- do you worry that this might be so bad by the time you take over, if you win, in late january that it will almost be too far gone to turn around? i despair at how bad this is and how many americans have died. i am overwhelmed by the prospect about what you are going to be trying to turn around by late january if we stay on the trajectory that we're on now. >> i mean let me start by saying that i pray that we will have a vaccine as soon as possible and that it will be safe and that we can distribute it to everyone who needs it as quickly as possible.

but you're right, rachel. i mean when we look at the trajectory based on just where we've been in the last weeks, much less months, we know more people are going to die. we know many more people are going to contract this virus, and it doesn't help when there's a president of the united states who is also the commander in chief, who still is playing around with people, playing around with facts, with bravado, taking a stage and suggesting that he is now immune and saying to people have contracted the virus or those who may that, you know, yet again he's going back to a theme he's been pushing from the beginning, which is to suggest people shouldn't take this thing seriously. and thank god that we have an election coming up right now because can you imagine if we had to deal with two more years of him? and so we have an election, and the american people have a clear contrast. on the one hand, there is joe biden, who since march has been

saying that the plan that he has had in mind should be implemented. joe biden, who has been modeling the right behavior in terms of wearing a mask. meanwhile, donald trump took the debate stage and made fun of him and then later, of course, we know what happened. so i think about where we are now, and i think at the very least, the american people have light at the end of the tunnel, and there is a plan that they are aware of that can be implemented. and the way that it will be implemented is if over the next 20 days, people vote, they vote early. i invite people to go to joebiden.com. go to iwillvote.com and make sure you know where your polling place is and if you can vote early. it is within our power to change the trajectory of this, and i am fully confident that people will do that. >> senator, one of the things that i have also been troubled by and even when i consider the

prospect that you and vice president biden are going to win and have the chance to take the country in a different direction on this, i worry about the long-standing impact of what we've already been through, and that's about the cdc. >> yes. >> during the pandemic, we have seen a number of episodes where the cdc has changed or withheld its scientific guidance in response to political pressure from the white house. the cdc director appears to have repeatedly caved to pressure from the white house, which has caused not only damage to the public's confidence in the cdc, it's also caused significant damage to morale among career scientists at the cdc. what is the first thing that you would do to try to start restoring the integrity of the cdc and our ability as the public to trust in what they do? >> to trust those career people who are the public health experts, who are the scientists. you know, there's so many people in the cdc and nih who have dedicated their lives to working

on, you know, research and developing those things that will alleviate pain and improve the human condition. and, you know, personal story, my mother, who i talk about often, she was a scientist, rachel. you know, she -- i grew up going to the lab with her after school and on weekends. and my mother was actually an adviser at nih. i remember, you know, this kid growing up in california, i would hear about this place called bethesda. i always knew mommy was going to bethesda. so this is perhaps personal for me in addition to being professional, which is we must trust the scientists. these are people who have dedicated their lives to this work. they could care less about who voted for who in the last election. they just want to focus on what is necessary to save lives and to help people and be relieved of pain. and so the first step is to trust them and to let them know

we trust them and to leave them to do their work. leave them to guide our decisions and our policies when it comes to things like a pandemic. and joe and i feel strongly about it. remember, joe, even after the presidency when he was vice president with president barack obama, started this whole effort he referred to as the moonshot, right? joe cares deeply about science. i've sat in briefings with joe with worldwide experts on these issues, and he is knowledgeable. he is fascinated. he is interested. he is engaged in what science can do and must do to help the american people. >> how does it feel to be out there right now yourself, campaigning in these circumstances? obviously there's never been a presidential campaign logistically like this one, let alone politically. but do you feel safe campaigning

during covid? >> well, we've been very safe and, you know, again, the president has made fun of us. but we wear masks. we, you know, social distancing, and so, you know, the events are, you know -- it's, you know -- i'd like to hug people. you don't hug people these days. that's not an option. you can't shake hands. but you can look people in the eye, and you can listen, and you can be there. and so, for example, i'm going to be in north carolina and ohio and pennsylvania and, i think, texas over the next three days, and that's important. i think it's important to be where the people are but to do it in a way that does not cause them to be at any risk in terms of their safety. and so we're working it out.

it's definitely a different kind of campaign than anything that we've done before, but we're making the best of it, and people are engaged. and they're engaged online. you know, we've done, i don't know, countless zooms, and i think we're all in our personal and professional lives figuring out ways to stay engaged and connected with the people that we need to talk with and the people we need to hear from. >> one of the other things, of course, that's changed and changed sort of unexpectedly and very late in the game is the debate situation. the next debate between president trump and vice president biden was supposed to be tomorrow. president trump backed out after it was changed by the debate commission into a remote debate because of his covid diagnosis. do you and your campaign expect that there actually will be a final presidential debate next week, or do you expect that the president's going to back out of that one too? >> you know, i mean he just changes his mind every day. who knows what he's going to say? but joe's been clear. he's keeping his promise. and early in the summer, they

worked out a schedule with the commission, and joe's sticking to his word. and so joe will be keeping the october 15th date. he has never backed out from it, and he'll be talking to the american people and listening from the american people, and he's prepared to do that again on -- i think it's october 22nd. so joe's consistent. donald trump is never consistent, and i don't have any reason to believe he will be on this subject. >> are you as mad as everybody else is that nbc is doing a town hall with president trump tomorrow instead of the debate at the same time that vice president biden's going to be on abc? >> i'm not touching that. >> that is -- that is -- well, let me ask you a different angle. >> yep, yep. >> should the networks refuse to give the president other opportunities for air time if he's the one who refuses the chance to debate?

>> you know, i'm not going to tell the networks what to do, but i'll tell you. i know who i'm going to be watching, so there you go. >> well done. your job is safe here, yeah. let me ask you about something that's going on in your home state and mine, in california. the california state republican party has been caught putting up fake ballot drop boxes, presumably to trick voters into depositing their ballots there. it's almost like a -- like a college republicans prank, but they're doing it for real out in the wild. the state party has been issued a cease and desist order by the state, by the secretary of state and the attorney general. they say this is a felony. you're former attorney general in california. what do you make of this? do you think there should be legal ramifications for the party here? >> i think there are. i think both the secretary of state padilla and the current attorney general becerra have made clear they're monitoring it and they're prepared to take action where enforcement is

necessary. the point that i will make, and i think it is an important one 20 days before the election, is that there are in every state -- many states obstacles being purposely thrown at voters because there are certain people that are afraid that if people vote, that they're going to lose. and, you know, for some of us, you know, we just celebrated in the last month or so the passage of the 19th amendment, right, honoring those suffragettes who fought for the right for women to vote, also remembering black woman couldn't vote until 1965. but this is not new in america. they gutted the voting rights act in 2013, and we've seen, you know, almost two dozen states set up laws that have been designed to suppress the vote. these tactics are not new, but what i'm seeing rachel in this election in 2020 is the voters will not be deterred, and people are voting by mail. they are voting early.

you see the lines in places like texas and georgia where people are prepared to stand in line. they are doing it with joy, and they're doing it with a commitment, knowing that their voice matters and that their voice can determine the outcome of this election through their vote. >> to that end, at a very, very serious level i think one of the things we could see coming from a great distance when president trump was first elected and we saw the way that he was approaching gaining power is that i think for a lot of us, there was worry very early on that he would become the kind of leader that america previously thought we didn't have or would never have again after nixon, who would use the powers of the state, use the powers of government to try to ensure his continued hold on power. and as you talk about voters not being deterred here, for some key pillars of the government that the president might use to subvert the election and stay in

power, we are seeing some contingency plans come into view. and i mean specifically there's a legal group now that includes former heads of the american bar association that is telling justice department personnel they will defend and support them if they whistle-blow or resign or refuse orders on election interference as prosecutors and justice department officials. experts in military law are also offering free counsel to service members who question the legality of trump's orders regarding the use of the military against protests or related to the election. these contingency plans from within the profession, within the legal profession, within the military law expert profession, trying to backstop people who may be asked to do very undemocratic things by a president who has an authoritarian cast when it approaches this election. have there been those kind of contingency discussions within the campaign? i know you've said there will be

a peaceful transfer of power and the best way we can assure that is for there to be an overwhelming vote against this president. but are you working on those kind of contingency plans in the case of a worst-case scenario? >> we are, but i also -- to your point, i have faith in the american people and in our democracy. and there's no question, rachel, that many of us believe that donald trump has been a threat to our democracy and the integrity of our democratic institutions. i don't think there's any questions about that, not to mention his complicity with foreign actors trying to interfere in our election. in 2020 as they did in 2016. but i will say this. our democracy is always going to be as strong as the american people's willingness to fight for our democracy. so it is strong if you look at what people are doing as we speak. again, standing in line, prepared to engage in litigation if necessary, but registering people to vote, talking with

their friends and neighbors about what's at stake. we have always had to fight to get closer to the ideals that we hold dear, and part of that has been over the course of our history to fight for the integrity of our elections. and what i am seeing every day in this election and i've seen for a long time is the american people are willing to fight for the integrity of our electoral process in spite of those that might attempt to discredit or tamper with it. and ultimately i think we prevail when we don't let anybody mess with our vote and we stand firm in knowing that our vote has meaning and it has purpose and actually can determine an outcome of an election. >> senator harris, we're going to take a quick break here. if you don't mind, i have a lot more to ask you about, including about the confirmation battle over amy coney barrett, potential

supreme court justice. if you'd stick with us, we'll be right back in just a moment. ♪ here? nah. introducing the all new chevy trailblazer. here? nope. ♪ here. ♪ when the middle of nowhere, is somewhere. the all new chevy trailblazer. making life's journey, just better.

and ask your doctor about biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in certain adults. it's not a cure, but with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to and stay undetectable. that's when the amount of virus is so low it cannot be measured by a lab test. research shows people who take h-i-v treatment every day and get to and stay undetectable can no longer transmit h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your doctor about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b, do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your doctor. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. if you're living with hiv, keep loving who you are. and ask your doctor if biktarvy is right for you.

do you accept that covid-19 is infectious? >> um, i think, yes, i do accept that covid-19 is infectious. that's something of which i feel like we could say you take judicial notice of. it's an obvious fact, yes. >> do you accept that smoking causes cancer? >> i'm not sure exactly where you're going with this. but, you know, the notice that smoking -- >> the question is what it is. you can answer if you believe it

yes or no. >> senator harris, yes, every package of cigarettes warning that smoking causes cancer. >> and do you believe that climate change is happening and is threatening the air we breathe and the water we drink? >> um, senator, again, i was wondering where you were going with that. you have asked me a series of questions that are completely uncontroversial like whether covid-19 is infectious, whether smoking causes cancer, and then trying to analogize that to eliciting an opinion on me that is a very contentious -- opinion from me that is on a very contentious matter of public debate, and i will not do that. i will not express a view on a matter of public policy, especially when that is politically controversial because that's inconsistent with the judicial rule as i have explained. >> thank you. thank you, judge barrett. you've made your point clear that you believe it's a debatable point. >> back with us once again is senator kamala harris, the democratic nominee for vice president. she of course is on the judiciary committee. she questioned the president's

supreme court nominee today. senator harris, thank you again for being with us. because of what supreme court nomination hearings are like now, it is not categorically a surprise that judge barrett is refusing to answer questions about how she might rule on cases affecting abortion rights or the affordable care act or climate. but i have to say it has been surprising to me as a lay observer to see her reluctant to answer questions about black letter law. she has refused to say whether the constitution allows the president to postpone the election. it clearly doesn't. whether voter intimidation is illegal. it clearly is. what is your read on what's going on there? >> i -- i -- rachel, i think that she and the senate -- republican leaders of the senate have probably decided that

they've got the votes, and she doesn't have to answer questions. you know, i think that it is -- the fact that she can't -- she can't admit what justice roberts admitted, which is that discrimination -- that voter discrimination exists, justice roberts could talk about that. justice roberts, who is the chief justice of the united states supreme court, republican-appointed, i think has created a standard that she should actually admire, which is being candid with the american people about just certain facts and not debatable facts. these are facts. but that's not what we got from this nominee, and the tragedy of it all is that this has been, i think, a process that has violated what the american people want and what they should expect, which is that when we are in the midst of an election,

which will be over in 20 days, it's started, it's going to be over in 20 days. 14 million americans, rachel, have voted, and that they are ramming through this nominee while the american people are voting on who will be their next president is unconscionable. joe and i have been very clear. let the american people decide who will fill that seat in the white house and then fill the seat in the united states supreme court. anything less than that is really contrary to, i think, the best principles about what we do in a democracy. >> as you just articulated there, you have also in the past called this process around judge barrett illegitimate. you've just described there why you believe this is an illegitimate process. given that and in light of judge barrett's refusal to answer any

substantive questions at all in this confirmation process, do you think it was a mistake for democrats to actually show up and participate in these hearings at all, which arguably grants them some sheen of legitimacy? would it have been better to just sit this process out, describe it as illegitimate, say we don't have the power to stop it, but we're not going to grant our imprimatur of legitimacy to this process? >> i have to say that i believe that the democratic senators have been very consistent and unified in pointing out the sham of this process and the illegitimacy of it and also pointing out to the american people what's at stake in terms of, for example, the affordable care act, which i know from traveling the country is the number one topic on people's minds and the issue that keeps them up at night, which is the access to affordable health care. and i think really what we need to do right now is hold these republican senators accountable

for what they're doing, which is forcing upon the american people this process while not, rachel, while not dealing with relief for the tens of millions of people who have found themselves unemployed, for the renters -- almost half of renters in america right now are worried they're not going to be able to make rent next month. the one in five mothers who is describing her children under the age of 12 as being hungry. the thousands and thousands of people that are in food lines every day in america because we're not talking about it, but we're in the midst of a hunger crisis. and these republican senators instead want to ram through this justice, this nomination, without giving american people the relief that they so desperately need right now. it is unconscionable what they are doing, and they should be held accountable because this is, again, a distraction from the failures of this

administration, which is covid and all that it has caused in terms of harm. and it is an example of an agenda that is purely about politics and their weird obsession with getting rid of anything barack obama and joe biden created, which is all about their politics and not about what we should be doing to relieve the pain and the suffering of the american people right now. >> as you intimated, though, there is a sort of fait accompli aspect of the barrett nomination. i mean barring something changing in an unforeseen way in a few days, it's likely the republicans will be able to confirm her with zero democratic support. and as you and your colleagues have highlighted, her record, her statements, particularly her life-long activism on issues like abortion suggest that her confirmation really could be the undoing of health insurance very quickly for tens of millions of americans while we're in the middle of a pandemic.

it could also mean the undoing of same-sex marriage rights, the undoing of reproductive rights on a grand scale, not just roe but also -- i mean today she questioned -- she raised questions about rulings that protect even married couples' access to contraception. fertility doctors have come out in an unprecedented way and essentially anti-endorsed her, called for her not to be confirmed to the court because of her participation with groups in the past that want in-vitro fertilization treated as manslaughter. people locked up for that. given that record and given that if she's confirmed, it will essentially be a 6-3 court with her on the side of 6, what do you say to americans who are scared about that, who aren't gaming this out but who are worried about their rights and their families when she's confirmed? >> you're right, rachel, and i actually talked about that today in the hearing. people are scared.

you're right. civil rights are on the line. workers' rights are on the line. consumer rights are on the line. health care is on the line. all of these things are at stake. you are absolutely right. and the only point that i can make to hopefully relieve some of that righteous fear is we have an election coming up, and it's not only about the white house. it's about the senate. and, you know, i've been in the united states senate now for 3 1/2 years, and i'm going to tell you something. i've been serving on this judiciary committee for a little while. the senate makes decisions about who will be in these lifetime positions on these courts, and it is there that these decisions will be ultimately made about our civil rights, about our right to love who we love and marry them, about our right to have equality and equal justice under law, about whether we protect collective bargaining and the rights of workers, whether we agree that access to

health care should be a right and not just a privilege of those who can afford it. that's where those decisions are made, and the united states senate has a lot to do with it. and when we take back the senate and have the majority, we will have a lot to do with whether or not we are one step closer to those ideals we hold dear. right now we don't have the majority in the senate, and so what have we seen? with donald trump and this senate, we have seen nominations -- because i've been there. i've witnessed it on the judiciary committee. i mentioned this in the debate. rachel, 50 nominations and confirmations to the united states court of appeals for lifetime, lifetime appointments. do you know of the 50, not one person is black? i've been watching where they bring in these nominees who are unwilling to agree that brown v. board of education is precedent. it's crazy. and i mean, you know, to use a term.

so there is one thing we can do among the many things. let's not stop protesting. let's not stop being active. let's not stop speaking up and shouting when necessary. and let's vote. and let's vote, guys. let's vote. >> senator, i have one last question for you, and it is along these same lines. there has been a lot of talk from the right that there is an anti-catholic bias against judge amy coney barrett even though i think she would be the sixth catholic on the court out of nine if she is confirmed and although, despite the fact that her faith hasn't been a matter of discussion during the confirmation process from democratic senators whatsoever. >> right. >> i'm struck by that criticism from the right at the same time president trump and other republicans supporting him, including speakers at the republican convention have routinely and aggressively questioned joe biden's faith. the president accusing joe biden

of being against god and vice president biden being called catholic in name only. i wonder if you have talked to the vice president about those attacks on his faith and if you know how he feels about them and how you two handle that as part of the campaign. >> listen, i am a person of faith. joe biden is a person of faith. and the one thing i will -- you know, i talk to joe all the time. first of all, i love joe biden. he's such a good person, and he is -- he's an incredible leader, and he is so deep of faith and an incredible optimist in the midst of all that we are seeing. you know, and i'm going to say i think it's hurtful to joe to be honest. he goes to mass every sunday. he -- he -- for him, his faith, it's a part of him. i think many people, contrary to what the president and these political people are trying to

play, are very excited about the fact that we have the potential to elect the second catholic -- practicing catholic ever to be president of the united states. and, you know, i think that joe feels the way most people do, which is that their relationship with god and their relationship with their faith is something that cannot be tarnished by other people's perceptions of who they are. and i think joe's very strong that way. >> senator, i know i said that was the last question, but i lied. right before we had that discussion about god, which is a very bad way to do it, but i just realized i would kick myself if i didn't just ask you before i let you go if you noticed the fly on vice president pence's head at the time during the debate. >> rachel. >> or if that was something only -- we could see it at home. could you see it sitting next to

him? [ nodding ] did you have feelings about like -- did you have the instinct to -- >> you know, rachel, i just -- you know, i think that it's important that we kind of find a way, all of us, to move on and, you know, kind of fly away from this subject on to something else. yeah. >> senator harris, you are very kind, and let's just spare a thought right now for the people who have to write closed captions for this portion of the interview and for those who have to transcribe it because they're going to have to no idea how to convey what we just communicated. senator harris, thank you so much for taking this much time. i know it's an exhausting time.

thank you for being here. >> thank you, rachel. thank you very much for all that you do. thank you. >> all right. we'll be right back. stay with us. t... t... i'll be eating roasted cauliflower tacos with spicy chipotle sauce. [doorbell chimes] thank you. [puck scores] oooow yeah!! i wasn't ready! you want cheese to go with that whine?? unlike ordinary memory want supplements-ter? neuriva has clinically proven ingredients that fuel 5 indicators of brain performance. memory, focus, accuracy, learning, and concentration. try our new gummies for 30 days and see the difference.

proposition 16 takes on discrimination. some women make as little as 42% of what a man makes. voting yes on prop 16 helps us fix that. it's supported by leaders like kamala harris and opposed by those who have always opposed equality. we either fall from grace or we rise. together. proposition 16 provides equal opportunities, levelling the playing field for all of us. vote yes on prop 16. but i can't say i expected this. because it was easy. to fight these fires, we need funding - plain and simple. for this crisis, and for the next one. prop 15 closes tax loopholes so rich corporations pay their fair share of taxes. so firefighters like me, have what we need to do the job,

and to do it right. the big corporations want to keep their tax loopholes. it's what they do. well, i do what i do. if you'ld like to help, join me and vote yes on prop 15. do you feel safe campaigning during covid? >> well, we've been very safe, and, you know, again, the president has made fun of us. but we wear masks. we, you know, social distancing, and so, you know, the events are, you know -- it's -- it's -- you know, joe -- i'd like to hug people. you don't hug people these days. that's not an option. you can't shake hands, but you can look people in the eye, and you can listen, and you can be there. >> democratic vice presidential nominee senator kamala harris speaking with me just moments ago. i want to bring in now my pal

and the host of "all in" right here on this network week nights at 8:00, chris hayes. i am blessed to have both very good colleagues and very good friends. chris, thank you for sticking around tonight. >> my great pleasure. >> let me just ask you, i feel like it is going to stick out for a lot of people that she confirmed that she saw the fly. >> yes. >> that was on the vice president's head. but let's just leave that where it is. that's told its own story. besides that, what else stuck out to you from this interview and from where kamala harris is at right now? >> you know, two things. one, i think the most striking thing was her answer to your question about -- which is the question i think we all have and i've been asking on my show every night about the amy coney barrett hearings, right? there's this feeling of impotence, this sort of frustration like they're doing it. they have the votes. this is happening. probably going to be very bad for a lot of things that democrats believe in and progressives and liberals. and, you know, joe biden has been hounded with this question

about whether he would consider expanding the court, and i thought she gave a kind of interesting and fairly deft answer that seemed to kind of like conjure a lean towards that without ever saying it about the power that the senate has and the sort of importance of building a senate majority because it is true that all the talk about court expansion or court balancing or what will come, you know, on the other side of the bridge requires joe biden to win and the democrats to take the senate and also to, you know, to take the house and have all three houses before you even get to that question. and i thought her answer to that, it seemed to me that that was essentially what she was saying. i thought she did it in a pretty deft way compared to this sort of weird game we've been playing with the campaign reporters and biden. >> i agree. and i feel like, you know, everybody keeps asking biden and harris the same question and the right is having all this concern trolling over whether or not they're going to violate norms when the other option is donald trump.

but is there -- i mean is this one of those situations, though, where we should be looking for what they do rather than just what they say? are there things that a presidential campaign, a presidential contender and a vice presidential contender can do to prioritize the down-ballot senate races that are going to make it possible for them to govern if they actually get control? i thought that pivot that she made too was also really important, but what should we be looking for from biden and harris for them to kind of put their money where their mouth is and boost democratic candidates. >> there's two things. one i think it is notable they haven't said, no, we're not going to do it. they haven't said no, we're not going to do it, which is itself a statement. part of the reason we're playing in ring around the rosy. the second thing to me is when you talk about down-ballot candidates, one of the things -- you know, back during the primary there was a lot of discussions about electability, and i thought a lot of those got pretty gauzy about people's

ability to sort of project out to the future and project the mind of the median voter. but i remember the one argument that most landed for me about biden and electability is i had several conversations with members of congress in swing districts who are like absolutely i want him at the top of the ticket. it's not really close for me. and believe me i know my district. i am telling you that's the person i want at the top of the ticket. and thus far that theory of the case appears to be bearing out, right? i mean it really does seem the case that his favorability numbers have gone up over the course of the campaign, which is remarkable. the trump campaign keeps trying to find new ways to sort of, you know, create some monstrous socialist version of him or to run against kamala harris herself. and so in that, i mean, look, i think the objective for democrats is two steps -- build power and then use power. and you build power in this case by winning as many elections as you can, and then you figure out what to do with that power when you're, you know, in office. >> yeah. and i mean i think that's -- i

think that's exactly right, and i think that my sort of takeaway from this interview -- and this is the first chance i've had to speak with senator harris since she was the nominee -- is that it sort of puts the focus for me on the fact that there isn't a senate race or, i think, a congressional race anywhere in the country that has been hurt by the democrats choosing joe biden and kamala harris as their ticket. they literally have been value added in every single state, in every single district where a democrat is running anywhere on the ticket, and they know it. that's why had they're talking about how they're going to govern, the rest of the ticket and getting the early vote locked in. it's a position of strength but still got many days ahead. chris hayes, thank you for working late, i really appreciate it. >> my pleasure, anytime. >> more ahead. stay with us. our extended release melatonin helps you sleep longer.

and longer. zzzquil pure zzzs all night. fall asleep. stay asleep. still a father. but now a friend. still an electric car. just more electrifying. still a night out. but everything fits in. still hard work. just a little easier. still a legend. just more legendary. chevrolet. making life's journey, just better.

to save you up to 60%. these are all great. and when you get a big deal... ♪ ...you feel like a big deal. ♪

priceline. every trip is a big deal. to customizes yourcan gocar insurancetual.com so you only pay for what you need? really? i didn't-- aah! ok. i'm on vibrate. aaah! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

their laundry smells moremily amazing than ever.in flings, uh, honey? isn't that the dog's towel? hey, me towel su towel. there's more gain scent plus oxi boost and febreze odor remover in every fling. gain. seriously good scent

if your gums bleed when you brush, the answer is yes. the clock may be ticking towards worse... parodontax is 3x more effective at removing plaque, the main cause of bleeding gums parodontax

nbc news at, i kid you not, the exact same time joe biden will be holding a previously announced town hall on abc news. which is as odd as you think it is.

this event tomorrow isn't an msnbc event. it is being done by nbc news. but it will be simulcast on our air at 8 p.m. tomorrow night. it will be one hour which means it will be over before this show starts as normal in its usual place. i will see you here at 9:00 p.m. eastern tomorrow night. now it's time for "the last word with lawrence o'donnell." >> and i will see you here at 10:00 p.m. tomorrow night. my first guest will be the communications director of the biden campaign, kate bedingfield. we might have a little bit of a spin room here to start things off. and tonight, rachel, i have two people who have been in real wrestling matches with the bear. with donald trump. speaker nancy pelosi will join us. governor andrew cuomo will join us. i think they both have similar stories to tell of what it has been like during this pandemic. to try to force this white house to do the