Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: June 19, 2017 Guest: Bernie Sanders, Sarah Kliff, Betsy Woodruff, Charlie Pierce
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC ALL IN HOST: Tonight on ALL IN.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: - resist and it`s very unfortunate.
HAYES: The clock is set as the secret Republican health care bill inches closer to the floor of the Senate.
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY), SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: Nobody`s hiding the ball here.
HAYES: Tonight, the Democratic resistance.
SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), CALIFORNIA: We will fight this bill with all we have.
HAYES: My guest, Senator Bernie Sanders. Plus, meet the President`s new lawyer.
JAY SEKULOW, TRUMP`S LAWYER: Now he`s being investigated by the Department Of Justice.
HAYES: The ever changing explanation on the Russia investigation.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`ve now said that he is being investigated after saying that he didn`t -
SEKULOW: No.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You just said, Sir.
SEKULOW: No, he`s not being investigated.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You just said that he`s being investigated.
HAYES: And after months and months of silence, Jared Kushner speaks.
JARED KUSHNER, PRESIDENT`S SENIOR ADVISER: It`s working and it`s very exciting.
HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Good evening from New York, I`m Chris Hayes. The countdown clock is now officially ticking down towards a vote on the secret Republican bill to overhaul the American health care system, and right now in the Senate at this moment, Democrats are staging a last-ditch protest that could go deep into the night. Democratic Senators are now in the middle of a marathon session filled with speeches and procedural maneuvers designed to escalate their opposition to what is by all accounts an unprecedented attempt by Senate Republicans to remake 1/6 of the U.S. economy with a health care bill they are drafting in total secrecy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY) MINORITY LEADER: There`s only one reason why Republicans are doing this. They`re ashamed of their bill.
SEN. CORY BOOKER (D), NEW JERSEY: Rushing something through that fundamentally affects life and we`re pushing it to the floor with an insult to our history or insult to our values.
SEN. BRIAN SCHATZ (D), HAWAII: This is shameful. This is a violation to the way democracy itself should work.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: What Senate Republicans are attempting is no less than a brazen legislative heist on a scale that has never been seen in the modern era. You just can`t point to any precedent. Remember, this is a bill that was initially drafted by an all-male panel of 13 Republican Senators, has been kept secret from the American people, Senate Democrats, even many Senate Republicans, interest holders of all kinds. Virtually nobody has seen a word of it. We don`t know what`s in the black box at the center of this entire escapade yet Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell reportedly still plans to hold a vote on the secret legislation before the Senate leaves for its July 4th holiday. A timeline Republican Senator John Barrasso says you can count on.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO (R), WYOMING: I believe we`re going to vote before the 4th of July recess on a health care plan, a repeal and replacement of ObamaCare. Every Republican is trying to get to yes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: That would mean a vote in less than two weeks, likely by Friday, June 30th despite what are expected to be zero hearings and virtually no time for a debate.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCHUMER: Will we have time, more than ten hours since this is a complicated bill to review the bill? Will it be available to us and the public more than ten hours before we have to vote for it?
MCCONNELL: I think we`ll have ample opportunity to read and amend the bill.
SCHUMER: Will it be more than ten hours? That`s -
MCCONNELL: Well, I think we`ll have ample opportunity to read and amend bill.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Wait a second. Wait a second. That`s Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell there refusing to agree to a minimum of ten hours for a piece of legislation that no one outside of 13 Republican senators has read that would rework 1/6 of the American economy. And over, and over on the Senate floor, today Democrats requested the bill go through the normal Senate process with committee hearings, public comment, all of the other things you`re supposed to do when you craft legislation. All of the things one should note as well, that were done for the Affordable Care Act and over and over again Mitch McConnell stood in the way.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So I`m going to ask that we agree today that the bill won`t come to the floor until the Health Committee has had an open meeting and considered amendments from both parties.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is there objection?
MCCONNELL: I object
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection`s heard.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I ask unanimous consent.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is there objection?
MCCONNELL: I object.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection is heard.
BOOKER: I`d like to ask for unanimous consent.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: is there objection?
MCCONNELL: I object.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Objection is heard.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I ask for unanimous consent
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is there objection.
MCCONNELL: I object.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection is heard.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have a unanimous consent request.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is there an objection?
MCCONNELL: I object.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection is heard.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Senate bill is based on the already passed House version which is polling at just 17 percent approval in which the CBO says will result in 24 million Americans being left uninsured while the wealthiest households in the country receive billions of dollars in tax cuts. President Trump celebrated that bill in the Rose Garden when it passed but then last week decried it as quote "mean, mean, mean." Reportedly adding it is "cold- hearted" and a, "son of a B," in a closed-door meeting with Republican Senators. Comments Democrats are already using to tar GOP lawmakers who voted for that bill. Despite that, they Senate GOP is reportedly considering even deeper Medicaid cuts than the House bill. As House conservatives warn that any efforts to moderate the bill, that is to make it less mean in the President`s words, quote, "may jeopardize final passage in the House." White House today refused to answer questions publicly. There`s a theme emerging here, about this bill or anything else. In fact, Sean Spicer held an off-camera briefing, barred reporters from even releasing recordings of what he said. At that briefing, Spicer said President Trump is confident that McConnell can get the bill passed and added, the President does not get involved in how the Senate conducts its business. So what is going on here and can Democrats stop it? Short time ago, right before he took part in tonight`s Senate action, I asked Senator Bernie Sanders for his views on the secret GOP bill.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (D), VERMONT: I mean, I am speechless when I try to describe what is going on here because it is really literally unbelievable. Chris, we`re talking about in terms of health care, 1/6 of the American economy, trillions of dollars. You`re talking about an issue that impacts virtually every single American in our country. And in the midst of all of this, you have a process by which right now perhaps a dozen Republicans are the only people in America who know what is being talked about, what the new bill might look like. Most Republicans don`t even know it let alone anybody in the Democratic caucus. This is outrageous beyond outrageous. This is unprecedented I think in the history of modern America, that you have a bill of such consequence where there is not one hearing. I`m a member of the Health and Education Committee. No hearings.no public debate. What will likely happen is that at the very last moment on the day of the vote Mitch McConnell will present a bill, the Republicans will, like sheep, vote for this legislation and that`s what the debate on the most - one of the most important issues facing America will be like. It is incomprehensible.
HAYES: You know, the closest analog in some ways that I can remember for something like this a little bit is the Iraq war vote, and here`s why I say this. That vote, there was tremendous political pressure at the moment to vote to authorize the use of force. It turned out that in the end, the policy itself mattered a great deal. It was paramount in the end to the political fortunes of the Republican party, particularly whether the war was a good idea or not. And I just wonder whether your colleagues on the other side, if they don`t know what the policy is, how can they possibly think it`s in their political benefit to vote for it?
SANDERS: Look, you have - well, they assume that their base supports the repeal of ObamaCare. That`s what they know, and presumably, this is what that will do. I think the analogy with the war in Iraq is not quite correct because this is enormously complicated. You know, in the war on Iraq, do you go into the war? I chose not to. I voted against it. Whether you`re not, that`s the decision. This one is health care. There are so many aspects to it. It`s complicated stuff, as the President reminded us, and that you have Republicans out there when asked by media, have you read the bill? Do you know what`s in it? No, I really don`t know it. But you`re prepared to vote for it? Well, you know, maybe I will. And, again, it is a disgrace. It`s a disgrace to the tradition of the Senate, to the United States Congress, and it really is an insult to the American people. And the reason clearly, Chris, is they don`t want any debate about it, is they know how unpopular and how awful this legislation is. How do you go home and defend throwing 23 million Americans off of health insurance, defunding Planned Parenthood, cutting Medicaid by $800 billion, raising premiums for older workers, and by the way, giving hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks to the richest 2 percent and drug companies and insurance companies? You know what, that`s a pretty hard proposal to defend. Their view is let`s not defend it, let`s just do it in secret.
HAYES: It also seems to me and this is something Democrats know very well, anyone who voted for the ACA, American health care is complicated. People have all sorts of mixed emotions about it. A lot of people are frustrated about their health care.
SANDERS: Right.
HAYES: And when you pass major health care legislation, the party that does that essentially owns the entirety of the system, even if they - even the parts that they didn`t touch. It does strike me, the Republicans are on the precipice of essentially doing that. Am I wrong?
SANDERS: Well, yes, and no. Yes, of course, they are going to own it, but behind them will be many hundreds of millions of dollars from the Koch Brothers and others billionaires bombing the airwaves with 30-second ads attacking anybody who is critical of what the Republicans did. So it`s like a war and they have heavy duty artillery in the back and they say, hey, we can do anything we want. It really doesn`t matter.
HAYES: You think that`s the reason? You really think that - you think that`s the thing that emboldens them?
SANDERS: I think in the back of their minds is the understanding that they have an unlimited amount of money to defend them and to attack and destroy those people who are critical of what they did. I think that`s a very important factor.
HAYES: So there`s tremendous frustration on behalf of a lot of people that follow this issue and not just, you know, folks that have a liberal, political bent but anyone involved in the industry of health care, I talked to them, they kind of can`t believe what they`re watching.
SANDERS: That`s right.
HAYES: The question to you and your colleagues in the Democratic caucus is, you know, what are you going to do? What can you do? I remember Tom Coburn back when I used to be on Capitol Hill covering him could bring the whole place to a stop for the craziest stuff. Seemed like the Senate would grind to a halt because Tom Coburn didn`t like something. Can you do that?
SANDERS: We are going to - I can only speak for myself. I will do everything humanly and legally possible to make sure this horrendous piece of legislation, which will be close to what the House passed, never sees the light of day. This is the House-passed bill, Chris, is the worst piece of legislation by far that I have seen in my lifetime, and I will do everything I can, I think I speak for a number of other people in the Democratic caucus, to make sure that legislation like this never, ever sees the light of day.
HAYES: All right. Senator Bernie Sanders. I appreciate your time tonight.
SANDERS: Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HAYES: Joining me now, Health Care Policy Guru and Senior Policy Correspondent at Vox.com and MSNBC Contributor and Republican Strategist, Steve Schmidt. Sarah, let me start with you because you wrote this piece that really struck me. The headline was basically, I covered the Affordable Care Act from day one and I`ve just never seen anything - I`ve covered - I`ve never seen lying and obstruction like this. What do you mean by that?
SARAH KLIFF, VOX.COM SENIOR POLICY CORRESPONDENT: I mean it`s kind of captured in the headline, that it has really been an unprecedented secret effort that`s going on with Republicans, and you`re really seeing that continue today. You have multiple outlets reporting right now that the bill will be released at the end of the week. You`ll get a CBO score Monday or Tuesday, and a vote on Thursday and that`s just - it is so different than the process I covered in 2009 and 2010 where you have over a year of debate. We recently counted up all the hearings at Vox, 42 different hearings or public meetings about the Affordable Care Act and its drafting. It is really such a different process, and it makes it quite clear that Senate Republicans, they don`t really want anyone to see their bill, that their goal seems to be secrecy. You don`t see anyone out there on the front lines saying, this is why we need to pass it. I used to interview a lot of Democratic Senators in 2009 and 2010. You`d ask them you know, why the Affordable Care Act and they generally give you some version of, we need to increase coverage, we need to reduce costs. Then you can debate whether they accomplish those goals but they had a goal in mind. And it`s really not clear, aside from getting from 51 votes, what the goal is on behalf of Republican Senators with their health care bill.
HAYES: Steve, and this is my question to you. I mean, I - and I get - I mean, in some ways there`s sort of a devious ingeniousness to the McConnell process but there`s going to be a day after. I mean, if you pass this thing and you`re successful, you better hope it makes people`s lives better. No matter how you pass it, it`s not like it goes away as an issue when you manage to remake the American health care system, right?
STEVE SCHMIDT, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: The extraordinary thing about it is that Republicans who will vote for this, if they do vote for it, will be voting for something that they don`t understand, they have no idea what`s in it, no idea what it will do, 1/6 of the American economy. Now I guess I`m old enough to remember that we had a process where we would debate legislation, there would be hearings, there would be a committee process, it would pass to committees. Senators would go out. They would campaign for the legislation. They would try to convince the American people that it`s so complex.
HAYES: Right.
SCHMIDT: It was good for them. Apparently, the model is now let`s take something that`s hideously unpopular, 16, 17 percent approval, no one will read it, we won`t talk about it, no public process and we`ll jam it through in the dead of night. The problem is, is that once the American people have an entitlement, they don`t want it taken away from them. There`s never been an example in the political history of the country where that`s - where that`s happened and where it`s accrued politically to the benefit of the people who took it away. So I think the politics of this will be very interesting. It will be more interesting tomorrow after we know what the results of the Georgia Six Special Election are. But this has enormous implications for control of the House of Representatives, I suspect.
HAYES: Yes. And Sarah, to Steve`s point, I mean, in terms of why they`re sort of all in on this, I think there`s a case to be made that maybe they believe that the only way that you can, quote, "take away an entitlement is to do a process like this." What is - what is the driving goal here? I mean, the goal is to get to 51 votes, and to keep a promise to repeal and replace ObamaCare and it`s to cut the taxes as far as I can tell. What am I missing about why they`re so invested in this?
KLIFF: I don`t think you`re missing that much. I think, you know, I spend a lot of time talking to kind of health care wonks, liberal conservatives, and this is not really what you would consider, like a bill that conservative health care experts like.
HAYES: Right.
KLIFF: This is not how they would craft the health care system. So I think, you know, the three things you outlined, Chris, deliver on a campaign process, cut taxes, you know, do this quickly, those are really what is driving this whole effort. And you know, I will say, it is true, I think there will be electoral consequences for Republicans just like there were for Democrats but it will be after a lot of people get hurt. Like the election will happen months after people lose health insurance. A lot of really vulnerable people on Medicaid. You know, yes, they`ll pay the consequences, but these poor Americans will pay the consequences first.
HAYES: Steve, do you think Republicans are prepared for success? I mean, are they prepared for what it would mean to go to the White House, have the President sign into law a new health care bill and then go out and answer the questions about everyone`s health care in America as part of the Trumpcare - you know, problem of Trumpcare, whether it`s related to the legislation or not?
SCHMIDT: Well, I think clearly not. Look, Republicans control all these both Houses of the Congress and the White House yet they`re unable to move anything with regard to legislation forward, none of it. The domestic policy agenda is completely stalled. So I think they`ve made a calculus and said, look, if we don`t repeal this, we`re going to have a unenthused, depressed base.
HAYES: Right.
SCHMIDT: The failure to repeal ObamaCare will be the biggest broken political promise in American history, so it`s better to repeal something so we can say we repealed it, then we`ve fulfilled the campaign promises, consequences be damned. We have no idea what it will do to the health care system, what its impact on real people will be, how much it cost, how many people will lose insurance. I mean, before you can even get to a debate about the merits of this, nobody knows what`s in it, nobody how much it cost, no one knows what it does, no idea. And we`re not talking about a small thing, we`re talking about a big thing, 1/6 of the American economy. So it`s just the incompetence from a governance perspective, just a simple we`re in the job of running the country, it`s just extraordinarily malfeasant.
HAYES: Yes, and I would reiterate, I would love to have any Republican member of the Senate on to talk about the bill and talk about the substance not profits - process. I`d rather talk about substance but this is where we are. Sarah Kliff and Steve Schmidt, thank you, both for your time.
KLIFF: Thanks.
SCHMIDT: Good to be with you.
HAYES: Ahead, President Trump`s new lawyer tries to explain why when he tweets about being investigated; it really means that he`s not being investigated. How that attempted Jedi mind trick went after the two-minute break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEKULOW: The President is not under investigation by the Special Counsel.
The President has not been and is not under investigation.
The president is not a subject or target of an investigation.
We have not been notified that there`s an investigation of the President of the United States.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: President Trump`s lawyer Jay Sekulow basically had one job on all those news stories yesterday, and that is to say that President Trump is, as you heard, not under investigation. But he had to try to sell that idea after the President himself tweeted, and I quote here, "I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director. Witch hunt." All four of those shows asked Sekulow to respond to that tweet of course and as you saw, he tried to directly contradict the President`s own words. He said the Washington Post put out a story last week that the President was under investigation and the President was just responding to an article that was based on five unnamed sources. But just listen to Sekulow`s response when he was pressed to really explain the President`s thinking behind that tweet.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEKULOW: He takes the action that they also by the way recommended and now he`s being investigated by the Department of Justice because the Special Counsel under the Special Counsel Regulations reports still to the Department of Justice, not an independent counsel. So he`s being investigated for taking the action that the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General recommended him to take by the agency who recommended the termination.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`ve now said that he is getting investigated after saying that you didn`t -
SEKULOW: No.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You just said, sir -
SEKULOW: No, he`s not being investigated.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You just said that he`s being investigated.
SEKULOW: Let me be crystal clear, so you completely understand. We have not received nor are we aware of any investigation of the President of the United States.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Joining us now, Betsy Woodruff, Politics Reporter at The Daily Beast and Charlie Pierce, Writer at Large for Esquire. And Betsy, this is a widely panned performance. I don`t know, Sekulow had - you know, he didn`t have really the facts on his side. He is though - Sekulow is a very sort of familiar movement conservative face, and it`s interesting to me that he is out there making the President`s case. What do you make of that?
BETSY WOODRUFF, THE DAILY BEAST POLITICS REPORTER: I think the fact that he is such a familiar part, long-term fixture in social conservative circles is why he has this job. You know, my understanding is that the reason he is the public face of Trump`s legal team is that he allegedly is good at talking on TV. Although of course on Sunday morning, there was some doubt cast on that assertion. And remember, the really important thing about what he said about the President not being under investigation is that he carefully couched that at different points throughout this interview. He said to my knowledge, not that I`m aware of, we haven`t been informed. That`s because if Sekulow had said point blank without qualification, the President is not under investigation, he would be saying something that he knew he couldn`t know and that can potentially have triggered a legal ethics complaint. So there`s a lot of artful dodging going on with varying degrees of success.
HAYES: You know, Charlie, I`ve been watching - it`s been interesting to watch the President expand his legal task force that sort of representing him. Sekulow is not at all sort of a criminal trial lawyer. He`s also brought on this guy named John Dowd who has done high profile cases. And this is really interesting to me, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara who was fired by Trump famously, throwing shade at the President`s legal team, "I don`t know what the facts will show, or what they Special Counsel will conclude, but Kasowitz - that`s President`s personal lawyer, Sekulow and Dowd is not the dream team."
CHARLIE PIERCE, ESQUIRE WRITER AT LARGE: Preet is becoming the king of twitter by the way. People aren`t following him, they should. You know, it`s a very interesting crew. Sekulow is a specialty litigator. He`s specialty is litigating quote-unquote "religious liberty cases." That`s his whole gig. That`s - what he made his movements balanced is doing that. Dowd is you know, a name that`s been around legal circles for a long time. I`m beginning to think that Trump - the President is simply hiring people he sees on TV the night before. Well, that guy looks good, we`ll put him on retainer. I don`t know who`s actually concocting the legal strategy here.
HAYES: I think - I mean, Betsy, given the way that we know the President sort of interfaces with the media, he`s a creature of the media, he`s mediated by the media himself. It seems entirely plausible that that`s maybe what`s happening.
WOODRUFF: Right, without a doubt. I think we know that the President made campaign staffing decisions based on how well people did talking about him on TV perhaps more than any other President in American history. I think we can say is certainly more than any other President. Trump loves cable news. That said, I think Sekulow`s role in his legal defense isn`t just that. I think it also - it shows the growing influence of evangelical Christian conservatives in Trump`s inner circle. Sekulow is very close with the number of the social conservatives who`ve really made inroads in Trump`s world since he was nominated.
HAYES: That`s interesting.
WOODRUFF: And Sekulow as member is a part of that world. You look at the influence (INAUDIBLE). As a fact that Mike Pence is forceful driver of domestic policy to supreme court nominees of course. Sekulow is kind of part of that world and an indicator that social conservative, evangelicals don`t have a lot of clout.
HAYES: And that - and that`s also part of the strategy, I think. If he - is he going to be in the bunker, those are the folks he wants to be in the bunker with. Charlie, I want you to respond to something the former House Speaker Newt Gingrich who is there when President Clinton was impeached, had to say about the obstruction of justice and the President. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NEWT GINGRICH, FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER: Technically, the President of the United States cannot obstruct justice. President of the United States is the Chief Executive Office of the United States. If he wants to fire the FBI director, all he has to do is fire him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: He literally impeached Bill Clinton for obstruction of justice. That was one of the articles of impeachment.
PIERCE: Yes. Well, I don`t know why anybody is listening to Newt Gingrich. I mean, people are telling Hillary Rodham Clinton to go away and shut up and don`t be part of it anymore. This is guy who`s a monumental Charlotte and has been from day one. And has now a monumental failure and he still - he still gets invited on TV to spout this nonsense. Of course, the President can obstruct justice. I would - I would recommend you the June 17th, 1972 tape recording at the Oval Office. If you have the CIA turn off an FBI investigation because they`re going to find out that your campaign paid off some burglaries, you`re obstructing justice.
HAYES: And this is - Betsy, this is a key point to me at this point is, they are now - they have managed to maneuver themselves into a situation where as we learn more and more facts about what`s going on you know, in sort of the Russia investigation itself, it is the case the President`s being investigated by a Special Counsel and that is true every day from henceforth until it`s not, and clearly that is something that obsesses the President is causing considerable legal concern over in the White House as well. bout.
WOODRUFF: Of course, without a doubt. And my understanding is that one of the deepest concerns among senior staff in the White House isn`t just this question of collusion, whether or not collusion happened. Remember, the Trump campaign was not the most artfully managed campaign in American political history. A bigger concern is that this investigation will turn up other problematic revelations particularly on financial side. That there will be financial dealings, that some of Trump`s close associates had, potentially that Trump himself had that won`t look good when Bob Mueller shines their searchlight on him. So some of the (INAUDIBLE) stuff could actually end up causing a lot more anxiety for Trump and his team than the focus of the investigation as we know it thus far.
HAYES: I have heard the same concerns from one source in particular who work in the campaign. Betsy Woodruff and Charlie Pierce, thank you.
WOODRUFF: Sure thing.
HAYES: All right, after the break, nearly five months into the Trump administration, Jared Kushner one of the most powerful people in the White House speaks publicly for the first time, that after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: The President`s son-in-law and Senior Adviser Jared Kushner is heading Israel on the west bank later this week in an effort to restart peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians. Middle East peace is just one item in Kushner`s expansive portfolio which is really unlike that of any other White House official. The former real estate mogul and heir, like his father in law, who inherited a real estate fortune, Kushner now advises the President on both Domestic and Foreign Policy. He`s managing diplomacy with China and Mexico. He traveled to Iraq with the Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff to checked in on the campaign against ISIS and he`s heading up efforts to make the government run more like a business under the new White House of American innovation. Ordinarily, when a public official has this much responsibility to deliver on promises made to the American people, he got a public profile to match. But Jared Kushner hasn`t given a single on-camera interview or public speech during his time in the Trump administration that is until today. This afternoon, Kushner spoke at a White House summit with tech CEOs and his remarks were notable less because of what he said then because it was the first time many of us have ever heard the sound of his voice.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KUSHNER: Our goal here is simple: we are here to improve the day-to-day lives of the average citizen, that`s a core promise and we are keeping it. Together, we will unleash the creativity of the private sector to provide citizens services in a way that has never happened before. We will foster a new set of startups focused on gov tech and be the global leader in the field making government more transparent and responsive to citizens needs.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: While Kushner has gotten an enormous White House portfolio. Now he has something else to do on his to do list: staffing up a legal team with the experience to handle a criminal prosecution. More on that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: What the special counsel`s Russia probe expanding, the president`s son-in-law and senior adviser is now trying too beef up his legal team. Representatives of Jared Kushner have quietly contacted high powered criminal lawyers about potentially representing him, according to the New York Times. Kushner`s current attorney Jamie Gorelick works at the same law firm where Robert Mueller was a partner until his appointment last month as special counsel, which raises potential conflicts of interest.
But Gorelick`s specific area of expertise may be a bigger concern. As the Times notes, "although Gorelick is a well known lawyer who has often handled complex cases involving government investigations, she is not primarily a trial lawyer." The outreach to other attorneys began last month, according to The Times after news reports revealed investigators were examining Kushner`s meetings during the transition with the head of a sanctioned Russian bank and the Russian ambassador which Kushner had initially failed to disclose.
Now the special counsel is investigating Kushner`s business dealings, according to The Washington Post, among the court room litigators Kushner`s team has reached out to, The Times cites Abby Lowell (ph), a prominent trial lawyer, whose past clients include Jack Abramoff, the former Republican lobbyist who served almost four years in prison on corruption charges.
I`m joined by Jill Wine-Banks, former assistant Watergate special prosecutor.
Jill, did people back during Watergate, did people get criminal defense attorneys fairly early on? And did individuals get them to defend them?
JILL WINE-BANKS, FRM. WATERGATE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR: Yes. I would say of course our case started at a sort of later pointwhen they were getting lawyers, but the staff got fired or resigned and immediately had their own lawyers.
It`s an important step. It`s interesting what you noted about the type of specialty: a trial lawyer means that you think there is going to end up being a need for a trial lawyer.
The banking and financial crimes is certainly something that is of great concern, and it sounds like the parallel to Watergate, which is follow the money. And when you meet with a sanctioned bank and don`t report it, follow the money seems like a good way to go.
HAYES: Well, the sanctioned bank - and we should also say the meeting with the Russian ambassador as a secret meeting, which he was snuck into Trump Tower in which Jared Kushner having hired some of the best, most expensive lawyers in Washington, who presumably would help him fill out his security clearance form failed to notice that on a form that the first part of which says under penalty of perjury do not lie or omit anything from this form and yet he did that, which at some level seems to put him on some hook for possible criminal exposure off the bat.
WINE-BANKS: Absolutely.
And remember that obstruction of justice includes perjury and that is one of the first articles of impeachment against President Nixon. So when I`m hearing tonight that you cannot have the president ever obstruct justice, that he simply can`t do it, he can and he can be impeached for doing it. That is what happened to Richard Nixon.
So, it`s possible here. And there seems to be confusion about the difference between two separate crimes. One is collusion with the Russians, who clearly had an impact on our election and that`s one crime, but the other crime is stopping an investigation of Flynn, stopping an investigation of Russia and that`s what we`re looking at now, as best I can determine from what I`m reading.
HAYES: In any complex prosecution, and in any investigation, getting people to cooperate is a huge part of that prosecution. Sheldon Whitehouse, a senator from Rhode Island, suggested earlier today I believe that it`s possible he believes that General Flynn may be cooperating with FBI investigators. How did - was that a key part of how Watergate came together? I know a lot of people ended up with doing criminal time. Were people making those sorts of calculations about when they were going to cooperate?
WINE-BANKS: Absolutely. The first real break came when James McCord, the security chief for the committee to re-elect Nixon, started to cooperate by writing a letter on the eve of his sentencing when he realized that maybe he could get a deal at his sentence. He wrote a letter that really broke open the case and said there was perjury committed during the trial. There were higher ups involved. And this was something that Judge Surrick (ph) had believed throughout the whole trial but -- and which Woodward and Bernstein had probed throughout the whole trial.
HAYES: So, he comes forward on the eve of his sentencing to basically spill the beans that there`s a larger conspiracy in the hopes of saving himself in a sentencing standpoint?
WINE-BANKS: absolutely.
And then I`m sure that John Dean saw that if he got in first with a good deal, because it`s always known among the criminal defense bar, that the first in gets the best deal.
HAYES: Right.
WINE-BANKS: And so I`m sure he was motivated both I really believe by his remorse of what he had done, but also by the recognition that if he came in first he would get a good deal as a witness.
HAYES: And so you`ve got now in any situation - again, we don`t know what the underlying facts are. And it may be that the case that everyone is innocent of any conceivable crime when the facts totally come to light. You`re smiling at that, but it`s possible.
That you`ve got, you know, a literal prisoner`s dilemma, right? I mean, you have got a whole et of actors in this drama. Paul Manafort who, of course, has high profile attorneys and investigations, Michael Flynn, Jared Kushner, all of whom are going to be making individual calculations about what is best for them.
WINE-BANKS: Absolutely. And part of the question will be who will flip first and what is in it for them in terms of flipping, and what are the countervailing factors. I am sure that Jared Kushner, as the son-in-law, may have a harder time in...
HAYES: Of course.
WINE-BANKS: ...in turning evidence and would Mr. Flynn, even though President Trump has certainly gone out of his way to protect Mr. Flynn. So it may be hard to turn him to. I don`t know.
HAYES: All right, Jill Wine-Banks, thank you.
WINE-BANKS: Thank you.
HAYES: Still to come, Democrats looking for their first big win in the Trump era when they can flip a Republican House seat tomorrow. Election day finally here. Why this race could decide the future of Trumpcare ahead.
Plus, a real time fact check in tonight`s Thing One, Thing Two after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: Thing One tonight, American history according to President Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Frederick Douglass is an example of somebody who`s done an amazing job and is being recognized more and more I notice.
Lincoln signed the law that built the first transcontinental railroad. Great president. Most people don`t even know he was a Republican, right? Does anyone know? A lot of people don`t know that. We have to build that up a little bit more. Let`s take an ad. Let`s use one of those PACs.
And I said, when was Andrew Jackson, it was 1828, that`s a long time ago.
They love Andrew Jackson...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yeah, he is a fascinating...
TRUMP: I mean, had Andrew Jackson been a little later, you wouldn`t have had the civil war. He was a -- he was a very tough person, but he had a big heart and he was -- he was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the civil war. He said, there`s no reason for this. People don`t realize, you know, the civil war...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yeah.
TRUMP: ...when you think about it, why. People don`t ask that question. But why was there the civil war? Why could that one not have been worked out?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Today there`s an addition, another instance of historical musings. The president`s comment that provoked a live footnote from the president of Panama is Thing Two in 60 seconds.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: President Trump welcomed the president of Panama to the White House today and speaking before cameras President Trump said the two leaders had many things to discuss, but there was just one issue he made sure to bring up specifically, bragging about a project that began under a previous president after the turn of the century, the turn of last century, that is, and was completed in 1914, something that was not lost on the president of Panama.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: It`s our great honor to have president and Mrs. Varela from Panama. We have many things to discuss. We`re going to spend quite a bit of time today. The Panama Canal is doing quite well. I think we did a good job building it, right?
JUAN CARLOS VARELA, PRESIDENT OF PANAMA: Yes, one hundred years ago.
TRUMP: But things are going well in Panama.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: One person is dead, at least 10 others injured after an attacker drove a van into a crowd of Muslims gathered near the Finsbury Park Mosque in London during the holy month of Ramadan.
Witnesses say the suspect, 47-year-old man from Wales, yelled that he wanted to, quote, kill all Muslims. He was wrestled to the ground by bystanders in the midst of this disaster and protected by a local imam and others until police arrived.
Officials are treating the incident as a terrorist attack.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CRESSIDA DICK, METROPOLITAN POLICE: This was quite clearly an attack on Muslims who looked like they were probably Muslims and they were coming from a prayer meeting. We treat this as a terrorist attack.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: The terrorist attack is the fourth in UK since March. London Mayor Sadiq Khan says they say they were all an assault on British values.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SADIQ KHAN, MAYOR OF LONDON: This attack me on Seven Sisters, the attack in Manchester, the attack on London Bridge, that attack on Westminster Bridge, are all an attack on our shared values, our shared values of tolerance and freedom and respect. And we will not allow these terrorists to succeed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: World leaders expressed their shock and solidarity with London. Justin Trudeau, the prime minister of Canada, pledging his country`s support. The new president of France Emmanuel Macron extended his sympathies, as did the spokesman for German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
But while the U.S. Department of State put out a statement strongly condemning the attack, the president himself has been silent, and that is a marked contrast to his reaction earlier this month after an attack at London Bridge when he picked a fight with Mayor Khan and used the violence to promote his Muslim travel ban.
President Donald Trump has yet to say anything about the latest attack in London.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: The Georgia Sixth special election, the most expensive House race ever is finally here. Democrat Jon Ossoff got the most votes in the primary, but narrowly missed the 50 percent threshold that would have given him the seat outright. So, now he`s facing Republican Karen Handle in tomorrow`s runoff, vying for a seat that hasn`t been held by a Democrat since Jimmy Carter was in the White House.
It`s taken a while to get to this point, considering that the primary in Georgia was on April 18th. Britain called for and held a national election in between those two, yet in some ways a national race is exactly what this local contest feels like.
For Democrats, the race is seen as a referendum on both the president and crucially the Republican health care bill, the most important piece of legislation of the Trump era, currently being crafted behind closed doors in the Senate.
While for Republicans, a win gives them room to continue supporting the president and a bit of breathing room before the 2018 midterms. Heading into election day, the polling average has the race looking like an absolute dead heat.
Joining me now from Georgia, MSNBC contributor Jason Johnson, journalism professor at Morgan State University; and The Washington Post reporter Robert Costa, also MSNBC and political analyst who is at a Jon Ossoff rally, the last one before election day.
And Robert, let me start with you. And I actually want to start with the article you did a few days ago about Republicans in this district. What were you hearing in interviewing the Republicans in this district, a district that Trump barely won but Tom Price, who`s being replaced, won by a huge margin?
ROBERT COSTA, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Republican voters I`ve spoken with here in the Atlanta suburbs, they are frustrated with the stalled agenda on Capitol Hill. They want to see tax cuts. They want to see a repeal of the Affordable Care Act. And they`re frustrated with the Republicans on Capitol Hill as much as they are with President Trump.
And it`s important to note that these are not Trump-style Republicans, these are more suburban Republicans who come out of the Tom Price mold, the Johnny Isaacson mold here in Georgia.
HAYES: And Jason, it`s interesting to me, because reading Robert`s piece, it is in some ways it`s a kind of traditional base for Republican Party. It`s affluent, white, southern, suburban. I mean, those are districts that tend to be very, very strongly Republican, and yet this one is a dead heat. What is your sense from being on the ground there?
JASON JOHNSON, MORGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: Well yeah. These are Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio Republicans who held their nose and voted for Trump.
I`ve been surprised at the lack of passion about either candidate. This is very much a national election. Usually the Republican Party, in particular, would want this to be about local issues. I heard people, they constantly wanted to talk about health care. They constantly wanted to talk about sort of national issues. It is actually a race that could be considered a referendum.
Look, it`s plus nine for Republicans. They probably should win it. But the fact that they`re this nervous and run some of the ads that they have says that it wouldn`t be surprising if Jon Ossoff pulled this off early tomorrow night.
HAYES: Well, and Robert part of the reason that so much money has poured in, it strikes me, is precisely your point, right. We got this Senate health care bill that`s being crafted in secret. The AHCA, which is polling at 17 percent. How big is health care been in the district, because the stakes to me on the fate of that legislation tomorrow seem quite tied.
COSTA: They`re intertwined, Chris.
And I`m here at Ossoff`s campaign office in Rosswell, Georgia. And there is energy, not so much about Russia or President Trump but it`s about stopping the Republican effort on health care.
HAYES: That`s interesting.
COSTA: When I`ve spoken to Democratic voters here, they know that they have to move forward. A spark here in Georgia could spark that effort to protect the current law.
HAYES: Yeah. And Jason, it is amazing that in some weird way it almost feels like this is right now there`s a kind of glide path because of McConnell`s secret strategy that a win there could be something, because health care, and correct me if I`m wrong, has been key to the ground upon which this campaign is contested.
JOHNSON: Right. Look, if Ossoff pulls this off tomorrow, it`s going to be a record stratch for every single Republican in the Senate. There have been 50,000 new people who have registered since the primary in April, people who didn`t vote in April who have registered now.
My guess is that most people here think those are probably people who are not happy with President Trump. They`re concerned about the health care bill. This is very much going to have national reverberations. And, again, while Democrats are nervous, they seem to believe they got a decent chance tomorrow.
HAYES: Robert, the money coming into the race is astounding and one of the things that`s interesting about the money is it`s asymmetrical in this sense, most of the Ossoff money raised through sort of traditional party apparatus in the campaign. Most of the Republican money has been outside the campaign, that`s come in, and you have got to think that that - Bernie Sanders early in the show was saying that Republicans know that there will be someone having their back. That`s been the case in this district so far.
COSTA: That`s true.
Ossoff`s raised $23 million. Karen Handel has raised far less than that, but she has been boosted by House Speaker Paul Ryan`s affiliated super PAC, the Congressional Leadership Fund. They have poured money into this district, they`ve put people on the ground on the Republican side.
Republicans know they have to protect this district. Ossoff might be a political novice, but he has got a lot of energy around his candidacy, because of health care and because of the stakes.
HAYES: And Jason, it seems like he is political novice, but he`s been very careful and that care so far has largely (inaudible) to his benefit. It in some ways it has become, because it`s so nationalized this sort generic Democratic, generic Republican, even though Karen Handel has a very long history and she`s got some issues herself.
JOHNSON: Oh yeah. I mean, look, this is not a district that sees this much attention. Chris, the intensity on the ground is bizarre. I have talked to volunteers, nonpartisan get out the vote volunteers, who have been spat on, had things thrown at them. I had a woman call the police on me today when I was just following canvassers. Everyone here wants this race to be a symbol of whatever it is they want this country to be going forward.
HAYES: Jason Johnson, Robert Costa, thanks for joining us.
As for tomorrow, polls close at 7:00 p.m. We`ll have complete race coverage at that time. That`s All In for this evening. The Rachel Maddow Show starts right now. Good evening, Rachel.
END
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. END