All in with Chris Hayes, Transcript 9/6/17 Hurricane Irma the most powerful thing ever

Paul Douglas, Matt Miller, Nick Ackerman

Date: September 6, 2017

Guest: Paul Douglas, Matt Miller, Nick Ackerman

CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HOST: – gateway where Chicago, Saint Louis, Kansas
City and Denver and other cities of war were concourses of a busy, united,
exciting America. I can see all of this in my mind. What I cannot see
looking all across this great country arising is the politician with the
guts to stand up and say this is the America I want to build. That`s
HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us. “ALL IN” with Chris Hayes
starts right now.



that are on the plate.

HAYES: A day after ending DACA, President Trump burns his own party.

TRUMP: Thank you very much Nancy, Chuck, I appreciate it very much.

HAYES: Tonight why Republicans are seething after the President cut a deal
with Nancy and Chuck and what it can mean for Dreamers.

TRUMP: Chuck and Nancy would like to see something happen, and so do I.

HAYES: Plus the Washington Post scoop. There was a Russian influence
operation by way of targeted Facebook ad. Democrats raise alarms over the
new Republican interference in the Russia investigation.

And about that storm.

TRUMP: Not good. Believe me, not good.

HAYES: The size, the scope and the science behind Hurricane Irma.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We`ve never seen a storm be this strong for this long.

HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.


HAYES: Good evening from New York, I`m Chris Hayes. The President of the
United States today handed Democrats what a senior Republican aide called a
“loaded gun” getting into essentially all of their demands on high stakes
legislation undercutting his own party and leaving conservatives fuming
beside themselves. The surprising move came one day after the President
said he would end the DACA program currently protecting about 800,000
undocumented immigrants brought to this country as children from
deportation. And then saying (INAUDIBLE) suggested – I mean, it might not
follow through, much more on that shortly.

But we begin with the day that let head spinning on Capitol Hill around
10:00 o`clock this morning. Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer put out a
statement saying they supported raising the debt limit for only three short
months. Republicans fearing, of course, the political fallout of having to
vote to raise the debt ceiling again in December were staunchly opposed to
that plan. House Speaker Paul Ryan who repeatedly used the debt limit
votes for his own political purposes under President Obama today disproves.


ridiculous idea. I hope that they don`t mean that. I think it`s
ridiculous and disgraceful that they want to play politics with the debt
ceiling at this moment when we have fellow citizens in need to respond to
these hurricanes so we do not strand them.


HAYES: All right you got that, ridiculous, disgraceful, not happening,
absolutely not happening. Ryan and his fellow Congressional Leader then
went to the White House to try to meet with President Trump and try and
hash out a debt ceiling plan.


TRUMP: Our country has a lot of great assets and we have some liabilities
that we have to work out. So, we`ll see if we can do that. I appreciate
everybody being here. Thank you very much. Thank you very much Nancy,
Chuck, I appreciate it very much.


HAYES: You`ll notice the President thanked the Democrats present by name
Nancy, Chuck but not the Republicans, you know, Paul and Mitch. And that
would a harbinger of things to come. Behind closed doors, NBC News
reports, Ryan and McConnell argued for an 18-month debt limit hike
insulating their members from having to vote for it again until after the
mid-term elections are over. And then when the Dems balked, Ryan and
McConnell came back and suggested six months. But amazingly the President
intervened to side with the Democrats, agreeing to the three-month hike
they proposed. The same hike Ryan had just called disgraceful. Near the
end of the meeting, Ivanka Trump just came by to say hello to the group
derailing the conversation and leaving Republicans leaders visibly annoyed.

This picture from inside the Oval Office showing Schumer and Trump looking
awfully chummy, a pretty good summation of how it all played out.
Congressional Republicans were livid. The President of the United States
just handed a loaded gun to Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, one senior
Republican aide told Politico. Another Senior GOP aide called the move
mystifying adding, maybe about the wall, I don`t know. None of it makes
any sense. Despite some Senate Republicans immediately coming out against
the deal, McConnell (INAUDIBLE) yes, saying he will support the three-month
hike and bring it up for a vote. McConnell specifically said Trump reached
the deal with House and Senate Democrats. But that`s not how Counselor to
the President, Kellyanne Conway described it to NBC News this afternoon.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Some Republicans on Capitol Hill say he defied the
party by striking a deal with Democrats. How do you respond to that?

There`s no deal struck with Democrats. This is on – it`s the deal on
behalf of the American people. Donald Trump – Donald Trump is a constant
deal maker.


HAYES: Speaking in North Dakota this afternoon, the President
characterized the deal as a success.


TRUMP: We had a great meeting with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and the
whole Republican Leadership group. And I`ll tell you what, we walked out
of there, Mitch and Paul and everybody, Kevin and we walked out and
everybody was happy.

Not too happy because you can never be too happy, but they were happy


HAYES: I`m joined now by someone who is very familiar with the complicated
relationships between the White House and Capitol Hill, Jim Manley, 21-year
veteran of the U.S. Senate and former Chief Spokesperson for Senate
Majority Leader Harry Reid. Jim, I thought of you when I saw this news
break as someone who`s been in the room for these deals and been around
them, what was your reaction when you heard this?

to tell you I can`t believe how poorly equipped this President is to
legislate. He is – I mean, art of the deal, give me a break. This is
amongst the worst deals I`ve ever seen in my entire life. That`s what I
think. He`s given Democrats two bites at the apple. They get to spend
what they want upfront, and then in December, they`re going to come back
and exact more out of the next vote. It`s just an incredibly bad deal.
And another thing to say, I mean, again, I`m used to Republican Presidents
poking it in the eye of the Democratic Senators I work for. And for him to
stick it to the Republican Leaders like this, again, it`s just absolutely

HAYES: Well, let me play devil`s advocate or at least suggest an
alteration interpretation. It`s only a bad deal if the President cares
about the outcomes but I don`t think he does. I mean, if the outcome he
cares about is screwing the people he`s currently angry, Paul Ryan and
Mitch McConnell it is a good deal of that respect from his perspective.

MANLEY: Absolutely correct in throwing them fact that again, it`s a
classic move of his to just kick the can down the road. And yes, you can
think, you know, at least in his mind that it`s not a bad deal. But the
reality is, given the way the political process works on Capitol Hill, he`s
just thrown another gut wrench into the process.

HAYES: You know, the other – the other thing here strikes me. This is –
this President has now bluffed a lot and it`s been called and at this
point, you have to understand that he`s just never going to actually do
what he says. So, in Phoenix, he said, we`re going to shut down the
government and build this wall. Not only has that ship sailed, I mean, he
basically just gave away those doors. How do you – if you`re Chuck
Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, how does that affect what you do next?

MANLEY: Wait and buy your time very, very carefully. You don`t negotiate
against yourself, you wait for this guy to make a move under extreme duress
as he struggles to try and get out of whatever problem he`s find himself
in. It`s – again, he`s back to himself into a quarter once again so it`s
going to be up to him to make the move, and he`s going to have to make a
move at some point.

HAYES: I want to bring in political reporter Sabrina Siddiqui to join the
conversation. She`s been covering this for the Guardian and has covered
Republicans in Capitol Hill. And Sabrina, I saw a lot of Republicans very
upset about this, and think tank statements from the sort of the
conservative right and anonymous Hill aides saying nasty things. But in
some ways, this is the Republican`s own doing because they can`t hold their
caucus together on key votes, right?

of the matter is on this must-pass legislation, not just the debt limit but
also in the past, spending bills, continuing resolutions to keep the
government running, Republicans have been unable to thwart the opposition
they face from those hard right Conservatives who comprise of the House
Freedom Caucus. And so they put themselves in this position of having to
rely on Democrats in order to advance a debt limit hike or a continuing
resolution. I also think, look, it`s very plausible that Trump who has
shown no understanding of how Capitol Hill works to not grasp he`s paving
the way for Democrats to potentially have leverage on potentially resolving
the status of Dreamers, on spending bill and stabilizing insurance markets
come December. But I also don`t think that he really much care. He`s
looking for something he can chalk up as a victory even if it means defying
Republican Leaders in Congress.

HAYES: There`s also – there`s some reporting that suggestions that the
President just got bored with how long the meeting was taking. And – I`m
not – that`s not – that was some of the reporting today. It was just –
there were some people in the room that felt like he lost interest and he
was like, come on, whatever, three months, let`s do it. But here`s the
thing, this only works for the Democrats. People were talking about all
this leverage the Democrats have, but that only works if they`re plausible
on the bluff too. And everyone knows, they`re going to roll over and vote
for the debt ceiling. So I don`t understand what all this talk. And
Democrats don`t play hardball on these must-pass votes the way that
McConnell and Ryan were able to during the Obama era.

SIDDIQUI: Right. And I think that ultimately Republicans did believe that
if they tied an 18-month debt limit hike to Hurricane Harvey relief,
emergency relief towards the victims, that it would be – that would be
unlikely that Democrats would actually when push comes to shove opposed
that measure. Now the real question is, do Democrats plan to extract
serious concessions or are they going to at the end of the day pass another
clean debt limit hike and just kick the can on the road further.

HAYES: So that`s key Jim because – that`s very clarifying, right. So
Paul Ryan wakes up this morning, he thinks he has them boxed in, right?
And you could see it in that statement. He thinks to himself OK, we got
this problem, we`re going to vote for the debt ceiling, we don`t like that.
We need Democratic votes. We`re going to attach it to Harvey Relief, and
what kind of heartless cruel monsters are going to vote against that. I`ve
got them, I`ve got them, walked through the Oval Office, Chuck and Nancy
say three months, take it or leave it, the President says yes. Ryan must
be beside himself.

MANLEY: Yes, I mean, for myself, I saw that statement this morning and I
was trying to figure out whether I should go public and criticize you know,
the attempt at a three-month extension. But it turns out the President
went for it.

HAYES: Wait, because you thought it was – you thought it was such a low
ball offer that it was – it was a ridiculous low ball offer?

MANLEY: Well, I don`t know about low ball, but I mean, it just – I
thought it would have been better to kick the can down the road, get the
debt limit extension through the next year and clear off the underbrush and
try to deal with the other stuff including DACA. Now it`s all back in a
one big mess. But you know, kudos to Pelosi and Schumer. They pulled it
off, and this President fell for it, hook line and sinker.

HAYES: So then the question, Sabrina, becomes always with this President
and we saw it yesterday with DACA. He makes a decision and then he sees
something as he watches cable news and he`ll get angry and see that enemy
and he`ll think oh, gosh this isn`t playing well. You know, the other
question I have is you know, people talking about this at the beginning
about pivot and he brought Heidi Heitkamp, Democratic Senator on the State
of North Dakota. But I also feel like there`s a chance he gets angry that
the coverage is that he got rolled and he tries to (INAUDIBLE) on it

SIDDIQUI: Yes, certainly as is always the case to Trump. He can always
change his mind tomorrow. We also don`t know at the end of the day if
there`s sufficient votes to actually pass this three-month extension given
a lot of the opposition that you`ve already heard from Republicans in the
rank and file. But I also want to point out that as far as Democrats are
concerned, they`ve branded Trump as politically toxic. They`ve likened him
to a fascist. They`ve obviously gone really hard on the fact he aligned
himself in some ways with white supremacists in his response to
Charlottesville. So they have a very limited band with when it comes to
actually working with this President.

HAYES: It`s a great point.

SIDDIQUI: I think that at the end of the day, they have this window of
opportunity with this must-pass legislation where they can say well, this
is part of broader negotiations. Obviously wanted to do something about
DACA recipient and to stabilize the health insurance markets to keep
ObamaCare in intact. But beyond that I really do think that they`ve made -
- they`ve really staked their ground when it comes to their opposition to
Trump and I don`t think that they really want to be associated as working
hand in hand with his administration.

HAYES: That`s a great point. That photo through the Oval Office window of
Chuck Schumer could be a problem for Chuck Schumer as much as it`s a
problem for anyone else. Jim Manley and Sabrina Siddiqui, thank you, both.

SIDDIQUI: Thank you.

HAYES: Today`s deal sets the stage for a huge showdown in December when
Congress will have to raise the debt limit again. And here`s the thing.
In that showdown, Democrats should have a huge amount of leverage since
Republican Leaders will likely need their votes and the GOP is the party
empowered with almost certainly take the blame if god forbids, the U.S.
defaults on its debts and shuts down the government. That, in turn, can
mean the survival of DACA, the Obama administration program protecting
nearly 800,000 undocumented brought to the U.S. as children from

President Trump already appears to be waffling on his plan to end it after
sending his Attorney General out yesterday to announce the President was
ending DACA in six months` time. Trump tweeted last night, Congress now
have six months to legalize DACA, something the Obama administration was
unable to do. If they can`t, I will revisit the issue. In light to that
tweet, the President was asked while in route to North Dakota today if he
was sending mixed signals.


TRUMP: No mixed signals at all. Congress, I really believe, wants to take
care of this situation. I really believe it. Even very conservative
members of Congress have seen it first-hand. If they don`t, we`re going to
see what we`re going to do. But I will tell you I really believe Congress
wants to take care of it. We discussed that also today and Chuck and Nancy
would like to see something happen, and so do I. And I said if we can get
something to happen, we`re going to sign it and we`re going to make it and
we`re going to make a lot of happy people.


HAYES: I`m joined by Democratic Congressman Luis Gutierrez of Illinois who
released a blistering statement over the White House decision on DACA
including calling Chief of Staff General John Kelly “a hypocrite who`s a
disgrace to the uniform he used to wear. What is your reaction to the last
24 hours from the President`s tweet to the negotiations in the White House
that opened the possibility of Democrats being able to sort of jam
Republicans with some sort of must pass legislation that legislatively
protects DACA recipients?

REP. LUIS GUTIERREZ (D), ILLINOIS: Well, Chris, first of all, the
Democratic Caucus is not in sync with making this agreement with the
President of the United States of America. I`ve spoken to dozens of
members of the Democratic Caucus. And let me just say this, Chris. You
know we fought hard and tenaciously to put 800,000 Dreamers in a very safe
place.I T was the one victory the Democrats were able to accomplish and we
did it by taking on our own President of the United States with no help
from the Republicans. So tonight there are hundreds of thousands of
Dreamers that are not over joyed, that not happy because they have not seen
a Democratic Party who could have used their leverage today to have said
there is no vote on the debt ceiling, there is no vote on the C.R. unless
we carry with it 800,000 Dreamers and put them in safe place.

HAYES: So you — by the way, I want to show that there`s a protest
tonight in a Trump Hotel in Washington, D.C. in which DACA recipients,
their supporters, organizers are protesting in the lobby of that hotel.
Take a listen to what that sounds like.


CROWD: No justice no peace. No justice, no peace.


CROWD: No justice, no peace. No justice no peace.



HAYES: So this is interesting to me, Congressman. I want to make sure I`m
tracking this. The sort of message from leadership today was we kicked
their butts, we rolled them, we`re going to have all the leverage in
December and we`ll work out something for the DACA recipients in the next
three months. And what you`re saying is no, you gave away your leverage
now, to make the demand now the day after the President ended this program.
Why do you not trust that something will develop in the next three months?

GUTIERREZ: Who can trust Donald Trump? Nobody can trust Donald Trump.
Donald Trump is a serial liar. Not because I say so because it`s been
proven to be a fact. You can`t sit down and negotiate with Donald Trump.
He says one thing one day and another thing another day. Today was the day
in principle – remember the Democratic Party has to stand for something.
When the CEO of Microsoft says you got to come through him to get to the
Dreamers, and he`s to the left of the Democratic Party, it`s a sad day for
the Democratic Party in this nation when the CEO of a multinational
corporation is standing firmer with the Dreamers than our own Democratic

HAYES: So here`s what I want to get from you. There`s these two theories
of Donald Trump on DACA. One is that he was basically jammed into this by
Sessions and say he wouldn`t defend the executive order in court and that
he essentially did this in this kind of halfway so that he could – he
really doesn`t want to it but he`s doing it by himself. And the other is
that take him at his word. He`s ending DACA because he promised to end
DACA and his base wants to see those people deported. You clearly are of
the latter party. I mean, you think this is a thing he wants to do and has
to be fought on it or he`s not going to relent.

GUTIERREZ: You know, Chris, I wish you could spend more time with me on
the Judiciary Committee where I sit. If there`s one glue, if there`s one
thing that keeps the Republican Party together is their xenophobia and
their anti-immigrant (INAUDIBLE). I have seen it. Remember we passed DACA
– I mean, we passed the DREAM Act in the House of Representatives in 2010
with literally five Republicans voting for it. And the five Republicans
that were voting for it were five Republicans that were not coming back to
the House of Representatives. And then we went to Senate, and when we get
to the Senate, 55 Senators for closure. Who leads the charge to stop the
vote from happening, none other than Jeff Sessions. And we`re supposed to
believe the man who stopped the DREAM Act from passing in the Senate and
finding its way to desk of President Barack Obama, is now telling us
yesterday oh, by the way, we`re now looking for a legislative solution.
What height of hypocrisy – I mean, what do you take us for? I just cannot

Look, everybody says – so this is Paul Ryan on the one hand, I feel so
sorry. I`m so in love with those Dreamers, I wish I could do something for
them. Oh, they have all my sympathy. And what do the Democrats respond
with? Oh, we feel so sorry, we`re so sympathetic with them. We`re in
solidarity. Damn it, it`s about somebody do something about it and pay
some political capital. And I`m going to say this. Look, the debt ceiling
has to be on the table, the C.R. has to be on the table and Republicans
because we got to break the glue that keeps them together or we`ll never
free the Dreamers or have an immigration policy that`s fair and just.

HAYES: Well, this is a really fascinating perspective. And I think it`s
important for people to hear this, and I`m really curious to see how this
is going to play out because there is now this window. It looks like
they`ll have the votes for this. But everything you`re saying is going be
operable. Congressman Luis Gutierrez, thanks for making time tonight.

GUTIERREZ: Thank you.

HAYES: Still to come, new charges that Republicans are trying to undermine
the Mueller investigation, and an old Trump ally on the Hill is back at the
center of the controversy. That story in two minutes.


HAYES: Devin Nunes is back. When last we saw, the Congressman back in
April, the California Republican who Chairs the House Intelligence
Committee was forced to remove himself from the Russia investigation after
it was revealed he had been colluding with the White House in an
occasionally farcical attempt to launder information that reportedly
bolstered the President`s claim of having been wiretapped by his
predecessor Barack Obama. Now at the time, that claim was wildly thought
to be false, and now we have proof. President Trump`s own Justice
Department concluding that there`s no evidence the former president
wiretapped Trump Tower. But Devin Nunes is not done. Last night, we
reported that the House Intelligence had subpoenaed the FBI and the Justice
Department for all documents related to the infamous dossier containing
unverified claims about the President`s relationship to Russia, subpoenas
that according to the leading Democrat in the Committee were intended to
discredit the dossier`s author.


REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D), CALIFORNIA: I think it`s part of an effort to
discredit the author of the dossier and I think there`s a view if they can
discredit Christopher Steele, they can discredit the whole Russia
investigation for the whole Russia involvement of our election. It make
little sense to the subpoenaing the Department when we haven`t voluntarily
asked for the records. It`s also concerning when there`s an apparent
double standard between what we are willing to subpoena in the case of the
Department and what we`re not willing to subpoena in the case of the White


HAYES: Now, despite having withdrawn from the Russia investigation, Nunes
is inserting himself into this latest dispute following up on the subpoenas
with a letter to the Attorney General and the FBI Director dated September
1st but just made public. And in this letter which is signed by Nunes
alone, he threatens to hold the Attorney General and the FBI Director in
contempt of Congress. Congressman Joaquin Castro is a Democratic Member of
the House Intelligence Committee who called for Nunes to recuse himself
from the Russia investigation on this program back in March. Congressman,
what is your response to your colleague`s letter?

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO (D) TEXAS: Well, first I agree with Adam Schiff that
this is a real break in what we believe was agreed upon protocol which is
when we wanted to get information, we would ask for voluntary submission or
request for production. If the party was not cooperative at that point,
then we would consider a subpoena. And so all of us I think were surprised
that Devin Nunes and the Republicans went straight for subpoenas on this
dossier. And I do think that it`s their attempt to undermine the entire
investigation. Unfortunately for them, I think there`s a good chance that
it could backfire. And they`re also antagonizing the Department of Justice
and the FBI.

HAYES: Why do you think it could backfire?

CASTRO: Well, you know, because – you know, there`s obviously only so
much I could say, Chris, because a lot of it is classified. You know, they
may have a hard time achieving their goal of disproving what they`re trying
to disprove.

HAYES: You mean the dossier?

CASTRO: Right.

HAYES: Why are they so obsessed with the dossier?

CASTRO: That`s a great question. I don`t know. It`s hard to say that.
This kind of came out of nowhere. Again, we were hardly consulted on it,
and we certainly didn`t agree to it. you know, perhaps they see it as the
most salacious part if they think if they can make it that center piece of
this entire investigation, then it looks like something frivolous perhaps
but again, I think there`s a good chance it will backfire on them.

HAYES: I was under the impression that the Chair, Chairman Nunes had sort
of recused himself – I don`t know if there`s sort of the official term for
what he did but he was stepping back from the – from the inquiry. This
seems to me a violation of whatever he had agreed to do. Do you read it as

CASTRO: I do. And all of us, I think members of Congress and the American
public had understood Devin`s position to be one of refusal, complete
recusal. And over the last few months, he has slowly gotten back into the
Russia investigation. Now, ultimately it`s Speaker Ryan`s decision about
what role the Chairman has in this investigation. And so really I put the
final, you know, decision or blame, however, you want to call it, with Paul
Ryan in allowing this to go on.

HAYES: There was a statement from the Senate Chair, Richard Burr, where he
compared what they`re doing over there to nothing like I has been done
since Watergate. And I wonder, do you feel confident in your own Committee
on the House side?

CASTRO: Yes. I mean, the investigation under the new Chairman for the
investigative part of this, the Russia part of this, Conway, had been
coming along fairly well. We`ve been scheduling witnesses, interviewing
them, receiving many documents and production. So, many of us felt like it
was moving along fairly well, but every once in a while, you see a curve
ball like this come along that`s a real distraction to the investigation.

HAYES: Since I have you here Congressman, I know that the issue of DACA is
very close to your heart. I believe your mother was an immigrant from

CASTRO: My grandmother.

HAYES: Grandmother, sorry. You talk about that story, and I know that you
feel strongly about DACA. And I want you respond to Congressman Gutierrez
who basically accused Democratic Party leadership of selling out DACA
recipients with this deal today. Do you agree with him?

CASTRO: First of all, Luis has been a very passionate champion of DACA
recipients and Dreamers for a very long time. And I think all of us are on
the same page that ultimately we want a clean bill that is the DREAM Act,
that is supportive of these young people and allows them to stay. What
you`re going to see in the next few days really among Democrats – and what
you`ve seen is folks trying to hash out a strategy. So of course at times
there`s going to be disagreements on how to proceed. But I think
ultimately everybody understands that we`re on the same page, and we want
the same thing for these young people.

HAYES: All right, Congressman Joaquin Castro thank you for joining me.

CASTRO: Thank you.

HAYES: Still to come, Donald Trump Jr. faces his first formal questioning
over his contact with Russians during the campaign. Matt Miller and Nick
Akerman on what the son of the President is facing ahead.



TRUMP: Should I bring Ivanka up? Sometimes they`ll say, you know, he
can`t be that bad a guy. Look at Ivanka. Come on up, honey. She`s so
good. She wanted to make the trip. She said dad, can I go with you. She
actually said daddy, can I go with you. I like that. Daddy, can I go with
you? I said, yes you can.

HAYES: That was an aside during President Trump`s remarks in North Dakota
today. The speech he was there for is meant to promote the White House tax
plan, which is a little awkward since, after seven months, the White House
still hasn`t released the most basic details of its tax plan. But the
President made a promise about that today using a very familiar unit of
measurement. A thing one, one thing two montage is ahead.


HAYES: That is what it sounded like when the strongest storm ever recorded
in the Atlantic Ocean roared onto the island of St. Maarten earlier today.

Hurricane Irma made landfall as a category 5 causing massive damage with
sustained winds of 185 miles per hour. At least three people were killed
in the Caribbean. Right now, the storm is passing close to Puerto Rico,
causing heavy rains and floods. It`s projected to pass over the Bahamas
and could hit Florida this weekend, prompting mandatory evacuations in low
lying areas.

Hurricane Irma is so massive, its power has even astonished scientists who
are used to watching these sorts of things, as Taylor Trogden (ph) of the
National Hurricane Center put it, I am at a complete and utter loss for
words looking at Irma`s appearance on Satellite imagery.

And Hurricane Irma is not alone. Hurricane Jose is coming up right behind
Irma, and Hurricane Katia is churning in the Gulf of Mexico right there on
the left of your screen.

Meteorologist Paul Douglas is here to explain why Hurricane Irma is so
enormous and what we can expect.

Paul, they say that this is the largest one ever recorded in the Atlantic.
Is it just essentially luck of the draw? Why has this gotten so big and so


The water temperatures in the Atlantic are a few degrees warmer than
average. Upper level winds are light. All the ingredients converging to
turn this into a true super storm. There is no such thing as a category 6.
If there was, this could arguably be considered a category 6 hurricane.
Sustained winds are still 185. And the winds have been above 180 for 33
hours now. That`s a record in the Atlantic. The previous record was
Allan, which hit back in 1980, 18 hours above 180 miles per hour.

So, if you look – you can`t just take a snapshot. You have to integrate
over time. And if you look at the size and the intensity and the
persistence – I mean folks in Florida and even coastal Georgia and the
Carolinas need to take this very seriously. This is shaping up to be the
most expensive year, possibly the deadliest year for hurricanes since 2005.
That`s the year that Katrina hit and Rita hit and Wilma hit.

The drought is over with a vengeance.

HAYES: You know, the Harvey hurricane, it wasn`t the winds, of course,
that were so destructive there. And in fact it hit with wind speeds
considerably lower. But it sort of hung around and hugged the Gulf Coast
there in Houston and dumped a ton of water. Here, we`re looking at – I
mean, those islands that have just been through this. And the earlier
reports we`re getting is that when 185 mile per hour winds hit anywhere,
that`s going to do an unbelievable amount of damage, right?

DOUGLAS: Absolutely. Chris, this is roughly equivalent to an EF4, even
EF5 tornado, one that`s 40 miles wide. That`s what`s coming through.

The winds around the eye, what we call the eye wall, that doughnut that`s
right adjacent to the column eye, that is what causes the damage. And, you
know, unless you`re living in a home or some sort of a building that is
concrete and steel reinforced, stone brick, you know, traditional wood
framed homes just can`t hold up to those kinds of winds.

With Harvey, you`re right, it was the rain. A year`s worth of rain in four
days. Harvey stalled for five days, something I haven`t seen.

I didn`t think it could get worse than Harvey. I was wrong. Irma is
almost an order of magnitude of dangerous, not because of the rain. This
thing is going to keep on moving. It`s not going to stall. But the storm
surge and the wind damage – and it`s forecast to go right up the east

Miami floods now on a clear day, no storm required, because the water has
risen and land subsidence – Miami is a sitting duck.

HAYES: So, you and I have talked about this before. So, there`s a lot of
argument in the
literature about climate modeling, climate change and hurricanes. But what
we do now is water is that the water is on average warmer and that produces
more energy, and the big thing we know is sea levels are higher and a place
like Miami, elaborate on that a little bit. Why is Miami so exposed at this
particular moment given what`s going on with the climate and this

DOUGLAS: First of all, you can`t build a wall around Miami. You can around
Manhattan, but the fact that you have limestone, porous rock, the water
literally comes underneath.

And so because you don`t have any significant elevation, there is no higher
terrain in the Miami area, and so, you know, we`re really setting ourselves
up for a major disaster.

People think, all right Andrew came through in `92. That was a category 5,
we survived that. We rebuilt. It wasn`t a big deal for downtown Miami and
Miami Beach, but Andrew was a puny storm
compared to Irma, and the center of the storm tracked well south of
downtown Miami and Miami Beach.

We`ll see where the core of this storm goes. It may be like Matthew which
staged just offshore last year. If that happens we`ll dodge a bullet. If
the eye of the storm tracks right over Miami or just to the west of Miami
or Fort Lauderdale, then we`ll have a worst-case scenario. The full force
and fury of that storm surge, 10, 12, 14 feet of water, and to keep its
gain. It could be a real mess and people need to take a very seriously and
get out of dodge with days to spare.

HAYES: Fingers crossed it does not track in that direction, and fingers
crossed for everyone who is already experiencing that storm in it`s path.

Paul Douglas, thanks for joining me.

DOUGLAS: You bet.

HAYES: There`s a chance that during the election you saw political ads on
Facebook bought and paid for by a Russian backed entity. New reporting on
that coming up.

And, tonight`s Thing One, Thing Two starts in the not to distant future.


HAYES: Thing One tonight, you`ll remember Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin
confirmed last week the White House would outsource its tax plan to
congress, saying the administration would
stay engaged as congress actually writes the plan.

That`s after the White House promised for at least six months it was
writing its own tax plan that was coming along really well.


massive tax plan, it`s coming along really well. it`ll be submitted in the
not too distinct future.

STEVEN MNUCHIN, TREASURY SECRETARY: We want to get this done by the August

TRUMPS: We`re introducing a tax plan.

Before we do the tax which is actually very well finalized.

Our tax reform and tax plan is coming along very well. It`ll be out very

The tax cut is going to be major. It`s going to be simple.

One of the largest tax cuts in history.

And the whole tax plan is wonderful.


HAYES: Today in a tax reform stump speech in North Dakota, the president
gave a new
deadline on his quote, “wonderful tax plan”.


TRUMP: We`re going to get into great detail over the next two weeks, but
we`re working on it with congress now and coming up with very exacting


HAYES: Over the next two weeks, where have we heard that before? That`s
Thing Two in 60 seconds.



TRUMP: We`re going to get into great detail over the next two weeks, but
we`re working on it
with congress now and coming up with very exacting numbers.


HAYES: Exacting. So today the president promised details on his tax plan
in the quote, “next two weeks”, one of his favorite units of time.


TRUMP: We`re going to be announcing something, I would say over the next
two or three weeks that will be phenomenal.

We`ll be reporting back sometime over the next two weeks as to NAFTA and
what we`re going to be doing about it.

I`ll be making a big decision on the Paris Accord over the next two weeks.

And the minds are starting to open up. We`re having a big opening in two

We`ll be having a big conference in the about two weeks to let everyone
know how well we`re
doing. Tremendous progress has been made.

We`re going to have a news conference in two weeks on that fight.

Wiretap covers a lot of different things. I think you`re going to find some
very interesting items
coming to the forefront over the next two weeks.



HAYES: There`s been a lot of talk and coverage of Russian influence during
the presidential campaign other than hacking DNC e-mails and the John
Podesta e-mail inbox. But, it`s often been quite murky and very hard to pin
down any concrete sense.

But today we got actual data from people in a position to know. Officials
at Facebook that a
Russian entity was in fact buying issue ads during the 2016 campaign.

Facebook officials reported that they traced the add sales, totaling just
$100,000 to a Russian troll farm with a history of pushing pro-Kremlin
propaganda. Continuing to quote here, most of the ads focus on pumping
political divisive issues such as gun rights and immigration fears as well
as gay rights and racial discrimination. a

It`s not a lot of money, but it also feels like it could be just the
beginning of what we`ll ultimately learn about this effort. The report that
a Russian firm was able to target political messages id likely to fuel
pointed questions from investigators about whether the Russians received
guidance from people in the United States.

Meanwhile, for the first time ever the president`s very own son, Donald
Trump, Jr., will meet with the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow.

That`s next.


HAYES: For the first time since it was revealed that Donald Trump Jr. and
other Trump campaign officials attended a June 2016 meeting with a Russian
lawyer, promising dirt on Hillary
Clinton, Donald Trump Jr. will meet with the Senate Judiciary Committee

The meeting is officially with staff of the judiciary committee, though
several senators plan
to intend to ask direct questions according to the Washington Post.

Senator Christopher Coons said the interview will be a good opportunity to
better understand what was going on in that meeting and to better
understand what was the thinking of core members of the president`s team.

That June 9th, 2016 meeting included Don Jr., campaign manager Paul
Manafort, Jared
Kushner and the Russian lawyer as well as the meeting`s broker, publicist
Rob Goldstone, who had promised incriminating information on Clinton via
the Russian government. Quoting his email to Don Jr., “Part of Russia and
its government`s support for Mr. Trump.”

To which, Don Jr. replied, “If it`s what you say, I love it, especially
later in the summer.”

Matt Miller is the former chief spokesman for the Justice Department and
MSNBC Justice and
Security Analyst. Nick Akerman, a former Watergate prosecutor, they both
join me now.

Let me ask you from the sort of attorney standpoint, what is Don Jr.
walking into tomorrow?

NICK AKERMAN, FMR WATERGATE PROSECUTER: He is walking into a category
5 hurricane. There are so many things swirling around him.

First he`s got this false story that his father devised for him to give to
the public about the
fact that he just thought this meeting was about adoption of Russian
children, and that nothing happened about it. Without responding at all to
the notion that he was supposed to get documents incriminating Hillary

HAYES: Right.

AKERMAN: And on top of all that, you`ve got this dossier that`s out there
that just keeps
getting more and more credible, because that dossier talks about, in fact,
the Russian government supporting the Trump campaign.

It talks about Dmitry Peskov, who is the person that Micheal Cohan now we
know went to to talk about during the campaign to build another Trump Tower
in Moscow.

You`ve got all of these facts that keep swirling up, swirling around, just
like a hurricane, that are really going to impact Donald Jr. in a big way
because ultimately he`s going to have to give this story under oath.

HAYES: Right. So, right now Matt he`s not giving it under oath tomorrow.
It will be one of those long staff questioning sessions.

How much leeway does that give him?

him any. It`s not technically under oath, but the penalties of perjury are
the same.

If you lie to congressional investigators in an interview it is the same
penalty, charged as the same statue as lying to an FBI agent.

And it`s an important point because one of the things that Don Jr. has
inherited from his father is
a lack of faithfulness to the truth. You see it all the time in his public
statements. He won`t get away with that if he goes into his interview
tomorrow and doesn`t tell the truth.

One of the problems he has is this is not the only time he`s going to be
forced to testify. Dianne Feinstein said today they`re going to ask him to
come back to a public hearing, and you have to think that Bob Mueller is
going to call on him before the grand jury because that meeting in June is
such an important fact to get all the information about.

The final thing I`ll say is, the really big challenge for him is he is not
the only person who
attended that meeting, he is not the only account that investigators will
have access to. In fact, we know Rinat Akhmetshin, the Russian-American
lobbyist has already been to the grand jury and testified for several hours
and he`s obviously someone with no apparent interests of the president to

HAYES: That`s a great point. So, you`re not just spinning about a story
about what you were doing alone in your car. You`ve got people that they
can cross-reference.

There`s two loose threads out of that meeting that I think of the most. One
is the e-mail chain suggests the possibility, strongly suggests that Don
Jr. gets on the phone with Emin Agalarov, the pop singer, son of the real
estate developer, the person that Rob Goldstone represents, gets on the
phone to have a broader conversation about what exactly is going on with
all of this, and if that`s true, I want to
know what they talked about.

AKERMAN: Right, and that`s not in the e-mails. If you look at the e-mail
chains, there`s this big gap where you just don`t know what they talked

HAYES: Right. They coordinated back and forth to say, I`ll have him call
you. Oh, he`s on stage right now. And then it`s, okay, thank you for
setting that up. Okay, well.

AKERMAN: But, that takes you back to the dossier that talks about all of
this information that the Russians have been gathering on Hillary Clinton.
It just dovetails.

HAYES: Right. So that dossier, again, which we talked about congressman
Castro, which the Republicans are obsessed with, they view it as manifestly
ridiculous. It has been denied by many of the parties involved. It is
unconfirmed. I have to say all that because it`s true, but also to caution
folks that have read it that it`s not some description of reality, as far
as we know.

That said, there are lots of things that were suggested there that have
subsequent events made
look more credible.

AKERMAN: And made look true. They just dovetail perfectly. The story, the
June 4th e-mail talks about the fact that the Russians are supporting the
Trump campaign. The dossier says the exact same thing.

HAYES: And the second big loose thread, Matt, that I`m really obsessed
with, this is the thing I think of the most is, what happened after the
meeting. Even if you take their story at face value, this meeting got set
up, eight people go in there, the president`s son, his son-in-law, the
campaign chair,
and told to be a total bust where they prattled on about adoption.

And then, what? No one sent an e-mail? No one called the president? That to
me is the biggest unanswered question about that meeting.

MILLER: I think there are two big unanswered questions really to follow

One is did Natalia Veselnitskaya, this Russian lawyer, leave a document
behind. Veselnitskaya has said publicly that she did. That obviously will
be a big question. If she left a document, what did
that document say and what did Don Jr. do with it.

Then the other big question is, what did he talk to his father about. Did
he tell his father, did the
eventual President of the United States know about this meeting either in
advance or did he know
about it afterwards, what kind of information did he have about what they
discussed. That is a huge question.

HAYES: The reason that`s so huge, Nick, is that`s where you get the
intersection on what happened on the collusion front, or the possibility of
it, and the obstruction question, right? Because Mueller seems to be
focused on, according to reporting, president`s role in writing that wildly
misleading statement by his son about the meeting.

AKERMAN: Yeah. And then on top of it all you`ve got the whole question
about the e-mails that were hacked out of Hillary Clinton`s campaign. What
happened to those? It`s no coincidence that two weeks after that meeting,
these e-mails start turning up on the internet.

HAYES: The DNC e-mails.

AKERMAN: The DNC e-mails, right. Were those e-mails that were turned over
at that June 9th
meeting? We don`t know.

HAYES: Okay. But that would be a huge – I mean, that would be amazingly
smoking gun and somewhat strange thing to do to give them a thumb drive –

AKERMAN: I don`t think it would be strange at all.

HAYES: But that is not established by the facts so far.

AKERMAN: No, but if you look at the events that occur afterwards, it
certainly suggests that`s what happened. If you look at the events that
occurred before, it suggests what happened.

HAYES: We should also say that he says, I would love it if it`s later in
the summer, which is exactly what happened.

Matt Miller and Nick Akerman, thank you both for joining me.

That is All In for this evening. The Rachel Maddow Show starts right now.

Good evening, Rachel.


Copy: Content and programming copyright 2017 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Copyright 2017 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are
protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced,
distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the
prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter
or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the