Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: June 18, 2018 Guest: Dianne Feinstein, Pramila Jayapal, McKay Coppins, Ai-Jen Poo, Dorian Warren, Natasha Bertrand Rosalind Helderman
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HOST: As Albert Camus wrote, "perhaps we cannot prevent this world from being a world in which children are tortured but we can reduce the number of tortured children. And if you don`t help us, who else in the world can help us do this? That`s HARDBALL for now, and it really is. "ALL IN" with Chris Hayes starts right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST: Tonight on ALL IN.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They could be murderers and thieves and so much else.
HAYES: A moral crisis in America.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: The President has the ability stop this if he`d like.
HAYES: Thousands of children taken from their parents at the border.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a jail.
HAYES: As the White House defends their horrific policy.
JEFF SESSIONS, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL: They not put in jail of course. They`re taken care of.
HAYES: Tonight, the ever-changing rationale from the administration.
KIRSTJEN NIELSEN, SECRETARY, UNITED STATES HOMELAND SECURITY: We have to do our job. We will not apologize for doing for our job.
HAYES: And Senator Dianne Feinstein on her effort to stop this from happening.
SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), CALIFORNIA: I can`t believe that this is happening in the United States.
HAYES: Then, new details about the anti-Clinton leaks from the FBI.
REP. DEVIN NUNES (R-CA), CHAIRMAN, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Good FBI agents brought this to our attention.
HAYES: And guess who got offered Russian dirt on a Hillary Clinton.
ROGER STONE, ADVISER, TRUMP CAMPAIGN: This guy shows up wearing a MAGA hat and a Trump t-shirt. He makes this offer.
HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Good evening from New York, I`m Chris Hayes. This is what it sounds like. New audio recording first obtained by ProPublica reveals for the first time what the Trump administration`s policy of separating children from their parents at the border actually sounds like.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Daddy!
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mommy!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (Speaking Spanish)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MELBER: That audio came from Civil Rights Attorney Jennifer Harbury who says it was recorded by a client who wants from an anonymous out of fear of retaliation. The audio has not been authenticated by NBC News. But according to ProPublica it was recorded last week inside a detention facility run by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The children on that recording who appeared to have been at that facility for less than 24 hours are reportedly estimated to be between four and ten years old. What is being done to them has set off a moral crisis, a moral emergency in this country as the Trump administration lies and obfuscates about its child separation policy. The White House demanding that we accept a number of conflicting claims all at once. One that the policy is an effective deterrent to other families seeking entry to the U.S., two, that it`s sanctioned by the Bible, three that it`s actually a bad policy imposed by Democrats, and four that the policy simply does not exist. That`s according to Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen who tweeted last night we do not have a policy of separating families at the border period. Today, however, she defended that policy from the White House podium.
NIELSEN: It is the exclusive product of loopholes in our federal immigration laws that prevent illegal immigrant minors and family members from being detained and removed to their home countries. In other words, these loopholes create a functionally open border. Apprehension without detention and removal is not border security. The President likewise has tried to have it both ways blaming the policy on Democrats while simultaneously defending it as necessity.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I say it`s very strongly the Democrats fault. Their obstruction, yes, they`re really obstructionist and they are obstructing. The United States will not be a migrant camp and it will not be a refugee holding facility, it won`t be.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: The President appears to be lying to the public about intentional decisions that he made and that his administration took. And we know they made those decisions on purpose because we on this very show exclusively reported way back in the February of 2017 that the Department of Homeland Security was considering a plan to separate women and children after they`ve been detained. At the same time, just shortly after we brought you that reporting, then-Secretary John Kelly laid out explicitly the rationale.
JOHN KELLY, WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: Yes, I am considering in order to deter more movement along this terribly dangerous network. I am considering exactly that. They will be well cared for as we deal with their parents.
WOLF BLITZER, HOST, CNN: But you understand how that looks to the average person who is --
KELLY: It`s more important to me, Wolf, to try to keep people off of this awful network.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced with great fanfare at a public press conference that we played video of a new "zero tolerance policy for unauthorized migrants in April." And last week we here at ALL IN again obtained internal Border Patrol documents appearing to refer to the plan calling it a "prosecution initiative" and tabulating the statistics from it. White House Adviser Stephen Miller explained the initiative in an on-the-record interview with The New York Times "it was a simple decision by the administration to have a zero-tolerance policy for illegal entry period. The message is that no one is exempt from immigration law." Let`s bring in NBC News National Security and Justice Reporter Julia Ainsley and MSNBC Political Analyst Philip Rucker White House Bureau Chief for the Washington Post. Philip, I`ll start with you. I believe I saw you today in that briefing with Nielsen. I mean, the White House really is simultaneously saying we didn`t do this and here`s why we`re doing it. I mean, sometimes in the same sentence.
PHILIP RUCKER, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, and it`s just not true that they didn`t do this. This is a decision by the White House to implement this policy of enforcing the law of having border agents down in Texas and elsewhere separating families, detaining children in what amount frankly the metal cages. And this is a decision that they`ve been implementing for several weeks now and the President has the authority and the power as President to stop it if he chooses.
HAYES: Julia, you`ve been reporting on this for a while. I mean, you also report on the internal deliberations and the fact that this was something people talked about, memos were written about, plans were, and they debated about what would a sort of moral monstrosity this would be. It`s kept them from doing it for quite some time.
JULIA AINSLEY, NBC NEWS NATIONAL SECURITY AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Right. I mean, the factors at play here under the Trump administration are the same factors that were at play under the Obama administration when they saw that surge in 2014 of women coming with their children. They tried to keep them all in one place and you can`t hold children longer than 20 days so when they released to the parents, they`ll release them with their children because you couldn`t hold them that long. Their answer to that was ankle monitor so that they could monitor people before they came to court for their asylum hearings. In this case, they`ve taken a different approach and that is to separate them of course because you can hold the parents longer while you release the children. But it is also true that they -- there is more underlying this. As you pointed out from that reporting over a year ago, Chris, this is not just because they want to be tough on illegal border crossings, it is because they are going after this specific population, families who want to claim asylum. They had a hard time figuring out how to solve that and they decided that this would be the greatest deterrent. Whether or not that is actually working, it`s hard to say. We saw the numbers from May when this started in early May, the numbers are still very high. A lot of people are doing the threat assessment and deciding that it`s harder to stay at home.
HAYES: I just watched an interview the Atlantic did with a man gentleman who`s on a bridge is seeking asylum and he`s been turned back you know, 15 times who was shot seven times, beaten to within an inch of his life and lost an eye. He is camped out on the bridge because he has made a determination that whatever happens to him it is better than where he`s coming from. And anyone who`s making this journey is not doing it lightly precisely because of how dangerous the entire thing is. Julia.
AINSLEY: Yes, so I spoke today with former USCIS Director and former directors of different agencies under the Obama administration who encountered these same problems and they say precisely the reason why they didn`t go to this extreme. Number one, is it`s a humanitarian issue but that they were fleeing such conditions that you just laid out, Chris, that they knew that they didn`t need a deterrent policy like this at the border because there really was nothing they could do that would be bad enough from what they were fleeing at home.
HAYES: Well, that`s right. I mean, essentially you get into a competition with MS-13 over how poorly you can treat some people so that you could effectively deter them which is where we`re headed. The politics of this, Philip, are interesting to me that all the polling today has this is about a 66-27 oppose, right in that area. Congressional Republicans freaking out, Lindsey Graham, John McCain, everyone, Ted Cruz introducing a bill to stop it. Every sort of endangered House member the Republican side saying they hate it. What is going on politically right now between Congress and the White House?
RUCKER: Well, the attitude in the White House is very different at least in the Oval Office where the President is defiant. He thinks any time we`re talking about immigration it is a political win for him. Remember, he`s so concerned about losing his base. This is why again and again he returns to immigration. He talks about the border wall. He talks about rounding up immigrants and being tough on them in enforcing these laws and tough on criminals. And he talks about MS-13 gang members because he`s trying to secure his political base and he`s in continual fear that he`s going to be seen as weak somehow on immigration and the border. And so he`s digging in here. He`s being counseled by Stephen Miller, his Senior Policy Adviser who`s very much a hard-line proponent of this policy as well as the Attorney General Jeff Sessions and there`s no indication that he`s going to back away. I was talking to one senior official last night in the White House who said -- you know, I said is the President reacting to these images to what he`s seeing on T.V.? We know he watches so much T.V. news, is he reacting to this in an emotional way? And this official said no, he thinks that the media is cherry-picking these images and the President`s aides are actually bringing him pictures showing these detained children smiling and playing games and running around outside and he thinks it`s a much happier environment than is being portrayed in the media.
HAYES: Julia?
AINSLEY: I mean, that -- first of all I could take a moment just to absorb that but it actually aligns with some things I`m hearing from DHS. I was talking to a senior official there today this morning he said, things were imploding over here. And I said, what do you mean? Is there going to be a change in policy? We were getting ready for these briefings today by Nielsen at the National Sheriffs Association and then again she came to the White House. I was thinking, are they going to give an announcement that could change this policy. Instead, they said no, we`re digging in our heels because we think the problem is messaging. The American people just don`t understand.
HAYES: Well, I have -- I have a solution for everyone. The President and Stephen Miller should go down the border and take the role of actually physically separating two and three and four-year-olds from their parents while the cameras roll and America could decide whether that`s the thing that we should do, whether it is, in fact, a good scene or not. Julie Ainsley and Philip Rucker, thank you both.
AINSLEY: Thank you, Chris.
HAYES: Every single Senate Democrat has now signed on to a bill introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein to bar the Trump Administration from splitting up families at the border while some Republicans have spoken out against the policy. Not a single one has endorsed Feinstein`s legislation. Nevertheless, the President blamed Democrats for the current crisis.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: If the Democrats would sit down instead of obstructing, we could have something done very quickly, good for the children, good for the country. What`s happening is so sad, is so sad and it can be taken care of quickly, beautifully and we`ll have safety.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Senator Dianne Feinstein is a Democrat from California, Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senator, you have a bill that would "take care of it." What`s your reaction of the President`s words today?
FEINSTEIN: Big crocodile tears. There`s no bill that merits this, that orders this. It`s his order. He can stop it in a minute if he chooses to do so. And I guess that`s one of the things that annoys me the most. You have nearly 2,500 children that have been separated from their families, from their mother and no one knows where they are. I think it`s just terrible. It`s very upsetting and it`s never happened before. And then the President gets on T.V. and really it`s dreadful.
HAYES: Let me ask you this. The -- there are 49 co-sponsors now the entirety of the Democratic caucus if I`m not mistaken.
FEINSTEIN: That`s right.
HAYES: No Republicans on it so far. What are they saying when you approach them?
FEINSTEIN: Well, they`re looking at it. We have three or four who are taking a good look at it and I hope they would. I mean, I`m open to changes. It`s pretty benign. It`s very simple. It just prohibits the taking of a child except for certain specific circumstances which are laid out in the legislation.
HAYES: I want to play you what Susan Collins said about why she`s not co- sponsoring your legislation. She`s obviously a person I think people would anticipate would be a possible get for you. I want you to listen and give your response to her reasons. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R), MAINE: Her legislation is not the answer. It`s far too broad. It would essentially prevent arrest within 100 miles of the border even if the person has committed a serious crime or suspected of terrorist activity so that is not the answer. What I have done is worked with a bipartisan group of Senators. I think we should try again, we should not give up, it is important that we enact immigration reform.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Is that true?
FEINSTEIN: I`m sorry, is what true?
HAYES: That it would not allow arrest within 100 miles of the border even for serious --
FEINSTEIN: I have no problem. If that bothers Susan, we`ll take it out. That`s easy. That`s easy.
HAYES: So then tell me this, what is the endgame here from your perspective? It seems to me that the White House quite explicitly is essentially using these children as hostages to try to get Democrats to give in to a variety of demands they have on restricting legal immigration as part of a legislative package. Is that something you`re willing to entertain?
FEINSTEIN: Well, I think that`s exactly right. Of course, we`re willing to entertain a legislative package if it makes sense but don`t hold children hostage. I mean, you don`t have to take 2,500 children from their parents to get support for something. I mean, that`s bizarre and it`s hard for me to believe that even President Trump would want to do that. It`s just bizarre.
HAYES: Well, he pretty clearly does want to do it, at least as advisors do. I mean you have John Kelly talking about how it`s a deterrent. You have Stephen Miller giving on-the-record quotes about how it`s a deterrent. Jeff Sessions saying the Romans 13 commands us to obey the laws of man in a godly fashion. I mean, there does seem to be a part of this administration that knows what they`re doing.
FEINSTEIN: Well, this is the United States of -- I mean, United States of America, isn`t Nazi Germany and there`s a difference. And we don`t take children from their parents until now. And yes, I think it`s such a sad day. People are so upset. I just read a wonderful letter to the editor by Laura Bush. I can`t believe that this is happening in the United States and the President insists so we, of course, will do everything we can to pass a bill which would prohibit this.
HAYES: With the legislation, just so I`m clear about this, basically they`re saying we`re now going to prosecute everyone who crosses illegally for whatever reason and when we prosecute them, we have to take them away from their children because that`s the -- that`s the sort of processing method that we`re using. How does the legislation address that?
FEINSTEIN: Well, the legislation does not address that. What it says is that you cannot specifically remove a child from their parent for no reason other than the fact that they`re crossing the border and that`s where that is.
HAYES: Senator Dianne Feinstein, thank you very much for joining me.
FEINSTEIN: Thank you very much, Chris.
HAYES: Up next, inside an American government`s facility where kids are torn away from their parents and the new efforts to mobilize against this policy. That`s coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: This weekend we got our first look at the epicenter of the family separation crisis. Reporters were allowed into a processing facility for immigrants in McAllen, Texas, that`s where many children are taken from their parents. That`s the moment when it happens and then sent to separate facilities. Now reporters were not allowed to film inside. What you are seeing now are government provided images. Still, you can see the chain- link fencing used to pen in immigrants. MSNBC`s own Jacob Soboroff was one of the reporters who got an inside look at the facility, he joins me live from McAllen, Texas tonight. And Jacob, what do you see in there?
JACOB SOBOROFF, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: It`s worse than it looks in the photos, Chris, because you don`t see really the wide shot of the kids in the cage by themselves and the numbers that we saw. And this is the place right here. It`s the McAllen Border Patrol processing station. More people were separated, kids from their families here than anywhere else on the entire southern border. This is the epicenter. Dianne Feinstein was saying 2,500 kids separated so far, 1,100 of them were separated right here in this sector. And it is -- it`s sickening honestly to see little kids if they say four years old is the youngest that are separated from their parents. But here`s the thing, it`s the stress that`s being placed on the officers and the agents inside and only four social workers that were in there when we took the tour yesterday that have to care for these kids that are increasing in numbers on a daily basis that are separated from their parents. They have a manpower issue and then some of these kids might sit here for 24 hours before they`re picked up by HHS, little kids, four-year- olds and they`re on their own.
HAYES: And they`re on their own and my understanding is the separation -- the CBP officers are doing the separating. They`re putting them in a separate part of the facility behind one of those chain-link fences. And then there`s just a bunch of five and four and six and seven-year-olds just in there with like a guard looking at them?
SOBOROFF: So here`s what we found out. The way that the separation actually works is legally you can be up in here for up to 72 hours. The separate -- the physical separation happens when the parent is brought to the processing center on the way out the door. The parent doesn`t know if they`re going to go with their kid to ICE family detention or if they`re going to be prosecuted at this point because they`re not doing a hundred percent family separations prosecutions yet. So they may not even get to say goodbye because basically the parent goes to processing -- and by the way there are so many people being processed that there`s virtual processing, sometimes through video conference with agents and other facilities. They`re not even physical humans in here. And then you get a piece of paper that tear sheet basically that you put on the air the other night that says, alright, you`re getting charged right now. Call this number and you know, this is how you going to find your child after you come back from court.
HAYES: All right, Jacob Soboroff, thanks for the valuable reporting you`re doing. We`re also going to be in McAllen, Texas tomorrow night for a live edition ALL IN from the border. Now we`ll have a live report from the epicenter of the family separation crisis. Please make sure to join us then. Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal is a Democrat from Washington, the leading voice opposing this policy. And I understand you`ve been working with groups on an event planned in opposition.
REP. PRAMILA JAYAPAL (D), WASHINGTON: We are absolutely ready to have a mass mobilization. This is the first time we`re talking about it right here on the show. It`s going to be on June 30th at 11:00 at Lafayette Park right outside the White House. We have hundreds of organizations being anchored by the National Domestic Workers Alliance and Move On but hundreds of organizations that are part of the Families Belong Together Coalition because we see the outrage and we see that this has to be taken right to the White House, right to Donald Trump to stop the family separations. People can go to familiesbelongtogether.org. Sign up. There will be contiguous marches and rallies in cities across the country. This is a moment -- and I will tell you, Chris every single day I have constituents calling my office but not just from my district, from across the country saying how can we stop this? Republicans, Democrats, and Independents are outraged. And I have to say, I think the White House has badly miscalculated. They are losing on this issue. Nobody believes, nobody believes that there is any legislative reason, any policy reason and certainly no moral reason to be separating these kids. You know that I was in the detention center, there was -- you know kids up to as young as one- year old that had been taken from their moms and I heard from those mothers and I`ll tell you, it is outrageous. Laura Bush says it, Franklin Graham says it. This is not a political issue, this is about what`s right and wrong.
HAYES: Let me ask you a question. This is something that I`ve been trying to get an answer to and maybe you remember Congress, you had more luck than me. What`s happened is they`ve taken these kids that they`re separating actively right? And Nielsen said today about the 12,000 in custody, 2,000 they`ve actually taken, right, 2,500 somewhere around there. They`re putting these facilities that were designed for unaccompanied minors but those tend to be children at the youngest 10 to 18 because they`re being sent solo. No one is sending a two-year-old or a four-year-old or six- year-old by themselves. So now all of the sudden there`s a new population that (INAUDIBLE)has to look after. These are kids zero to ten.
JAYAPAL: Right.
HAYES: Do we know where they are and who`s caring for them?
JAYAPAL: No. I think there`s no coordination amongst the many different agencies and we`ve been trying to get this information. I think I might have said on the show with you that the women that I met with were given slips of paper that said this is your name, these are your children, and one woman said to me these are not my children. So it is very clear that the agencies are not able to coordinate this. There is no real understanding of which parent goes with which children, where the children are. And in my experience, the 174 women that I talked to, not a single one of them had actually been able to say goodbye to their children and only two out of the 174 knew where their children were. So June 30th and you`re planning a mobilization. You and others who are opposed to this, June 30th, 11:00 a.m. Lafayette Families Belong Together is the Web site. What is the end game here?
JAYAPAL: The end game is really to say this is about Trump. Look, he would love to make this about and you just quoted him you know, about Democrats. He would love to make this about legislation that has to be passed. He would love to make this about both sides as Melania Trump said. It is not. It is about Donald Trump reversing this policy. So the end game is Donald Trump reversed this policy, stopped the zero tolerance, reunite these kids with their parents and let`s get asylum hearings for all of these folks. Let`s get credible fair hearings for all of them.
HAYES: And he -- I mean, the White House could do that tonight.
JAYAPAL: Right now. They could --
HAYES: They were doing it before. They were doing it in February. As recently as February, they were doing it, just to be clear.
JAYAPAL: Yes, that`s right. And they have consistently -- you know, I think they`ve gone back and forth, is this policy of policy. No, it`s not a policy. They just tell lies all the time on this particular issue. But I do think that they understand that the only way they win is if they divert the focus. If they divert the focus to a broader question of immigration issues, legislation, those things, then they start to win. But if we keep the focus on this which is a policy of the Trump administration and we say you can reverse it right now and the outrage of the American people, including Republicans like Laura Bush, come forward. He can change it right this moment.
HAYES: June 30th, national mobilization of Families Belong Together. We will be covering that. Thank you for making time, Congresswoman.
JAYAPAL: Thank you.
HAYES: President separating children with their parents and echoing the anti-immigrant positions of Europe`s far-right. What this grim vision pertains next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: What we are witnessing here with the Trump Administration and immigration policy is part of a broader movement of anti-immigrant reaction across the West. Today, anti-immigrant forces gave German Chancellor Angela Merkel two weeks to restrict that country`s policy of accepting Middle East refugees or face the collapse of her government. Also today, Italy`s far-right anti-immigrant Interior Minister Matteo Salvini, asked for a, quote, "census of the Roma community" living in Italy with an eye toward kicking out the non-citizens. He said the citizens would be able to stay, unfortunately.
Last week, Austria`s far right government called for Italy and Germany to form an anti-migration, I`m quoting here, axis.
President today, attempting to justify the separation of families seeking asylum appeared to cheer on those far right forces in Europe.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: The United States will not be a migrant camp, and it will not be a refugee holding facility, it won`t be. You look at what`s happening in Europe, you look at what`s happening in other places, we can`t allow that to happen to the United States. Not on my watch.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: To talk about what`s going on here, I`m joined by McKay Coppins, staff writer at The Atlantic who has reported closely on the anti-immigrant contingent inside the White House; Ai-Jen Poo, director of the National Domestic Workers Alliance; and Dorian Warren, president of the Center for Community Change Action.
McKay, let me start with you. I mean, this -- this morning I watched the president`s Twitter feed. I saw his comments. And they`re indistinguishable from a Breitbart -- you know, a Breitbart article or a Stephen Miller rant or things you would hear from very far right extremist parties in Europe. Basically, we must defend the German people`s purity against the criminal interlopers.
MCKAY COPPINS, THE ATLANTIC: You know, watching that clip that you just played of the president making those remarks you could almost see Stephen Miller kind of over his shoulder writing those words down for him. This is classic Stephen Miller.
I mean, I spent a lot of time talking to Stephen Miller, reporting on Stephen Miller for a profile at The Atlantic, and the thing that I came away with was that he absolutely is a fierce ideologue when it comes to this kind of right wing nationalist world view. He spoke at length to me about the -- you know, the conservative nationalism sweeping across the world and how that movement would ultimately prevail because there was greater emotional resonance to that movement than any other movement.
But the other thing that I found out about as I spent time with him I found out about his worldview is that he thrills at kind of advancing it in the most caustic, outrageous, offensive way possible. This is how you get Donald Trump comparing refugees and immigrants to poisonous snakes on the campaign trail, and it`s how you get the travel ban implemented the way it was to maximize chaos at the airports and it`s now how you get an immigration policy that`s so draconian at the border that it`s kind of illiciting anger and outrage across the country, across the political spectrum.
To Stephen Miller and kind of his allies, that is the point. That provocation is the point. They want to see this anger and outrage because they`ve made this kind of grim political calculation that that will be a win for them in the end.
HAYES: I think that`s part of why it feels like a sort of an existential moment. I mean, the whole Trump administration has felt like that. But I mean when you look at the politics, right, I mean you`ve got 66 percent opposing this, 27 percent supporting. Republicans, though, supporting it 55-35, Democrats 91-7 opposed.
I mean, what is your understanding of what this means for the country`s politics of this moment?
AI-JEN POO, NATIONAL DOMESTIC WORKERS ALLIANCE: Well, I`ll tell you I just came from McAllen, Texas this morning where hundreds of us gathered at the Ursula Border Patrol processing station where they`re holding hundreds of children. And I saw with my own eyes buses of children being carted around like prisoners, and actually one bus drove right in front of us and we were able to chant to them you are not alone. We are here. We love you. You are not alone. And they waved through the window.
And it was one of the most heartbreaking experiences of my entire life.
And the fact that this administration every single day is deciding to continue this policy of separating children from their parents, it`s within their control to -- they can change this at any moment, right. This is not about congress. This is not about policy. They have the power to change it at any moment. And they`re deciding intentionally not only not to do that, but to brag and to use it as a negotiating chip for their political agenda.
And I think American voters can see right through that.
HAYES: Well, it`s a bet, right? They bet that this is -- I mean, I think they`re on the wrong side of this argument, politically. I think the polling shows that. But it`s also a bet that they`re -- they can motivate their people and that`s all that matters.
DORIAN WARREN, CENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE ACTION: This reminds me -- Chris, this is in some ways the prop 187 moment if you go back 20 years to California and Governor Pete Wilson and prop 187. And the meanness and the intentionality and the racism behind that...
HAYES: Which was a sort of -- a proposition, statewide ballot initiative to dramatically restrict immigration in California, a bunch of measures.
WARREN: And underneath that, though, was the demonization of immigrants, and particularly of Latino immigrants. And so what`s happened since then is that California, the politics of California has changed dramatically, because people said enough is enough.
And so we`re seeing that -- I think Ai-Jen is right, we`re seeing that right in this moment.
This is a moment where across the country immigrant rights organizations are mobilizing with an eye towards November to remind people who stood up for separating families and who stood up for uniting families. So, there will be consequences. This -- I think there will be long-term consequences for this.
This is more than politics, though, this is a moral crisis. The question is, how much is a child`s life worth? And we`ve decided in this country, and not a collective we, but this administration has decided that black and brown kids` lives aren`t worth as much as white kids` lives. And as a black person in this country, this is a familiar story to me, because we`ve been doing this to black kids in terms of juvenile -- juvey and sending kids at a young age being incarcerated.
So now we`ve turned out attention to brown kids. And it is a moral crisis. And we, all of us of goodwill, have to stand up and put our bodies on the line and say no more.
HAYES: You know, McKay, one thing that`s very striking to me is this is part of an all out attempt to reduce legal immigration in the country. I just think this can`t be stressed enough, because they want to make it about breaking the law, but it`s not really about breaking the law, they`re turning back people who are legally seeking asylum in ports. We have people who have gone to ports of entry and had their kids taken away. And Stephen Miller is very explicit. There`s an article today, like they want to dramatically reduce legal immigration into the country. That is the agenda.
COPPINS: Well, you know, it`s not even just this episode where that`s been apparent. Back earlier this year when there were negotiations -- actually last fall -- negotiations on DACA on Capitol Hill, it was Stephen Miller who drafted this kind of list of demands from the administration that you know, basically required that any movement on DACA would have to require major Democratic concessions on issues that would essentially dramatically limit legal immigration, restrict the flow of immigration.
Stephen Miller doesn`t hide that. He is a restrictionist. It`s not just that he wants to build a wall or, you know, punish lawbreakers in his view, he wants the overall flow of immigrants into America to be much lower.
HAYES: And it echoes -- I mean, the parties across -- the right wing parties across Europe are saying, basically, this is an assault on our nation and our blood and soil. And that`s -- I mean, there`s a question about whether that`s what American politics are going to be or not.
POO: This is about children. Let`s be clear. This is about children. And I think -- during the vigil with us this weekend, there was an 11-year- old girl from Florida named Leah (ph), who came all the way from Florida with messages from children in her community -- stuffed animals, cards, notes, poems, to deliver to the children who are being held at the border to let them know that they`re not alone. And children are being traumatized by this.
The children who are being separating by their parents are suffering incredible trauma. And we`ve heard pediatricians talking about this, we`ve heard child psychologists talking about this, but it`s also all of our children who are watching what`s happening. And as parents we have to do something. I mean, this is what this is about.
HAYES: McKay Coppins, Ai-Jen Poo, and Dorian Warren, thank you all for joining us.
Still ahead, Roger Stone and the previously undisclosed offer of Russian dirt on Hillary Clinton, another one.
But first, tonight`s seismic and uplifting -- and heartwarming, I promise, Thing One, Thing Two next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: Thing One tonight, in Mexico`s upset victory over Germany in the quarterfinal (sic) match of the World Cup yesterday, a star was born with this tweet, quote, "I`m 100 percent convinced my grandma was the reason Mexico won." The post from El Paso, Texas featured grandma blessing Mexico`s players during their national anthem.
As you can see, as the Mexican national anthem played, grandma even manages to hold her bowl of food aloft with one hand as she casts her blessings with the other. The video has garnered nearly 13 million views.
Now, Mexico`s 1-0 triumph over Germany, the defending champions, the first miracle of the World Cup, that`s not the only thing grandma may have brought about. There`s also the tectonic miracle. That`s Thing Two in 60 seconds.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: So after Mexico`s stunning upset of Germany in the World Cup group round, not the quaterfinals -- I misspoke -- another shock that cheering fans in Mexico set off earthquake centers. From Reuters, "the Institute of Geologic and Atmospheric Investigation said highly sensitive earthquake sensors registered tremors at two sites in Mexico City, 7 seconds after the game`s 35th minute when star player Hirving Lozano stored. It called the tremors an artificial quake possibly because of mass jumping, said the group.
The institute posted this tweet along with the seismic activity detected.
Now, a Spanish newspaper cast doubt that a phantom earthquake could be caused by, quote, "the scattered activity of fans" -- oh, that`s a sweet goal -- well, just take a look at the reportedly 75,000 people gathered in Mexico City`s main square when that goal happened. Lots and lots and lots of jumping.
So, the institute took issue with the doubters, according to the New York Times, explaining the seismic event might be imperceptible to the general public, but still it did set off those earthquake centers.
We don`t think grandma would be the least bit surprised.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: Here is something that remains true no matter how desperately Donald Trump and his allies try to deny it or spin it, in 2016, the FBI took numerous actions that hurt the candidacy of Hillary Clinton and it may well have led to Donald Trump becoming the president.
Then FBI Director James Comey said not one word about the investigation, the counterintelligence investigation, into the Trump campaign, and yet twice, before election day, he went public with information about the FBI investigation into Clinton -- three times, actually. And that allowed Trump to portray Clinton as a criminal -- lock her up.
Now Comey`s double standard appears to have been motivated by fears that the Clinton investigation would leak. And in last week`s Justice Department inspector-general report, a former FBI lawyer recounted that some, and I quote the report here, and some FBI employees hated former Secretary Clinton, and had made comments such as "you guys are finally going to get that B."
Some of the anti-Clinton FBI employees appear to have been working with Trump`s allies on the outside. During the campaign, Rudy Giuliani teased advanced knowledge that Comey would reopen the Clinton investigation on Trump TV. And Trump`s top water carrier in congress, Devin Nunes, said last week he`d been told about the Clinton emails on Anthony Weiner`s laptop before the FBI made them public.
That admission did not sit well with his Democratic counterparty on the intelligence committee Adam Schiff.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ADAM SCHIFF, (D) CALIFORNIA: This is the first that we`ve heard about it. And it is deeply disturbing because if this was shared by a New York field agents with Devin Nunes, was it also shared with Rudy Giulian? Or did Devin Nunes do something, which we have seen subsequently, which is coordinate with the Trump team?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Today, FBI Director Chris Wray, and Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Republicans took the opportunity to push their claim the FBI was out to destroy Trump even though no one at the FBI during the entire campaign leaked the fact he was being investigated.
After she emerged from the hearing, I asked the top Democrat on the committee, Senator Dianne Feinstein, if enough had been done to investigate the anti-Clinton leaks.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, (D) CALIFORNIA: No. The answer is no. I don`t think it`s been sufficiently investigated. There have been rumors about it for a long time, including during the campaign.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: When we come back, new revelations about yet more contacts between Trump allies and the Russians, and they just keep coming, this one involving a certain infamous dirty trickster with a Nixon tattoo on his back. That story right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: I`ve got a pretty shocking figure for you. There are now, at least, 13 people associated with the president, Donald Trump, who are known to have been in contact with Russians during the campaign or the transition -- 13 of them talking to Russians, the same campaign the Russians hacked and attempted to sabotaged.
The latest additions to the list are Roger Stone, infamous dirty trickster, long-time confidante, and Michael Caputo, a Trump campaign communications official.
They acknowledged to the Washington Post that back in May 2016, Stone met with a Russian accident (ph) man who offered damaging information about Hillary Clinton. Roger Stone, who we should note, does have a sterling reputation when it comes to the truth, told The Washington Post that the man wanted Trump to pay $2 million for the political dirt, an offer Stone says he turned down.
Joining me now one of the people who broke that story, Washington Post political investigations and enterprise reporter Rosalind Helderman. Also with me, MSNBC contributor Natasha Bertrand, a staff writer at The Atlantic, and one of the best reporters on the Trump/Russia beat.
So Rosalind, neither of these men have raised this before or talked about this meeting with congressional investigators even under oath, correct?
ROSALIND HELDERMAN, THE WASHINGTON POST: That`s right. We`re told that neither of them mentioned it in their congressional testimony, and that Michael Caputo suddenly remembered this event after two years while preparing to meet with the Senate Intelligence Committee and with Robert Mueller`s team in early May.
HAYES: Right, so the idea is like there`s a meeting. Everyone forgets about it. And then he just remembered about it. Is that -- that`s basically the story?
HELDERMAN: That`s basically what we`re being told.
HAYES: What do you make of this, Natasha?
NATASHA BERTRAND, THE ATLANTIC: Well, I think that one of the most important things to examine in all this is the timeline. I mean, this guy, this Russian, who Michael Caputo initially thought I guess was a U.S. citizen then discovered that he was not, in fact, he`s actually a Russian, approached Roger Stone and Michael Caputo in May of 2016, which of course was before the DNC hack, it was before the FBI investigation was formally launched.
So, when you`re thinking about what he could have possibly known, it was well before the DNC hack was even made public by The Washington Post a month later in June. So this is -- that, for one, is really curious.
Another really bizarre thing is just the discrepancy in the versions of the story that`s being told by the Russian and by Roger Stone. I mean, not only did Roger Stone and Michael Caputo just remember that this meeting happened, but Roger Stone is saying that this Russian, Henry Greenberg (ph), was the only one at this meeting, whereas Greenberg (ph) is saying, well, no I actually had a Ukrainian friend with me who was offering them dirt allegedly on the Clinton Foundation -- or at least represented himself as someone who had worked for the Clinton Foundation and had said that he had dirt on Hillary Clinton, presumably related to that.
I asked Michael Caputo this morning whether or not they ever found out what it was that this guy was offering in terms of the content and he said, no, we never got that far.
So, presumably they don`t remember what the meeting was actually substantively about either.
HAYES: Yeah, Rosalind, let me ask -- this is the test passages that are from your story -- this is Caputo: "how crazy is the Russians." They think he`s Russians. "Wants big money for the info. Waste of time. The Russian way. Anything at all interesting? No."
So, that`s supposedly the Trump -- the messages.
But here`s my question, they did set up this meeting, right? Like what was the -- it just seems like a lot of people are getting approached by people to like offer dirt on Hillary Clinton and everyone is taking every meeting?
HELDERMAN: Yeah, that`s absolutely right. I mean, they knew that it was a meeting for dirt, and Roger Stone did choose to go to it. It was a whole long sequence of events, kind of wild tale that involves Michael Caputo`s Russian-born business partner who met Mr. Greenberg (ph) at an art opening, a small art opening in Miami.
Mr. Greenberg (ph) immediately says I have this dirt. And Michael Caputo sends him to Roger Stone who takes the meeting.
BERTRAND: Right. And Michael Caputo has tried to now frame this entire issue around the idea that Henry Greenberg (ph), the Russian, who has about three different aliases, was an informant for the FBI. And he was, according to many, you know former FBI agents I`ve spoken to, immigration lawyers, they say that the paperwork that he filed is consistent with someone who was providing support to federal law enforcement.
But that support allegedly ended in 2013, so there would be a three year gap there between the time that he stopped working with the FBI and when he approached the Trump campaign, so that kind of doesn`t really work.
HAYES: It`s also before -- Rosalind, if I`m not mistaken -- it`s before, as far as we know, the FBI actually even opened the investigation, right?
HELDERMAN: Well, that`s right. Our best information, at the moment, is that the counterintelligence investigation was opened on July 31 as a result of the information from the Australians about George Papadopoulos.
Of course, Mr. Caputo and Mr. Stone want to question that and say is it possible that the FBI opened the investigation earlier than they`ve led us to believe?
HAYES: So, two things. One, just look at this graphic of all the Trump associates who are were in contact with Russia during the campaign or the transition. It`s a lot of people.
And second of all, just there`s three things that happened right around May/June, right? You`ve got George Papadopoulos is have a meeting with a person that is assessed to be somehow connected to Russian intelligence who says I`ve got dirt on Hillary. And he blabbed about it to an Australian ambassador. You`ve got this meeting of someone trying to get to the Trump people saying I got dirt on Hillary Clinton and I`m a Russian. And then you`ve got the Trump Tower meeting, again all within the span of about six weeks of all these different vectors of people being like I`m associated with the Russians. I`m trying to bring you dirt with Hillary Clinton. And the one thing we know for sure is that no one in the campaign when the news breaks that the Russians have hacked the DNC ever says word boo.
In fact, the candidate himself denies the Russians had anything to do with it.
BERTRAND: Right. No one actually reported these overtures to the FBI. And of course when I asked Caputo about this this morning. He said, well, we didn`t actually think this guy was serious. We thought he was a total crackpot. Well, OK, well then why did you take the meeting in the first place?
HAYES: Rosalind Helderman and Natasha Bertrand, thanks to you both.
That is All In for this evening.
END
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. END
Copy: Content and programming copyright 2018 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 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 content.