American citizen held for nearly four weeks. TRANSCRIPT: 7/26/19, All In w/ Chris Hayes.
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HOST: That`s HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being
with us. “ALL IN” with Chris Hayes starts right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST: Tonight on ALL IN.
REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): There`s no formal constitutional or statutory or
even House rule for how an impeachment inquiry is to begin.
HAYES: Democrats take a step toward impeachment.
RASKIN: I would say we are in an impeachment investigation.
HAYES: Tonight, what we know about today`s move by the Judiciary
REP. JERRY NADLER (D-NY): Today we are filing an application for the Grand
Jury material underlying the Mueller report.
HAYES: As Congress leaves for recess and the impeachment push grows.
REP. MIKE LEVIN (D-CA): I must now support an impeachment inquiry and
we`re going to get to the truth for my constituents.
HAYES: Then –
Am I freaking out unnecessarily or is this an extremely big deal?
SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): Yes, freak out.
HAYES: New pressure on Mitch McConnell after the bombshell revelations
about Russian interference in our elections, Donald Trump`s new torture
legal argument to keep his taxes hidden, and my exclusive interview with
the American citizen detained against his will by ICE.
FRANCISCO GALICIA, U.S. CITIZEN DETAINED BY ICE (through translator):
We`re all people. We all deserve the same respect and the same treatment.
HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Good evening from New York I`m Chris Hayes. I have said it before,
but if you have one foot on the boat and one foot on the dock, you`re
likely going to end up in the water. That is increasingly what it feels
like the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is trying to pull off as she
tries to slow a growing call for impeachment from within her caucus.
Now, here`s the basic problem that she and the Democrats face. CNBC`s John
Harwood quotes a Democratic leadership aides saying, we don`t have the
votes within our party for impeachment. Here`s Congresswoman Katie Hill
who defeated an incumbent Republican to win her seat saying that months
from now there may be a time when she would consider impeachment, extremely
gentle, extremely amorphous and ambiguous. Well, one of her several
primary opponents fired a warning shot-calling her pretty mild statement
“divisive and dangerous.”
Democratic leadership is concerned about the politics for those 30 to 40
frontline members that constitute their majority. They worry that
impeachment would hurt them politically. And let`s be clear, it`s not at
all crazy for Speaker Pelosi to worry about that or to make that kind of
A big part of her job perhaps really the biggest part of her job, when they
don`t control unified government, is to protect her current majority so
there can be one when and if there`s a Democratic president.
On the other hand, impeachment is a constitutional duty. It is powerful
legal force behind it because it is literally a specified power of Congress
in the Constitution. House Democrats are currently being stonewalled by a
White House that refuses to hand over basically anything at every turn.
It is generally the feeling of most scholars that if Democrats were
formally pursuing an impeachment inquiry, they would have stronger legal
standings in the courts. In fact, House Judiciary Chair Jerry Nadler
himself said that on this show just last week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NADLER: The courts have held that our ability to investigate is at its –
is at its zenith when we`re – when we`re doing an impeachment. We can get
60 information in a judicial proceeding. Impeachment has been held to be a
judicial proceeding or part of a judicial proceeding. Yes, that is – that
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: 60 information, that`s grand jury information. So that brings us
to what it looks like that they have done today. Essentially Democratic
leaders are attempting to thread this needle and say we are not formally
opening an impeachment inquiry and pulling all of our at-risk members on
the record about it. But who`s to say what an impeachment inquiry is
anyway? We`ll just investigate the president`s possible high crimes and
misdemeanors so we`ll have a stronger legal position in court.
And lo and behold, today, Jerry Nadler announced his committee has indeed
filed a petition with the court for that grand jury material that underlies
the Mueller report. The reason that`s significant is that grand jury
material can only be given over in a few cases, one of those is in a
judicial proceeding and as Nadler said, previous courts have ruled
impeachment counts as one.
This is how you get what we`ll call schmimpeachment which is kind of
impeachment-esque, a little bit of impeachment, a tincture of impeachment
depending on who you ask.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): We won`t proceed when we have what we need to
proceed, not one day sooner.
NADLER: Among other things, we will consider are obviously are whether to
recommend the articles of impeachment. We may not do that, we may do that,
but that`s a conclusion at the end of the process.
RASKIN: From my personal standpoint, I think we are in an impeachment
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: But in the committee`s own filing for grand jury material, they say
part of the justification for seeing it – seeking it is because “this
committee is conducting the investigation to determine whether to recommend
articles impeachment. And now tonight, four members of the Judiciary
Committee have penned a brand-new op-ed title why we`re moving forward with
Joining me now are Philippe Raines, former adviser of presidential
candidate Hillary Clinton, Donna Edwards former Democratic Congressman from
Maryland, Ezra Levin the Co-Executive Director of Indivisible which is a
progressive organizing – organization building a grassroots movement to
defeat the Trump agenda.
Congresswoman Edwards, let me ask you first your read on all this and how
you view leadership`s position vis-a-vis the polling, the politics, and
protecting what they view as those 30 to 40 frontline members.
DONNA EDWARDS, FORMER CONGRESSWOMAN: I think right now – I mean,
obviously leadership is in a bind but it was really clear in the petition
to the court seeking the grand jury material to enforce subpoenas that
Jerry Nadler in the Judiciary Committee actually recognized that their
strongest hand is in using the language of the Constitution and an
impeachment otherwise it would be difficult, more difficult to obtain that
And so you know, I think right now there`s a growing call for impeachment,
there have been a half dozen members who come out actually since the
Mueller hearings. I suspect that when members go back to their district,
they`re going to hear directly from their constituents that they cannot let
this president get away with his lawless criminal behavior, and that will
make a difference.
When the speaker says that you know, they`ll act when they`ve got all the
facts in hand, one of those facts is also what she describes as public
sentiment. And I think at this stage it`s really important for the public
to rise up and demand that this president be held accountable and this
process today begins that.
HAYES: So there`s the chicken-egg issue with that Ezra, right? I mean,
about whether you`re leading or following public opinion. And for people
that are skeptical and there are people who make the case that look, the
better part of valor here is not to essentially walk the plank with
something with high risk politically for what will ultimately almost surely
be an acquittal in the Senate.
Here`s the latest polling today and I want to get your responses. 37
percent of voters said they support beginning impeachment proceedings to
remove Trump from office basically steady from last week`s survey, down two
points from a January poll, and 46 – I wish we had the other part of that
but I think it`s like 46 percent who say o 41 percent – it`s 46 percent
who don`t want to start impeachment proceedings.
EZRA LEVIN, CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INDIVISIBLE: Yes. You know, I think
the striking thing about those numbers is they`re far, far higher than the
numbers for removing President Nixon from office when the Watergate
hearings began. And I think this is a really key point that the purpose of
impeachment proceedings is indeed to eventually lead to a vote on whether
or not to impeach but it`s also to educate the public.
And that`s the really important piece here that we need to be able to send
a clear message to the public as to why are we even pursuing impeachment?
What are the crimes the Trump is committed? And that`s the opportunity in
front of the House Judiciary Committee to make clear.
Now, I wouldn`t lose sight of the context we`re in right now. Yes, Mueller
just testified but that`s not the only important political event we`re
facing. Today is also the start of August recess, congressional recess
where members of Congress all over the country go back to their hometowns.
And I think Democrats didn`t want to go back to their districts without
being able to say something. And Jerry Nadler deserves some credit. This
isn`t everything but this is a step in the right direction where they`re
able to say, yes, we are starting to move forward on impeachment.
HAYES: OK, but here`s the tricky thing, right, because you`re trying to –
Philippe, trying to have it I think a little bit both ways and not –
again, not – it`s not – strategically it`s not crazy right, like why
they`re trying to do both these things. They want the constitutional force
of impeachment inquiry in the courts without getting all their members on
the record at this point, right, on something that might not be popular in
The issue then becomes the momentum of the thing. You can see Pelosi is
scared about this, right? You open an inquiry, then you find out more bad
things about what the president did, the next thing you know you`re not
controlling where it`s going.
PHILIPPE REINES, FORMER ADVISER TO HILLARY CLINTON: Yes. I think what
we`re seeing here is what we`ve been reading about which is that Nancy
Pelosi and Jerry Nadler have been having conversations behind closed doors
about disagreeing about what to do next.
Now we`re seeing it out in the open. Now this is maybe the legislative
version of taking to the streets for Jerry Nadler, but you know, but for
what he did today, we might be sitting here saying his impeachment dead.
They`re going to a recess.
HAYES: That`s a good point. He did something just as the sort of window -
REINES: He knew what he was doing. And he didn`t do it –
HAYES: That`s interesting.
REINES: And he didn`t do it yesterday. He did it a day after seeing the
cumulative deflation of people like me who think my god this guy has broken
the law in so many ways, you have to do what`s right.
And he was talking to us, he was talking to his members, because yes, while
there have been somewhere between six and ten that have come out for
impeachment in the last 48 hours and the numbers around somewhere between
98 and 100 now, that`s less than probably would have been because there are
people don`t want to stick their neck out. Remember, this is not 100
people who are for impeachment and 135 Democrats are against it.
HAYES: Right, yes, well said.
REINES: This is 100 who are willing to buck the Speaker.
HAYES: The leadership.
REINES: That is a big deal. And you know, where we are now it`s better
than where we were 12 hours ago.
HAYES: Well, and I`ll say this, Congresswoman Edwards. This is Jared
Huffman saying – writing yesterday week prediction. Week of September
9th, that`s when I predict solid majority of Dem caucus will publicly
support impeachment inquiry a tipping point. Grassroots pressure during
August recess is key. Lots of memories are leaning. Let them hear from
you, folks. The rule of law hangs in the balance. Do you think this
August recess really is key in that respect?
EDWARDS: Well, you know, look, ten years ago during an August recess, the
Tea Party practically shut down every town-hall meeting across the country,
and I think that we`re at one of those kinds of moments here where it`s
really important for people out in the country to let their members of
Congress know that it is unacceptable for this president to get away with
crimes, and that will be a really important moment.
Look, today, one of the senior Democratic leaders Katherine Clark came out
for impeachment. Lisa Blunt Rochester came out for impeachment. These are
not people who generally travel all the way on the left side of the
spectrum. Those things are really important and it`s important for people
to hear from their members of Congress.
And let me just say this lastly, that Jerry Nadler here is really trying to
galvanize what had been dead following the Mueller hearings. And I think
that he`s pushing –
HAYES: That`s interesting.
EDWARDS: – he`s pushing the envelope right here.
LEVIN: I totally agree, and frankly, I`m excited. Look it is so rare in
American politics that if you are an individual in the community, you`re
looking at things and you`re asking what can I do and we`re in one of those
moments right now. Donald Trump doesn`t care what you think, the
Democratic House leadership doesn`t particularly care what you think. But
you know who does care what you think, your individual member of the House
And if they`re a Democrat, chances are they`re not yet out in favor of
impeachment, but they depend on your vote for re-election and they`re about
to be back home. So you`ve got a shot right now over the course the next
few weeks to make clear with other constituents that they need to come out
in favor of impeachment.
HAYES: OK, but let me – I just want to counter that and then I`m going to
come to you again, Philippe. I mean, do you worry that the political
analysis is wrong? Do you worry about the fact that maybe you, Ezra, and
the individual folks don`t actually have the best sense of what`s going to
help those 30 folks get reelected in the districts they won from Trump,
that this really would put them in a bad spot, that it might actually risk
REINES: I think we got to consider all angles. But frankly, nobody knows
what the future holds. What we do know is what Donald Trump has done and
we do know where the grassroots is on this. We know that people who were
knocking doors, who were making calls, who were sending texts, they voted
in a House majority to hold this administration accountable.
So if you want those people out knocking doors, sending texts, and making
calls to build the 2020 blue wave, you got to give them something. You
ought to actually say we`re out here fighting for you. Fecklessness and
cowardice does not win elections.
HAYES: You know, Yale – I think it`s Yale historian Samuel Moyn had an
interesting op-ed that I was just reading before I came on air about sort
of basically making the case that like people have been looking for this
kind of white knight savior the Mueller investigation that they`ve sort of
stumbling through this nightmare from a huge part of the country, right,
not all of it obviously, and they want to wake up from it they want to be
They want someone to come and slay the dragon and that`s kind of a – it`s
a mistake to think that way. It`s mythical and that even maybe the entire
hopes put on Mueller in the Mueller report and his testimony and even
impeachment. The only way to beat this guy is to beat him.
REINES: Yes. Well, there`s a fair amount of fantasy going on. I mean,
the notion of you know, I don`t want to see him impeached, I want to see
him dragged off in cuffs. I want to see –
HAYES: That`s so ridiculous.
REINES: It`s not happening. But you know what, there`s a fair number of
people who keep moving the goalposts and you know, I have the highest
respect for her, and I hope that we do impeach because she`ll be a great
speaker, but Nancy Pelosi is doing a little of that too.
And here`s the problem. You know, the question you just asked Ezra about
the political calculus, it is a valid conversation to have what is the
calculus. The problem is people are not having an open mind. They`re just
saying 1998 Bill Clinton was acquitted and nothing happened and the
Republicans lost forever. You know what, I just don`t see that.
HAYES: No, that I agree with. I think –
REINES: You know, there are a lot of people don`t and people won`t even
entertain that. And it`s having a circular argument. And the person you
know who believes that more than anyone is Nancy Pelosi.
HAYES: You know, the other historical thing that I`ve been thinking about
and this isn`t apples to apples at all, but in the fall of 2013, a massive
fight opened up between Republican leadership in the grassroots over shut
down to repeal the ACA, and the leadership said you guys are nuts. This is
idiotic. This is suicidal. It`s not going to work, and the grassroots
said fight, fight, fight. We don`t care. And the grassroots won.
They shut down the government, and everyone said this is a disaster. The
polling on it was terrible, and everyone said this is going to cost him
from a year from now. And a year later, not a single vote was cast in
America on that shutdown, not a single one. People moved on to other
I mean, people are thinking I think a lot that like impeachment is going to
happen and the election is the next day. But that`s not – that`s not the
way it`s going to work.
REINES: That`s what happened in 98 where –
HAYES: Right. That`s exactly –
REINES: – straddled the midterm. We`re a year away. And the two
previous impeachments have been three or four months. I mean, we could be
done with this and have a whole year to get our act together.
HAYES: Lord knows what will happen in that year. Philippe Raines, Donna
Edwards, and Ezra Levin, thank you all. Next, new fallout from the
stunning Senate Intelligence report that says Russia targeted election
systems in all 50 states. A new outrage at the man of the Senate who is at
this point essentially single-handedly blocking our government from doing
anything about it in two minutes.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ANCHOR, ABC NEWS: Your campaign this time around,
if foreigners, if Russia, if China, if someone else offers you information
on opponent, should they accept it or should they call the FBI?
TRUMP: I think maybe you do both. I think you might want to listen. I
don`t – there`s nothing wrong with listening. If somebody called from a
country, Norway, we have information on your opponent. Oh, I think I`d
want to hear it. It`s not an interference. They have information. I
think I`d take it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Yes. Maybe the Norwegians just text the pres with a little dirt,
you know, you read the text. So this is how this week went. On Tuesday,
FBI Director Chris Wray testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee and
said that Russia is still intent on interfering in our elections.
On Wednesday, former Special Counsel Robert Mueller testified for about
seven hours largely about Russia`s sabotage of our campaign and election.
And then yesterday the Senate Intelligence Committee released a stunning
report on Russia`s 2016 election interference.
And then following all that, Senator Mitch – Senate Majority Leader Mitch
McConnell blocked two election security bills yesterday. One of the bills,
the Duty to Report Act required candidates and campaign officials to notify
the FBI if they are offered foreign contributions or assistance.
McConnell blocked that bill too. It seems like that`s the kind of
provision he might think President Trump would run afoul of particularly
because the president has said he would run afoul of it. But let`s not
forget that back in September of 2016, when the CIA presented the gang of
eight with its assessment that Russia was at that moment intervening in
that election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, President Obama
suggested putting out a bipartisan statement urging state and local
officials to take federal help to protect their elections from Russia`s
And you might remember that Mitch McConnell stood in the way of that
statement “according to several officials McConnell raised doubts about the
underlying intelligence and made clear to the administration he would
consider any effort by the White House to challenge the Russians publicly
in active partisan politics.
Joining me now MSNBC Intelligence Analyst Malcolm Nance, 36 year veteran in
terrorism strategy, author of The Plot to Hack America. Well, a lot
happened this week, Malcolm. What do you make of McConnell`s maneuvering
in the last day or two?
MALCOLM NANCE, MSNBC INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: The only thing that I can make
of it is that I have to go and I have to look back at what precipitating
event would make him not want to defend the United States from a Russian
attack. I don`t like the word intrusion. What happened in 2016 was an
attack. As Robert Mueller said, we are still in an on-going attack.
And the only thing that I can think of is that Oleg Deripaska, one of the
oligarchs who was implicated in the 2016 election activities has opened –
has promised to open an aluminum smelting plant in the state of Kentucky
providing jobs in Kentucky.
Anywhere else in any other point in history, that would be considered a
bribe especially when you consider the next immediate thing that he does is
stop the United States from defending itself in cybersecurity and
specifically stops to make it a crime not to report foreign contacts who
are trying to impact our elections.
HAYES: Wait, but it also seems to me there`s an even simpler Occam`s razor
explanation although the Deripaska thing is true. Deripaska has offered
that they`re going to invest in aluminum factory in Kentucky which is just
that he thinks it helps Donald Trump in the Republican Party retain power,
that he wants to win again.
I mean, it seems to me that to a lot of Republicans, like it works the
first time. They`re now going to run again. They lost the popular vote by
three million votes, like maybe they could use a little help.
NANCE: Sure. And obviously, no one is going to be held accountable for it
if it turns out that is you know, that Russia does this again, or China, or
Iran or even worse North Korea which has a pretty robust cyber warfare
HAYES: They started all at the Sony. They were – they were the blueprint
for this whole thing when they hacked Sony.
NANCE: Sure. And they could get combined attack the American electoral
process and throw it into chaos. You don`t need to have Donald Trump have
votes tallied for him. You need to make it appear that the Democrats have
done something and then throw it into chaos and have the entire thing be
what Donald Trump call it, a rigged process.
Mitch McConnell as Joe Scarborough has named him has earned his title of
Moscow Mitch. He either will stand up and defend this nation or he should
just admit that he wants Moscow`s assistance in this next election.
HAYES: There`s also the question of just how extensive – I mean,
obviously we know about the WikiLeaks – about the you know, the hacked e-
mails. We know about the troll factories and all that. But the degree to
which you know, Russian hackers were inside election systems including
efforts in Illinois – this is a recap of the most to me, unnerving part of
that report which specifically discusses efforts in Illinois in an unnamed
state too where details about meetings in cybersecurity efforts appear to
mostly jive with what`s previously been disclosed about the election system
hacking attempts in Florida, which by the way matters a lot more for a
The Senate Intelligence Committee apparently unwilling or unable to provide
more information. Florida`s politicians and election officials remain
stuck and yet another guessing game. This just seems insane to me. Like
how it – how is it the case that there is no – like coordination
NANCE: Well, it`s not as insane as the fact that in 2016 I actually had
the secretary state of Florida attacked me for saying that their system had
been scanned, their subcontractor had been scanned by Russian intelligence
and said no such thing has happened.
Now we found every state that`s happened. The Russians are not stupid.
They are doing what is an extension of the old Soviet systems wanting to
dismantle and destroy American democracy. And they have learned breaking
the confidence of the fundamentals of American elections is the way to do
And so by going after every state, we don`t know whether they`ve planted
Trojan horses, we don`t know whether they have taken registrations and are
intending to change them. All of these things could happen the day of the
election or a week before the election, and again throw us into chaos.
That is their number one goal and that works to Donald Trump`s advantage.
HAYES: All right, Malcolm Nance, thank you so much for making some time.
President Trump and his administration and his lawyers are still doing
everything possible to keep Democrats from getting his tax returns. Their
latest ploy to keep those tax returns from coming out next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RICHARD NIXON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I`m going to say
this to the television audience. I`ve made my mistakes. But in all of my
years of public life, I have never profited, never profited from public
service. I`ve earned every cent. And in all of my years of public life, I
have never obstructed justice. And I think too that I can say that in my
years of public life, that I welcome this kind of examination because
people have got to know whether or not their president is a crook. Well,
I`m not a crook. I`ve earned everything I`ve got.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: I`m not a crook. That, of course, is one of the most if not the
most notorious things that Nixon ever said. A phrase that has been
repeated ever after with a wry chuckle because of course, if Nixon was
anything, he was a crook. The funny thing is that that speech wasn`t about
Watergate or the Watergate break-in, it was about his personal tax returns.
And unlike Trump, Nixon ended up releasing his taxes.
And not only that, but when Congress sent the IRS request for Nixon`s
returns in 1973, the agency turned them over on the same day according to
letters released by House Democrats yesterday showing that contrary to the
current Treasury Secretary claim, the current congressional request for
Trump`s taxes is unprecedented.
It is not unprecedented for Congress to request a president`s tax returns,
nor is it unprecedented for the IRS to provide them. The House Ways and
Means Committee has asked for the President`s tax returns under clear
statutory authority and under a subpoena. They`re trying to ways to get
them. And amid continued stonewalling from the federal government, New
York state passed a law allowing Congress to get the president`s state tax
Well, Trump`s personal lawyers are now suing to prevent that from happening
using a truly insane to my mind legal theory. Here to explain is MSNBC
Legal Analyst Nick Ackerman, former assistant Special Watergate prosecutor.
All right, so –
NICK AKERMAN, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: It is truly insane.
HAYES: OK. I`m glad – you`re the lawyer here, but that was my – that
was my amateur diagnosis.
AKERMAN: That was a legal phrase, truly insane.
HAYES: It`s truly insane.
All right, so you`ve got – the law says that, you know, the IRS shall
provide any of the returns the ways and means committee asks for. So, they
asked for that. The government is saying no, so they`re in court about
that. Then they subpoenaed. So there is a case about that. And then New
York state said you know, we just passed a law. You can have his state tax
returns. Trump sued them. And one of the arguments…
AKERMAN: Preemptively, I might add.
HAYES: Preemptively because it hasn`t been turned over. One of the
arguments this is unlawful violation of his first amendment rights, that
it`s retaliation and discrimination in violation of the first amendment,
that it singles out President Trump because he is a Republican, a political
opponent, enacted to retaliate against the president because of his policy
positions, his political beliefs and protected speech, including the
positions he took during the 2016 campaign.
AKERMAN: This entire argument is like the kibosh is put to it by this
Eastland Case the Supreme Court came down with in 1975 saying that the
debate and speech clause of the congress, which is in the U.S. Constitution
trumps any idea that you can question the motive of congress, as long as
it`s for a legislative purpose.
And clearly, we`ve got the president of the United States where it`s shown
he has a long history of his family trying to evade taxes, not to pay his
taxes, being constantly audited, that there is an absolute legislative
purpose in trying to get to the bottom of this to determine whether there
should be legislation requiring any candidate for president to turn over
HAYES: Clearly, OK – but that`s the federal case. I`m saying on the
stateside, right, where he`s saying you`re discriminating against my
protected speech rights.
AKERMAN: The courts have no business even being involved in that.
HAYES: Right. Right.
AKERMAN: I mean, that`s what the Supreme Court has said.
HAYES: I see. I see what you`re saying.
Why – so there are three different ways they`re trying to get them. One
of the things that I sort of wonder about is there was a gap between the
filing of the lawsuit to block New York State and New York State passing
the law, and there are some people who say like why doesn`t Richard Neal on
the Ways and Means Committee just get them from New York state.
And there are people arguing saying if he does that, it might mess with the
arguments he is making before the courts. Do you think that`s true?
AKERMAN: I think there is something to that. I think he wants to keep it
a pure argument.
HAYES: Right, because then if you get them from – you might sort of
complicate things in your court arguments if you get them from New York
AKERMAN: Right. And besides, I mean, the federal returns are better.
There is more detail on those federal returns.
And if I were the prosecutor, I`d want to get those, because Michael Cohen
testified that Donald Trump had different financial statements for
different situations. If he needed to have more money, then he would show
that on a financial statement to a bank. It was the old Paul Manafort
trick, his former campaign manager. When you needed to buy – to lower
your taxes, you lowered your financial statement. When you didn`t want to
pay taxes, you lower it. You`d up it for the banks.
And so you`d do it both ways. And if you took all these financial
statements, spread them out, put the tax returns together, you would find
major discrepancies would show that he lied to the banks or he lied on his
returns or he did both.
HAYES: I mean, I think there is basically The New York Times public
report. There is reason to think that`s absolutely the case.
I guess my question is we saw Robert Mueller under questioning by Sean
basically say look, I wanted to interview the president, but he
successfully ran out the clock. That was basically what he said. He said,
look, he tried and then it was going to be a year of litigation, and then
it worked. Donald Trump has been doing that for 40 years. There is
nothing he wants less than people to see his taxes.
I guess the question is like are they going to be successful? Can they run
the clock out on this in their litigation against congress?
AKERMAN: They shouldn`t be able to. I mean, this should go pretty
quickly. Because whatever the district court decides they`re going to take
to it the appellate court in the District of Columbia. The Supreme Court
is not going hear this. I mean, this is going to go pretty quickly.
HAYES: That`s a lot of faith in the Supreme Court.
AKERMAN: Well, after today, you may be right.
HAYES: Which just ruled that the president can start building his wall
with Pentagon dollars in a 5-4.
AKERMAN: But I just don`t see this being an issue that the Supreme Court
is going to look at. The statute is very clear. This statute goes back to
Calvin Coolidge. I mean, this was enacted because of the Teapot Dome
HAYES: This is the language: “upon written request of the chairman of
committee on ways and means of the House of Representatives, the chairman
of the committee on finance of the senate or the chairman of the joint
committee on taxation,” that is who requested Nixon, “the secretaries shall
such committee with a return or return information specified in such a
request.” And when they did that to Nixon, of all people, Nixon turns it
over the next day.
Nick Akerman, thank you very much.
HAYES: Thank you.
Ahead, my exclusive interview with the American citizen detained against
his will by ICE. The stunning details.
But first, Fox News fails to bend reality enough to satisfy President
Trump. It is tonight`s Thing One, Thing Two, next.
HAYES: Thing One tonight. It`s the end of a long week for the proud
warriors carrying the president`s water over at Trump TV. With the Mueller
testimony driving Trump nuts, the folks at Fox had to work extra hard to
spin for the boss man.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Even with this albatross around his neck, the
president has once again beaten the elites at their own game.
TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NOWS: Never meet your heroes, that`s how the saying
goes, they`ll only disappoint you. Well, that`s true, by the way, as
Democrats across the country learned the hard way today.
SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS: Today`s hearing capped off what will now go down
in history as one of the single biggest, most epic embarrassments in
RUDY GIULIANI, TRUMP LAWYER: Democrats are such idiots. They call him to
testify and now he`s going to have to have a mouthpiece to help him. This
guy was the director of the FBI.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: The channel really pulled out all the stops, even bringing in this
dynamic young legal analyst to join the gang on Trump TV and Friends
leading up to the Mueller hearings.
As it turns out, on closer inspection, it was actually the president`s own
lawyer in some sort of disguise. But today Fox News had to go and release
a new 2020 poll. And the audience of one was not happy. Trump turns on
Trump TV. That`s Thing Two in 60 seconds.
HAYES: One of the few remaining parts of Trump TV not in the tank for the
president is their polling operation. And so when Fox News conducted a
legitimate poll with what appeared to be legitimate results, Trump seemed
to have a legitimate tantrum.
Now, we`re not talking about the Fox News poll results published Wednesday
on the economy. He loved that one. Fox poll says best economy in decades!
But then Fox release these numbers yesterday, and mind you, they are from
the same poll showing Trump losing in a 2020 matchup to Joe Biden by 10
points – ouch – to Bernie Sanders by six points, and a statistical tie
with Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris.
OK, now he hates the poll. And today, Trump hates Trump TV.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The president tweeted about the polling today: “Fox
News is at it again,” he wrote. “So different from what they used to be
during the 2016 primaries and before, proud warriors. Now Fox News polls,
which have always been terrible to me, they had me losing big to crooked
Hillary, had me down to Sleepy Joe.”
The Fox News poll did have President Trump losing the popular vote to
Hillary Clinton. And the Fox News poll was accurate. The poll predicted
Hillary Clinton would beat Donald Trump by 4 percentage points with a
margin of error of 2.5 percent. So Clinton would win the popular vote by a
margin of between 1.5 percent and 6.5 percent. She did. Her margin of
victory was 2.1 percent, close to 3 million voters. The polls were
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: This was the moment when 18-year-old American citizen Francisco
Erwin Galicia was finally reunited with his mother after nearly a month in
detention by ICE.
For 23 days, he was offered no shower and says he lost 26 pounds. Things
got so bad that at one point he almost grid to self-deport, an American
citizen. And you will hear all this from him in
just a moment.
But this was him on Wednesday morning at the McAllen, Texas bus station
with his mom.
The Dallas Morning News was first to break the story last week, quote, a
Dallas-born citizen picked up by the border patrol has been detained for
It was completely beyond belief that an American, a teenager not accused of
a crime, who committed literally no infraction other than having the wrong
skin color, the wrong last name could
be held in detention without a trial for a month. Here in the U.S., in
Texas, but it happened, and here is his story.
Francisco`s mother is an undocumented Mexican immigrant. She had him in
Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, Texas in December of 2000. Shortly
after his birth, they moved back across the border to Reynosa, Mexico.
I should tell you, Reynosa is a border town. It sits on the southern bank
of the Rio Grande. In fact, it is literally across from McAllen, Texas.
The bridge separating those two towns is called the McAllen Hidalgo Reynosa
Francisco stayed on that other side of the river, in Mexico, until he was
15 years old. And then he moved back to the U.S. with his younger brother
who is undocumented.
On June 27, Francisco and his brother were traveling to North Texas for
soccer tryouts when
they were stopped at a border patrol checkpoint.
They were pulled over by customs and border patrol. His undocumented
brother had no papers, but Francisco did. Knowing that checkpoint was
there, he had brought with him a card version of his birth certificate,
basically, a kind of short form certificate. He brought his Social
Security card. He brought his Texas state ID. Three forms of
identification, all in anticipation of this checkpoint. And despite all
that, border patrol agents accused Francisco of not being a citizen. They
threw him in detention where he stayed for 23 days.
After two weeks, his lawyers got them the full birth certificate. But it
took another nine days until they let him out.
Francisco`s case was raised by California Congressman Ted Lieu on Thursday
during a House
Judiciary hearing with the U.S. border patrol chief, who said that
Francisco never told them that he was a U.S. citizen.
But that appeared to be flatly untrue. His own lawyer provided this
document, which is a citation issued to him that proves that he told
authorities he was a U.S. citizen from the moment he was detained.
After 23 days in detention in a small room with 60 men, no showers, no way
to brush his
teeth, Francisco Erwin Galicia is out and has been reunited with his
family. And for the first time, he will tell his story right here, next.
HAYES: 18-year-old Francisco Erwin Galicia is an American citizen, but he
was still detained for nearly four weeks by immigration authorities who
just didn`t believe him, didn`t believe his documents, who didn`t believe
his lawyer. He was released on Tuesday of this week.
Because Francisco spent almost all of his life in Mexico, he felt more
comfortable doing his first live taped TV interview in Spanish. I spoke
with him yesterday night through a translator.
HAYES: And here with me now is that American citizen, Francisco Erwin
Galicia. Francisco, first, I want to ask how are you feeling now that you
are out of detention?
FRANSISCO ERWIN GALICIA, AMERICAN CITIZEN DETAINED BY ICE (through
translator): Well, much better after all the suffering that I lived. Now,
being able to be next to my mother I feel much better. The truth is it`s
the ability to be free.
HAYES: Can you describe a little bit of what it was like inside detention,
what the conditions were like, the food you received, the ability to
shower or brush your teeth or things like that.
GALICIA (through translator): From my experience, we went through
something inhumane, all of us who were in that detention center. There,
we couldn`t bathe or brush our teeth. Nothing. You didn`t have anything.
The only thing that they would give us from time to time to clean ourselves
were wipes. We would wipe ourselves but the dirt would stay, unable to
come off our skin. They wouldn`t clean us.
And those wipes, they would give them to us every once in a while, every
seven days maybe, or every three days, but we wouldn`t shower.
HAYES: What kind of room were you in?
GALICIA (through translator): It was a small room, super small for the
amount of people
there. We were about 60 people in one small room that we would call the
freezer, because, well, it`s
really cold. With one single bathroom for all of those people, without
beds or anything. And we would sleep on the floor. And the bathroom, what
separated the bathroom was a wall about this high. It didn`t cover
anything. The room was so small that there were people sleeping in the
bathroom. We would take turns to be able to sleep.
HAYES: People sleeping on the floor, sleeping in the bathroom, it was very
cold, you had blankets, it was crowded, 60 people in the room. What – you
were there for three weeks in that facility?
GALICIA (through translator): I spent 23 days in that place. And from
there, they brought me to Piersol (ph), Texas, to a bigger center for the
detained nationals. I was there for around three, four days.
HAYES: And I read that you lost 26 pounds.
GALICIA (through translator): Yes, I lost around 26 pounds when I was in
that detention center in La Fordias (ph). The 23 days without eating well.
The truth is no one ate well, because it wasn`t only me. There were many
that suffered that.
HAYES: I want to talk about what happened when you were apprehended. But
one more question about the conditions. Were other folks that were in
there with you, had they been there for long periods of time, like
GALICIA (through translator): Yes, there were people there for some 30
days, including one for 43 days. There were people who were there way more
time than me. I was there 23 days. There were people who had been there
for much longer time.
HAYES: You were apprehended at a border check point with your brother.
Your brother does not have papers. You do. You had them in your wallet.
You had a birth certificate, a Social Security card, a Texas ID, when you
presented them at the checkpoint, what did they say to you when you said
I`m a U.S. citizen?
GALICIA (through translator): In the moment when I showed my
everything, they said that the documents were false, that I was not an
American citizen and they didn`t believe me. I would tell them after
showing them all my documents that I was an American citizen and they would
still not trust what I said and so they then decided to lock me up.
HAYES: So just so people understand because you`re speaking to me in
Spanish, you were born in Dallas. You`re a U.S. citizen. You lived most
of your life in Mexico, recently came back to the United States after being
born here. And there were some papers, you had a travel visa. There were
some papers that raised their suspicion, but today an official with the
U.S. Immigration Services, the CBP, said you never told them you were a
U.S. citizen. Is he telling the truth?
GALICIA (through translator): From the first moment that I presented
myself at the checkpoint, I always said I was an American citizen. I
showed my documents. They even charged me because they said my papers were
falsified, and I have proof because they contradict themselves because they
charged me for supposedly falsifying my citizenship when I am a citizen
here. It doesn`t make sense what they`re saying.
HAYES: Did you worry when you were in detention that you would be there
forever, that no one would belief you?
GALICIA (through translator): Yes. The truth is I felt fear that they
would not believe me, and that they would leave me there for a much longer
time, being that I was able to prove it to them and they still didn`t
Yes, I felt fear that they were going to deport me even because it was so
much, the pressure
they put on me to sign the deportation order that at a certain point I was
about to sign it because there was so much pressure that I sign it.
HAYES: Can you describe the pressure to sign, to deport yourself, what is
that pressure like? What do you mean? What did they say to you?
GALICIA (through translator): Well, they would – it was more
psychological. They said they were going to charge me, that they would
insult me so that I would sign my deportation order. And well, it was all
psychological damage, all that so they could pressure me to sign it,
telling me they
were going to charge me three felonies that I would go to jail, all that,
that it`s better for me to sign. It was like they were going to deport me
HAYES: When finally they came to release you, did anyone there say we`re
sorry that we made this mistake?
GALICIA (through translator): No, no one.
They just called me and said get your stuff together, you`re leaving. I
got my things together. They gave me my clothes, what I brought on me.
And then the moment my lawyer got there and the media was outside, they
told me there`s your lawyer. You can go. Go with her. Nothing. Not one
HAYES: For people that think it`s important for there to be very strong
borders, border patrol,
border check points to be tough on people that don`t have papers that are
in this country, is there something you want to say to them about what
happened to you and your experience.
GALICIA (through translator): Don`t be so inhumane. Here under god`s
eyes, we`re all people. We all deserve the same respect and the same
treatment, regardless of your nationality, we all deserve the same respect.
We`re all people.
HAYES: Francisco Galicia, thank you so much for taking the time. I`m so
glad that you`re out and be well.
GALICIA (through translator): Many thanks. With all my heart, I really
HAYES: Under god`s eyes, we all deserve respect. Hard to argue with that.
That is ALL IN for this evening. “THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW” starts right now
with Ari Melber in for Rachel. Good evening, Rachel.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
Copyright 2019 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.>
Copyright 2019 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