IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

New York AG sues Trump Foundation. TRANSCRIPT: 06/14/2018. All In with Chris Hayes

Guests: David Fahrenthold, Elie Mystal, Josh Marshall, John Podesta, Sherrod Brown, Antar Davidson, Barbara Boxer

Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: June 14, 2018 Guest: David Fahrenthold, Elie Mystal, Josh Marshall, John Podesta, Sherrod Brown, Antar Davidson, Barbara Boxer



DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I wanted to make this out of the goodness of my heart.

HAYES: The President sued for running a lawless slush fund.

TRUMP: Donald Trump gave $1 million, OK?

HAYES: Tonight, the new lawsuit alleging persistently illegal conduct during the 2016 campaign. Then, the Justice Department reports. James Comey helped elect Donald Trump.

TRUMP: I am a big fan of the FBI. I love the FBI.

HAYES: Hillary Clinton`s Campaign Chairman joins me for reaction. Plus, the White House defense of the President`s salute of a North Korean general and citing the bible to defend child separation.

JEFF SESSIONS, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL: I would cite you to the Apostle Paul.

HAYES: The outrage over the Trump family separation policy continues.

BRIAN KAREM, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY SENTINEL: You`re a parent of young children. Don`t you have any empathy for what they go through?

HAYES: My exclusive interview with the detention center whistleblower when ALL IN starts right now.


HAYES: Good evening from New York, I`m Chris Hayes. The President`s private charitable foundation was an illegal slush fund used to further the President`s own interests including his presidential campaign. That according to a lawsuit filed today by the New York Attorney General against the President and his three oldest children, alleging the Trump Foundation engaged in "persistently illegal conduct," a phrase that may stick around a while, used by the President not to advance the public good but to settle business debts, decorate his hotel and help get him elected president. The lawsuit adds to a growing list of legal challenges this President is facing. It comes one day before his former Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort, he of two ankle bracelets, is due in court to find out whether he`ll spend the rest of the summer in jail, though he will get to lose the ankle bracelets. And just as his personal fixer Michael Cohen is under investigation for running another slush fund. That one was used apparently to take corporate money and pay off the President`s alleged mistress.

At least that`s what we know about that one. Now the complaint filed today in Manhattan lays out new details about the Trump Foundation which was shut down after the 2016 election. Among them that its board has not met in 19 years, not a good look that it`s official Treasury was an employee of the President`s private business who did not even know he was on the Foundation`s board, also not a good look. According to the complaint, the foundation coordinated illegally with the Trump campaign on a fundraiser for veterans in 2016 just days before the Iowa caucuses where the candidate announced a donation of his own.


TRUMP: Donald Trump, another great builder in New York now a politician. I can`t stand this. A politician, I don`t want to be called the politician. All talk no action. I refuse to be called a politician. Donald Trump gave $1,000,000 OK.


HAYES: $1 million. Four months later, after calling around to dozens of veterans charities, the Washington Post David Fahrenthold still could not find a single one that received money from candidate Trump. It wasn`t until he and other reporter started asking questions the President finally wrote a check.


TRUMP: I will say that the press should be ashamed of themselves. I sent people checks of a lot of money and we`re going to give you the names right now which is what you want. And instead of being like thank you very much, Mr. Trump or Trump, did a good job, everyone say who got it, who got it, who got it? And you make me look very bad.


HAYES: Again he didn`t write the checks until like the day before he held that event. OK? Now, if Fahrenthold`s reporting on the Trump Foundation which won on the Pulitzer Prize founds the basis of much of the New York Attorney General`s lawsuit. There was the time the President had to settle dispute in the town of Palm Beach over his Mar-a-Lago Resort agreeing to make $100,000 charitable donation. He paid the settlement not from his business, not from his pocket but from the Foundation and not by accident.

In the complaint, there`s a note in the President`s own handwriting ordering the Foundation to pay a $100,000 to the Fisher House Foundation in parentheses settlement of flag issue in Palm Beach. And then there was a time the President used $10,000 from the Foundation`s money to bid on a portrait of one Donald J Trump which was last spotted hanging on a wall in the restaurant of one of his golf clubs. That`s just one of the items he bought in an auction using the foundation including a football helmet signed by Tim Tebow, yet another Trump portrait, this one costing 20 grand.

Best of all, the President by large managed to use other people`s money to fund those endeavors. According to the complaint, he hasn`t given a single solitary cent of his own to the Trump Foundation that he`s using to pay all the stuff out since 2008. Now, think about this. All of this, what we see today in the complaint amounts to a tiny glimpse of the flagrant improprieties lurking in the President`s secretive financial operations. And you can`t help but wonder what we would find out from say his tax returns. Joining me now, the Washington Post David Fahrenthold who`s Pulitzer Prize-Winning reporting on the Trump Foundation led to this lawsuit. David, one thing that was striking about the complaint is you had reporting that sort of put A plus B together, the complaint provides some primary sources that make it very clear what was going on.

DAVID FAHRENTHOLD, REPORTER, WASHINGTON POST: That`s also gratifying about this. There were things that I had always wondered or suspected about what -- how this all went down and because the Attorney General has subpoena power and I don`t they learned a lot of things from as you said inside the Trump Campaign, inside the Trump Organization that showed how these things happen, how Trump used money from the foundation, money from the charity to pay off his business`s obligations and how he also used the foundation as kind of a prop and a tool for his presidential campaign.

HAYES: You`ve got Corey Lewandowski directing disbursements from the foundation as they`re campaigning through Iowa.

FAHRENTHOLD: That`s right. What`s important to know here is that there`s sort of a key bedrock part of charity law in the U.S. that nonprofits charities can`t use their money to help political campaigns. That`s like a bright line. You can`t do that. And what turns out to have happened in this case was that the Trump Foundation, this tax-exempt nonprofit was sort of co-opted by the Trump campaign. It was used by the Trump campaign to give away money at Trump rallies and as you said, the Trump campaign basically shows when and where and how and whom -- and who and how much to give us money away.

HAYES: That`s just on its face illegal.

FAHRENTHOLD: Well, that`s not for me to say but certainly the Attorney General has said it`s illegal.

HAYES: Well, so here`s the other thing they seem to be doing. I mean, the other thing and this was something that you`re reporting showed was he`s using the foundation essentially as a means of paying off things for the President himself, that you know settling a legal settlement. Is that proper?

FAHRENTHOLD: Yes it is. What Trump never seemed to grasp. But even today in his defense it doesn`t seem to grasp is that he thinks that the only rule that applies to his charity is it as long as he`s giving money from his charity to another charity it has to be OK, there can be nothing wrong with it.

HAYES: Right.

FAHRENTHOLD: But that`s not the way it works. That`s not the way the law works. If it did, we would all create charities to use you know, people will use it -- their own charity money to pay for private school tuitions, right? That`s an easy example of why you can`t just give money to a non- profit and assume that it`s always OK. In this case, Trump had made -- sort of his businesses had these obligations were to settle legal disputes, they had committed to pay money to a charity to make a charitable donation in lieu of the lawsuit settlement or a legal settlement with the town of Palm Beach. What Trump did was taking money out of his foundation which is theoretically an independent non-profit meant to serve its own goals, serve the public --

HAYES: Serve the public good.

FAHRENTHOLD: Right. He`s taking money out of that foundation and paid the charities that his businesses now owes money to.

HAYES: So here`s what my big question for you. You won Pulitzer Prize for your reporting on this in 2016. You were using sort of fuel leather, you were calling people up, plus you have public filings, right? There are some stuff the foundation have to publicly make accessible. You`re now working on trying to zero in on the President`s personal financial empire. You wrote this great piece about how he shifted to cash from debt. It`s very unexplained. It`s a sort of strange thing to do if you`re running a real estate enterprise. Compare the opacity of the foundation to what you`re working on now.

FAHRENTHOLD: The foundation was hard but it was it`s much, much easier than this for the reason -- two reasons. One, the taxes in foundations like the Trump Foundation have to file a public annual filing with the IRS and in this case with the New York State Regulator. So we don`t have Donald Trump`s personal tax returns, we don`t have his businesses tax records, we did have set records for his charity. So that gave me a roadmap of who to call. Also, the people that he was doing business with, for lack of a better word, the people he was donating money to with his charity they were nonprofits who were -- would call me back. Trying to understand what`s going on with his business, a lot more records are non- public and a lot more that business partners have more incentive to be secretive about it. So it`s very interesting, much more interesting even but it`s a lot harder.

HAYES: Yes. This is what I would imagine. Washington Post Josh Fahrenthold, thanks your great reporting and stay at it, OK.


HAYES: All right, for more on what this lawsuit tells us about the inner workings of Trump world I`m joined by attorney Elie Mystal, Executive Editor of the legal Web site Above the Law and Josh Marshall Editor and Publisher of Talking Points Memo. My big takeaway from this and it`s a takeaway I already had, but when you see the documents in front of you Donald Trump is lining is just the flagrant aggressive lawlessness of the way that Donald Trump conducts himself and his personal business any time we get a glimpse of it.

ELIE MYSTAL, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, ABOVE THE LAW: Yes, Trump and his family act like rules are just guidelines and guidelines are just yelp reviews. Like he has no understanding of like how the rules work and how the laws work and they don`t think that they can be held accountable to any of them.

HAYES: And so far they got away with them. I mean, that`s also what`s remarkable. We only -- I mean, Josh, here -- this is the guy whose conduct himself this way for 30 years in public life and he`s been through some bankruptcies and he settled lots of lawsuits --


HAYES: And then he`s gotten slapped on the wrist by the near New Jersey Gaming Authority. He`s the President of the United States and you know, here`s the complaint from the A.G. and they`ll figure out ways to settle that.

MARSHALL: Yes. Well, the A.G. may not want to settle this one. I think that he may find a big surprise there. But you`re right. There`s -- they don`t -- you know, they have -- there`s those legends about kids raised by wolves, you know who haven`t had human acculturation. It`s like the Trump family, they were raised, they don`t know about the law. There`s something congenital. They don`t know about not breaking the law. It`s -- the frame you have is exactly right. It`s just show -- I mean, there are best practices for how to be a corrupt politician or a corrupt businessman. You don`t put this stuff into e-mails. You kind of tell us hey, move the money over there.

HAYES: Right.

MARSHALL: They don`t even -- you know they`re pushing back now. You have his campaign manager assigning the donations.


MARSHALL: You can`t do that. There`s just no question.

MYSTAL: The settlement point is important though as well. And I want to give a shout out to the A.G. Barbara Underwood. I mean, first of all, a Barbara Underwood is the one who brought this particular suit. She`s the one who replaced Eric Schneiderman. Let`s all now just understand that no abusive man is indispensable, OK. There are great people --

HAYES: Great point.

MYSTAL: -- who can do can you do the job right.

HAYES: Just took the file and said OK, peace.

MYSTAL: Put all your stuff in a box to the left, I`m going to get down to work.

HAYES: Right. good point.

MYSTAL: Number two, Underwood is an actual prosecutor. She`s not just playing one on T.V., she`s not trying to use being the A.G. to become the Governor, right? So when Trump says, oh I will not settle this, no problem. We aren`t asking you to settle this, right? She sees a crime that -- well, she sees a violation --

HAYES: A civil violation.

MYSTAL: A civil violation that has happened and she wants those people to pay for -- pay for their misdeeds.

HAYES: Well, this is the question also. I mean, look we got one, we`ve got a little window into Michael Cohen`s little financial world because a whistleblower started sending out his suspicious activity reports. And through that tiny keyhole, what did we see? The guys getting these $500,000 payments that are -- that from major corporations from a Russian oligarch aligned firm, right, into this LLC is paying off slush funds, that looks shady sack. That`s one tiny keyhole. There`s another keyhole over here which is the Trump Foundation which they`re flagrantly violating a law. You cannot help but wonder what is in the black box of those tax returns.

MARSHALL: I think everyone wonder.

MYSTAL: I think we know.


MARSHALL: Every time we get a look, it`s sort of like take the craziest anti-Trump person on Twitter --

HAYES: That`s right -

MARSHALL: And take their fantasies about what you`re going to find and that`s what you do find. I mean, it`s like --

HAYES: That`s well said.

MARSHALL: Who would have thought? Like you know, Michael Cohen was actually getting half a million from a Russian oligarch and also another million from a big corporate. Like, wow. Like, that seems like a little improbable yet it totally happened.

HAYES: And the reason it seems improbable is precisely for what we`re talking about is that we`re used to a certain acculturation around compliance or hiding things from the law.

MARSHALL: Yes, that`s practices --

HAYES: That`s practices for being corrupt, like a little wink-wink-nudge- nudge that seems totally missing in what we`ve seen in the documentary evidence.

MYSTAL: Not going to matter to his base though. Trump is going to get up there and he`s going to say, no crime, no collusion, and that`s going to be that. Look, if there`s one thing that I want the Democrats the pass if they happen to take back the House, I want them to pass a law saying that if you run for president, you have to release your taxes. Not optional, not like oh if it feels like it. You have to actually do that.

HAYES: Well, I think -- I think there`s very few things of a greater importance nationally in terms of accountability for this president and also knowing like making sure he`s not being bribed currently than that right now. I mean, like, extorting, bribe, like there`s a million reasons. Every time that we get any glimpse of this man`s financial life, it raises a million red flags.

MARSHALL: Yes, and again, usually we think -- I mean, in -- with normal presidents, we think about there might be appearance problems but here it really seems like it`s like a bust out with like a mob or something. Like let`s do as many deals we can as long as we have this White House thing. I mean they`re -- it is very reasonable to think based on the evidence that the Trump family is currently using the presidency to max out profits. And that`s -- that is something so aggressive and egregious that it`s mainly outside of what we`re normally worried about which is like OK, you`re dealing with like energy policy and you own some shell stock, you know, something like that.

HAYES: That`s right. And I think that`s a reasonable thing to suspect and there`s only one way to really know for sure which is to see the financial records. Elie Mystal and Josh Marshall, thanks for joining me.

MYSTAL: Thank you.

HAYES: Coming up, Hilary Clinton`s Campaign Chairman has said James Comey helped blow the election for his candidate. John Podesta joins me to react today`s I.G. report from the Department of Justice. You don`t want to miss that in two minutes.


HAYES: Today is the day, on the President`s birthday, the Justice Department`s Inspector General releasing it`s much-anticipated report on James Comey and the FBI. A1nd the primary takeaway, listened closely, was something that has been fairly clear for a while. It is this. The FBI under James Comey helped tip the U.S. Presidential Election to Donald Trump. It hurt Hillary Clinton and it is a very simple story. In a move that the Inspector General himself after months of studying a 500-page report, flatly criticized as insubordinate, James Comey broke with Justice Department policy and held a high-profile press conference about the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton, a move that played directly into Trump`s portrayal of Clinton as a criminal and reckless. And then, just ten days before the election, Comey announced he was reopening the Clinton investigation.

That decision, the I.G. today called "A serious error of judgment." As this was happening, let`s remember, the FBI was also simultaneously also investigating Donald Trump and his campaign for a far more serious potential crimes, not improper use of e-mail, not mishandling of classified information, but collusion with a hostile foreign government that was engaged in a crime during the campaign and yet, and yet Comey and the FBI were utterly silent about the Trump investigation even as they repeatedly dragged Clinton`s name through the mud. Joining me now for reaction of the report is the man who chaired Clinton`s 2016 Presidential Campaign John Podesta, Founder and Director of The Center for American Progress. John, your reaction to the report.

JOHN PODESTA, FOUNDER AND DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS: Well, look, Chris, I think you almost -- you summed up I think the outrage I think that people feel. But I think what`s -- what you pointed towards is really the heart of this which was that there was a double standard at the FBI that Mr. Comey made egregious errors of judgment in handling the Clinton e-mail case by first holding their press conference in July and then most importantly and I think most harmfully to our campaign releasing that letter publicly against policy, against practice. It was condemned at the time by bipartisan leaders of the Justice Department from the Bush and other administration`s going back, not just you know, Democrats but Republicans as well who had served in senior positions.

And it definitely, you know, it hurt her campaign and I think it gave Donald Trump the White House. But what this report says is something I think we`ve known for 18 months which is that a double standard was applied, they had a totally different view about how to manage the Russian investigation. They kept that completely under wraps. They even threw reporters who are on the scent of the Russia investigation often in the opposite direction famously with the New York Times. So you know, that`s what`s just so inexplicable.

HAYES: I want to read you on that. This is a Comey e-mail to Brennan when they`re discussing whether they should make a unified public statement from the I.C. about the attacks -- the attacks happening from Russia. This is Comey. "I could be wrong and frequently am but Americans already know the Russians are monkeying around on behalf of one candidate." This is him saying it`s already too late. The window has closed. We can`t come out public. "Our confirming it adds little of the public mix, begs difficult questions about both how we know that and what we are going to do about it, and three exposes us to serious accusations of launching our own October surprise. That last bit is utterly untrue but in reality it -- in reality in our poisonous atmosphere." This is several weeks before he announces the reopening of investigation. What`s your reaction in reading that?

PODESTA: Yes, and of course he refused to sign on to the letter that was released on October 7th that was signed by James Clapper and Jeh Johnson the Director of Homeland Security talking about the active measures that the Russians were undertaking to interfere with the election. Subsequent to the election we know that the Intelligence Community also concluded that they were doing that explicitly at the direction of President Putin and to help Donald Trump. And he refused to sign on it because he said you know, it would involve him in politics. And yet somehow that didn`t cause him to take a gulp before sending a letter to the Hill reopening the Clinton e- mail investigation and then a week later, saying never mind we looked at it, there`s nothing there. You know, it`s --you know it`s a historic error of judgment and in my view, the country is paying a huge price for that error.

HAYES: Can we just -- let`s pretend for a moment here on national television I`m your therapist, John. How does this make you feel? Like honestly, I wonder what goes through your head and for Hillary Clinton`s head and in your heart at -- when you read this.

PODESTA: Well, look, you know, you can`t but be angry all over again. But you know, I`ve tried to stop being angry because you know, the -- there`s an offense sort of daily that usually starts with a morning tweet and just try to do you know what we can to get the country back on the right direction and most importantly to have a positive outcome in the 2018 election so that there`s some check on the abuses of power that are going on right now in the White House. Now, there are -- we should be clear here that there are texts in there from one of the investigators here Peter Strzok that do seem quite hostile to Donald Trump. We can stop him at one point he says. He`s exchanging a lot of text with a woman who he`s having an affair with, talking about how they don`t like Donald Trump. They think poorly of him. The conclusion of the I.G. is that that bias didn`t end up playing out in the actual commissions of acts and the FBI. But I guess the big question is do you trust the integrity of this report from the I.G. and do you trust the current integrity of the FBI?

PODESTA: Well, I think Mr. Horowitz has a very good reputation. It`s a very thorough report. You know, Mr. Strzok has been kind of sent off to the site equivalent in the FBI of Siberia. Miss Page has left the FBI. You know, I think they made errors of judgment in doing those tweets. My guess is maybe Mr. Wray was talking about Mr. Strzok when he said today we`re going to review the report and think about further disciplinary actions. But as you noted, Chris, the I.G. also concluded that A, they were even more aggressive than some of the other FBI agents and prosecutors in pursuing the Clinton e-mail case and that they did nothing -- they took no action that the I.G. could find that in any way influence the conduct of this investigation or when after Mr. Trump. Now, you know what the President is going to say about this which is there`s a deep state conspiracy and it`s proven by you know, this one e-mail and you know, I think they were -- you know, again I think it was unfortunate but there were like a lot of other people in America saying, oh my God, we can`t let this happen.

HAYES: John Podesta, thanks for being with me tonight.

PODEST: Thanks, Chris.

HAYES: After the break my interview with a former staffer of a child detention center holding immigrant kinds as young as four years old to give a rare account of what he described as prison-like conditions. He joins me next.



KAREM: Don`t you have any empathy? Come on, Sarah you`re a parent, don`t you have any empathy for what these people are going to? They have less --


KAREM: Seriously.

SANDERS: I`m trying to be serious but I`m not going to have you yell out of turn.

KAREM: -- and they have -- these people have nothing.

SANDERS: Brian, I know you want to get some more T.V. time, but that`s not what this is about. I will not recognize you. Go ahead, Jill.

KAREM: Honestly, answer the question. It`s a serious question. These people have nothing, they come to the border with nothing, and he throwing children in cages. You`re a parent. You`re a parent of young children. Don`t you have any empathy for what they go through?

SANDERS: Jill, go ahead.


HAYES: The moral crisis of the Trump Administration`s policy of separating immigrant families is boiling over. The administration has chosen to tear children away from their parents and no one, no one is willing to take ownership for that, for what they`re doing. Today, ALL IN got an exclusive snapshot of what it`s like to be one of those parents desperately searching for their children. A tipster sent us the information that immigrants are given when they are taken into custody and their children are ripped away from them.

They are apparently handed a piece of paper with the following text in both English and Spanish. "You have been charged with the crime of illegal entry into the United States in violation of law. Within the next 48 hours, you will be presented before a judge for having violated this law. While this process is occurring, your child or children will be transferred to the United States Department of Health and Human Services Office a Refugee Resettlement. The Office of Refugee Resettlement is responsible for providing care for children that have been separated from their parent. For assistance in locating your child or children, you may contact the Office of Refugee Resettlement. For information about your immigration case with a process for reunifying with your child or children, contact Immigration and Customs Enforcement."

This afternoon, we called the number on that card and imagine yourself as a parent who has had their child taken away and in custody and in detention and maybe with no access to phone but you get access to a phone and then you call this and the number you`re supposed to call to find her child that has been taken away from you and you hear this.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All calls are recorded for Quality Assurance purposes. (SPEAKING SPANISH). Thank you for calling the detention reporting and information line at Immigration and Customs Enforcement or ICE. To continue this call in English press one. Thank you for calling the ICE detention reporting and information line. Information you provide during this call may be transcribed and retained in our call logs. This includes names, addresses, phone numbers, other personal identifiers, vehicle information, and information related to criminal and immigration history. Additionally, uses caller I.D. to identify your phone number and may record your phone number if it is available through caller I.D. ICE may disclose the information collected during this call within the Department of Homeland Security or externally as appropriate and consistent with federal law and policy. Providing information during this call is completely voluntary. However, failure to provide information we request may limit our ability to assist you. If you are in ICE custody, please press 1. All other callers, please press 2.


HAYES: That`s the message you get. In other words, if you want to get your kid back, call a number that will use anything you tell them to build the case to possibly deport you. And there are more stories coming out about what it`s like inside those child detention facilities.

Today, the L.A. Times published the account of one worker at a facility in Tucson who described a strained and understaffed environment for children. That whistleblower, Antar Davidson, joins me right now.

Antar, you worked in a facility in Tucson. Can you tell me how many kids were in there and what their ages were?

ANTAR DAVIDSON, WHISTLEBLOWER: Sure. First, thanks for having me on the show. I resigned as of Tuesday as a conscientious objector to what was happening there so I no longer work there. Basically the kids there ranging between 280 to 300 kids aged from about 4 to 17. However, some there had been adults that posed as adolescents and they were caught and they were as old as 26.

HAYES: Four to seventeen. I want to focus in on this transition period, the change after what`s called the zero tolerance policy or family separation starts happening in the last few months. What change do you see in a facility that had been designed for unaccompanied minors that is now getting children who are being taken from their parents? What did you see change there?

DAVIDSON: Yes. Well, you see basically a facility set up for a more transient population that is extremely strained already then have to deal with a much more traumatized population that has no clue what`s going on, the laws are changing every day. And as such, seeing as they`re kids, some as young as five, they`re extremely traumatized by this and act up and really there were more kids coming and they were more and more traumatized and harder to deal with leading to a harder, more authoritarian approach by the staff in attempting to deal with it.

HAYES: Elaborate that. You`re saying what were the signs of trauma from these young kids? You`re talking about kids five, six, seven who`ve just been pulled away from their parents.


HAYES: Put in your facility, how are they manifesting that?

DAVIDSON: So just a little bit of background, until the zero tolerance policy, the majority of kids that came were from Guatemala and this policy had been in place for about four to five years, so they kind of knew the drill. They knew that when they get to the border, they talk to a border patrol agent, that agent would then put them in the facility, they`d be there up to about three months and then they`d be reunified with papers and put into a public school in their destination.

So the kids that had come up until the zero tolerance policy, the majority were kids that knew what was going to happen. They knew what they were getting into. After that when the zero tolerance policy happened, basically it wasn`t these people that knew the drill, they were kids and kids up to 17 that were actually ripped from their parents and had no idea what was going on.

And the case that really broke the camel`s back for me, these were Brazilian kids and there was no one speaking to them in Portuguese so they hardly even understood and it was not even really explained to them well either.

HAYES: If you have a foster care system that the state will have some usually, it`s usually insufficient but some mental healthcare for kids particularly coming out of trauma, they`ll be social workers or they`ll be therapists to work with those, are there mental health services being provided for these kids who`ve just seen their parents ripped away from them?

DAVIDSON: Sure. They do eventually get a clinician. It sometimes takes a few days. For instance, I was the first person that speaks Portuguese. So the issue with these seven Brazilian kids was they do have a clinician, but the clinician didn`t speak their language and it`s very difficult to use by phone, so they weren`t even understanding the clinician part or the case manager part. But each kid is in Southwest Key, they are assigned clinicians, however that department in Southwest Key is very understaffed. They were offering bonuses of between $2,000 and $3,000 for like successful hiring of a clinician or a case manager because the turnover was so high in those departments.

HAYES: Final question for you. When you`re talking about four or five- year olds, like that`s a very young kid. That`s not a kid that you got a 14-year old, 13,-year old, 12-year old you can have lights out, go to the dorm, wake up in the morning, they come down for breakfast. Four-year or five-year old, you got to be managing that kid much more closely. Are there enough adults and are they trained to be looking after a four-year old?

DAVIDSON: Not at all. We received one week of training and now these kids are extremely traumatized and they`re put to bed at the end of the shift. Our shift would end at 9:30. And these are people as much as the children are suffering, the workers are suffering, they`re kept in temporary positions and meanwhile the CEO and his wife clear more than $1 million a year in mostly federal tax money. And they basically undercut the services, so it`s a basic private prison model in the guise of a shelter.

So the people at the end of the day when they have to put these kids to sleep, have already worked an eight-hour shift, are oftentimes asked to stay overtime and exhausted. And on top of that, these kids are very traumatized. They`re running up and down the halls screaming, crying for their mom, throwing chairs.

HAYES: Right.

DAVIDSON: It`s a tired, undertrained staff dealing with an increasingly traumatized and uncompliant population of minors so it`s a recipe for disaster.

HAYES: Actually, no, we`ve invited the CEO of Southwest Key to appear on the show. We`ve gotten no response. We love to have him on talking about this. Antar Davidson, thank you for the inside view. We appreciate it.

DAVIDSON: Of course. Thank you very much, yes.

HAYES: With me now Democrat Barbara Boxer, former U.S. senator from California. Watching this as someone who worked in immigration policy in years in the U.S. Senate, worked on the asylum policy, has dealt with shepherding legislation on this, what`s your response to this?

BARBARA BOXER, FORMER U.S. SENATOR: I can barely express it and so I`m going to be very direct. I want to thank Mr. Davidson for becoming a whistleblower and letting us know what`s happening. But I don`t care if you`re a Democrat or Republican or decline to state, whether you vote, you don`t vote. There are certain things that we have to cherish, the first thing are children.

And what is happening here is a sin against God. I believe that and that`s why we are seeing now finally some fundamentalist groups come out who have been loyal Donald Trump supporters, they don`t care about his private life. But this is brought about by the Trump administration. This is new. You do not, do not tear minor children away from their parents. What you should do is have a surge of immigration lawyers and judges come down there and listen to these asylum cases and if they have a leg to stand on grant them asylum, and if they don`t, keep them together, send them back. But what they are doing now is inhumane and it is a sin in my view.

HAYES: Your longtime colleague in California, Diane Feinstein, has a bill that would end this on the Senate side. She`s got 40 co-sponsors. If I`m not mistaken, there`s not a single Republican co-sponsor signed on to that yet. Does that surprise you given that you worked with these people? I know you worked on legislations with some of those Republican senators across the aisle.

BOXER: I think that the Republicans may have their own bill. I`m not sure. I`d heard something about it.

HAYES: That makes sense.

BOXER: . that Cornyn may have his own bill. Be that as it may, they should come together, we should solve this. There should be immediate hearings in this Republican Congress. Paul Ryan, who has always set himself up as a great dad, I`m sure he is a great dad and if someone tried to rip his kid out of his arms.

HAYES: That`s right.

BOXER: . he`d knock him cold. So let`s be clear here, I`ve studied the basic tenets of the greatest religions in the world just to get an idea, and where they all come together regardless of what they are is you treat others the way you want to be treated yourself, and they each say it in beautiful ways. This is a case in point that every single senator -- and, yes, I served with so many over time -- they should come together. I don`t care if it`s Diane`s bill and I`m so proud of her for having it or it`s Cornyn`s bill, whosever bill it is.


BOXER: . let`s take care of this and let`s look at this. Why is it that your station is the one that gets a reporter in and it`s the job of the Congress to do oversight. I would be just calling for oversight 24/7.

HAYES: Well, you may raise a good point. We should have hearings about this next week or as soon as Congress reconvenes. I`m not quite sure when that is. I don`t work that much. But, Barbara Boxer, thank you very much for being here. I really, really appreciate your insights.

BOXER: Thank you.

HAYES: We`ll be right back.


HAYES: Thing one tonight, the Trump White House has seen an unprecedented amount of turnover, more than any other administration in the last 40 years and now word of three more top aides looking for the exits. Legislative Affairs Director Marc Short will be out by the summer according to the Wall Street Journal. And today Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders gave a non-denial denial of a CBS news report that she and her company Press Secretary Raj Shah will be leaving as well. But according to the president he should have no trouble hiring replacements.


DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Believe me, everybody wants to work in the White House. They all want a piece of that Oval Office. They want a piece of the West Wing. So many people want to come in. I have a choice of anybody. I could take any position in the White House and I`ll have a choice of the 10 top people having to do with that position. Everybody wants to be there.


HAYES: Everybody wants to be here. Well, turns out not so much. A source close to the administration tells CBS nobody wants to come in to fill all these jobs, so they`ve gone through few rounds and now they`re at third tier of people who are just lucking out. Battlefield promotion ends up promoting people who aren`t qualified for the position. Gosh, you can never tell really by the way they operate. In fact, it`s gotten so bad that they are now trying a new recruiting tactic, the White House job fair is Thing Two in 60 seconds.


HAYES: The Trump White House is losing so many staffers and having such a hard time finding people to replace them, they`re turning to a conservative job fair to get some new recruits. Politico reports Republicans on the Hill received an email blast last night with a subject line "Interested in a job at the White House?" and this flyer advertising an executive job fair. Tomorrow afternoon at the Senate office building, the conservative group hosting the event says "CPI seeks to get the best most qualified conservatives in front of the administration."


TRUMP: So many people want to come and I have a choice of anybody. I could take any position in the White House and I`ll have a choice of the 10 top people having to do with that position. Everybody wants to be there.



HAYES: It has been an incredibly bizarre spectacle. The president of the United States just praising the dictator Kim Jong-un, a man who has executed hundreds of people including members of his own family, some on foreign soil, a man who`s imprisoned up to 120,000 people in gulags where many of them are tortured, starved and raped.


BRET BAIER, FOX NEWS HOST: He is a killer. He`s clearly executing people and.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, he`s a tough guy. Hey, when you take over a country, a tough country with tough people and you take it over from your father, I don`t care who you are, what you are, how much of an advantage you have, if you can do that at 27 years old, I mean, that`s one in 10,000 that could do that. So he`s a very smart guy, he`s a great negotiator and I think we understand each other.

BAIER: But he`s still done some really bad things.

TRUMP: Yes, but so have a lot of other people done some really bad things. I mean, I could go through a lot of nations where a lot of bad things were done.


HAYES: A lot of other people have done some really bad things. I guess true in so far as it goes. Trump also claimed in that interview that the parents of Americans killed in the Korean War personally asked him on the campaign trail to bring back their children`s remains which seems unlikely considering active fighting in the Korean War ended more than 60 years ago which would mean any parents of soldiers killed in that war would be more than 100 years old now. So it sure seems like the president is making up stories about Gold Star families for his own political purposes.

That pales in comparison to the video made for the propaganda purposes of Kim Jong-un which is running on state TV inside North Korea right now.



HAYES: That`s the president of the United State saluting an enemy general, saluting a North Korean general to the delight of Kim Jong-un. Now, I`m sure that this was just a momentary gesture of common courtesy and not something for everyone to get all worked up about. And I`m sure Donald Trump would agree with me if, say, Barack Obama had done this.


HAYES: A big concern for Democrats heading into November`s midterm elections is the number of Democratic centers up for reelection in states that Donald Trump won in 2016, 10 states in total, Democratic incumbents are particularly vulnerable in Indiana, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, and West Virginia, states that Trump won by big margins. And then there`s Ohio, it`s a state that Trump won about eight points but where two-term Democratic incumbent Senator Sherrod Brown is up 17 and 16 points respectively in two new polls.

With me now, Senator Sherrod Brown, Democrat from Ohio.


HAYES: I saw an ad of yours that you covered, it`s about sort of tariffs in trade. The president looks like he`s going to approve tariffs about $50 billion on Chinese goods. There`s a lot of mixed feeling about the president`s trade policy right now and the tariffs particularly. Where are you on the tariffs?

BROWN: Well, I support them. My whole career has been about fighting for workers and you look at what`s happened with these trade policies, what it`s done to Mansfield, Ohio and Youngstown and Cleveland, Dayton and everywhere where the business plan for hundreds of tens of thousands of businesses have been you shut down production in Toledo or Chillicothe, Ohio and you move it to -- you can cash in on a tax break and move it to Wuhan and Beijing. It`s been a trade policy that`s betrayed workers, tariffs are a tool, only a tool, they`re not a trade policy, but they`re a temporary tool to begin to change that policy.

HAYES: Okay. But do you support the ones against Canada?

BROWN: It depends on which day. I mean, the president has changed his.

HAYES: You, Senator Brown, don`t not support slapping tariffs on Canada for national security reasons?

BROWN: Correct. I support -- I mean, the president has, first, he`s been all over the board. When he rolled it out, it was supposed to be aimed at China, he was supposed to be consistent in what he did, he called it a trade war. It`s not a trade war, it`s a tool. I want to see it consistent. We know they need to be temporary. That`s how you do tariffs to get as part of a policy, as part of a trade tool to get to a better policy. I don`t like it that he`s aimed much of this from the G7 discussions or wasn`t really a discussion was it with Trudeau and Europe, I mean, that`s not the way you do this trade policy.

The violations of trade law have been what the Chinese have done including legislation I`m working on, China investing in the U.S., and in many cases those investments could undercut American jobs. So we need a test, if you will, of Chinese investments here that only leads to American jobs, not more profits for Chinese-owned companies.

HAYES: Okay. But I`ve been in Ohio, I don`t know it as well as you do, you represent the state. But you got farmers in Ohio, you got farmers that export products to China, you`ve got manufacturers that buy steel from other places, right? There`s two sides of the ledger, right? So you got factories in Mansfield, steel that you want to help, but if you start getting tariffs on exported soy and things like that, I mean, that`s going to hurt your state.

BROWN: Twenty years ago during the PNCR debates with China, the number that we arrived at, there were about 100 million unemployed Chinese workers and no authoritarian or democratic government wants a bunch and wants millions of young men running around the countryside unemployed. So china puts them to work. They put them to work by subsidizing their energy and their water and their land and their capital.

In many cases, they own these businesses, they`re government-owned enterprises and they break trade law day after day after day. They will work their way up the supply chain, it`s steel and aluminum today then its autos, then they work their way up the supply chain by subsidizing those and investing in the U.S. and we`re in a worse place.

That`s why you use these tariffs now. We do them selectively, we do them in ways that retaliation is minimized and they are more temporary. But that`s not the way the president has laid them out. That`s my concern. I talked this week at length with a U.S. trade rep from my wife`s hometown of Ashtabula, Ohio and we`ve got a lot to do to do this right. It`s been done generally in the right direction, but not been done as well as it should be.

HAYES: There`s big Supreme Court case regarding your state that upheld the ability to purge voter rolls. I know this is something close to your heart. You were Secretary of State in Ohio but back when you were quite young. Was that correctly decided, that Supreme Court case?

BROWN: No. It was terrible. There`s an assault. When I was Secretary of State, I convinced the McDonald`s corporation to print a million tray liners so when you go to McDonald`s they put a piece of paper in as your tray liner and you could register to vote on that tray liner, and you could go to the Board of Elections in Lima, Ohio and find ketchup-stained registration forms I imagine still.

But we`ve seen this Secretary of State, more than that, we`ve seen nationally Republicans go after voting rights whether it`s eliminate Sunday voting, whether it`s restricting more absentee voting, whether it`s re- districting, of course, and whether it`s these voter purges. Ohio`s may have been the worst in the country.

The president not only that case that was wrongly decided, the president of the United States has just selected two appellant judges that have been part of some of these on everything from for-profit charter schools to voting rights.

HAYES: Two nominees.

BROWN: Yes, nominees to the pre-existing condition ruling. And we`re fighting on this because I know that if the rulings like to stand its one more move, one more piece the Republicans are going to continue to go after to suppress the vote. They won elections by suppressing the vote in many cases. In close elections, if they can keep 1 or 2 percent of people from voting, it makes all the difference in the world.

HAYES: Final question. I think I know the answer. Are you supporting legislation from Diane Feinstein to rescind--

BROWN: Yes, yes, yes. I haven`t signed on yet. I want to understand it better. But watching your piece with Mr. Davidson and then Senator Boxer, it`s just incredible and the phone call that you made, that your staff made just breaks your heart. In Sandusky, Ohio there was one of the biggest raids ever.


BROWN: . where children were separated from parents. It`s the most mean- spirited, awful thing I`ve ever seen from my government and we should all be ashamed, we should all fight back. I talked to somebody from Bread for the World, a religious based food advocacy group and the work they`re doing to fight back in Sandusky and all over the country. It`s so, so important to tell these stories and you contributed a lot tonight to that. Thank you.

HAYES: Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio.

BROWN: Thanks. It`s good to be back.

HAYES: Before I go, I want to make sure everyone checks out the newest episode of our podcast, "Why Is This Happening?" with special guest Amy Chua. We talk about the idea of tribalism within politics.


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.