Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: June 15, 2018 Guest: Ken Vogel, Harry Litman, Ryan Goodman, Rosalind Helderman, Beto O`Rourke
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST: Tonight on ALL IN.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Paul Manafort has done an amazing job. He`s here someplace. Where`s Paul?
HAYES: The President`s Campaign Chairman in jail tonight.
TRUMP: You know, Paul Manafort worked for me for a very short period of time.
HAYES: A judge revoked Paul Manafort bail after new charges of obstruction of justice.
TRUMP: Like Manafort has nothing to do with our campaign.
HAYES: Tonight what this means for the Mueller investigation and the increasing evidence of collusion. Then --
TRUMP: I always like Michael.
HAYES: The Feds recover 700 pages of encrypted messages from Trump`s henchmen Michael Cohen.
TRUMP: Look, I did nothing wrong.
HAYES: And ALL IN has obtained exclusive new details on some of the 2,000 children taken from their parents at the border.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is where at least 65 kids, 65 migrant children from Central America are living.
HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Good evening from New York, I`m Chris Hayes. Tonight the former campaign chairman to the President of the United States is behind bars. He`s behind bars for allegedly colluding with a suspected Russian agent to suborn perjury and obstruct justice while he was out under house arrest. Today a judge in Washington D.C. revoked Paul Manafort`s bail after the Special Counsel accused him of tampering with witnesses while he was out under house arrest, filing new obstruction of justice charges against Manafort and a longtime associate Konstantin Kilimnik was believed to have ties to Russian intelligence. The judge sent Manafort to jail to await his two upcoming trials on multiple counts of conspiracy and fraud among other charges. Though he did at least get to ditch his two ankle monitors. It`s quite the record for a campaign whose unofficial slogan chanted at venue after venue was locked her up. Let`s review. The top National Security Adviser who led the locker up chants at the convention pleaded guilty to a felony and has been cooperating with investigators, a former top foreign policy adviser likewise, pleaded guilty to a felony, agreed to cooperate. The deputy campaign chairman pleaded guilty to a felony, has been cooperating. Now the chairman himself who ran the show during a crucial period of the campaign, the guy on top of the entire thing is behind bars after being indicted on numerous charges going out on bail and having his bail revoked. It is simply the most criminal group of people surrounding a sitting president since Richard Nixon. And when all is said and done, it may turn out to be much worse. According to a reporter who is at Manafort `s hearing today, he gave a stilted wave to his wife as court martials led him out of the courtroom and it`s later a Marshall returned to hand his wife his brown leather belt, wallet, and burgundy tie. Officers declined to say where exactly Manafort is being held but one law-enforcement official told NBC News, a normal procedure for a defendant whose bail was revoked would be to end up at D.C. Central Jail. Conditions there are as they are nearly all of America`s overfull jails, harsh.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There`s a metal shelf for bed, literally, right. And roaches are walking all over that as well as the ceilings and up the walls and on the floors. And so you`re spending the night killing roaches.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: It`s going to be an adjustment for a man used to a certain lifestyle and who according to prosecutors laundered millions of dollars for luxury real estate, designer clothes and a million dollars` worth of rugs. And that may be just what Robert Mueller is hoping for. But a few nights in lockup will convince Manafort to make a deal and share what he knows about possible collusion between Russia in the Trump campaign, and that could be a lot. After all, Manafort worked for Russian interests for years before during the campaign. We know he got an e-mail from George Papadopoulos about his contact for the Russian emissary. We know he attended the infamous Trump Tower meeting in which they essentially attempted to collude with the Russians. We know he was in touch throughout the campaign with his friend Kilimnik, the suspected Russian operative who has since been indicted. Just a couple hours after Manafort was taken into custody, the President`s lawyer offered him a reason not to cooperate. Rudy Giuliani, former federal prosecutor, a man known for loving law and order here in New York City telling the New York Daily News "when the wall -- whole thing is over, things might get cleaned up with some presidential pardons. I`m joined now by two journalists closely covering the saga of Paul Manafort. Ken Vogel, Political Reporter for The New York Times and MSNBC Contributor Natasha Bertrand, Staff Writer for the Atlantic. Ken, what a stunning turn of events for Paul Manafort?
KEN VOGEL, POLITICAL REPORTER, NEW YORK TIMES: Yes, that`s right. This is a guy who could have sort of faded away and maybe he would have been under some financial pressure. That`s the reason that we understand they decided to come back and sort of try to refresh his bonafides in Republican and U.S. politics to be able to go and market those connections around the world. He had done an amazing job of that, really pioneer at a particular type of foreign lobbying where U.S. consultants went around the world and worked for some of these unsavory characters both helping them with their own campaigns introducing American campaign techniques, but also helping them with their connections in Washington to try to buff their images. That is the type of work that he is now being prosecuted for, his work on behalf of Viktor Yanukovych, the Ukrainian strongman president who Manafort essentially revived the career of and got him elected but he was chased from power in 2014. Manafort continued to try to work in Ukraine for a follow-up party to Yanukovych`s party. That party didn`t pay him. He found himself short of money so he needed to refresh his credentials and that`s what -- that`s sort of the circumstances that found him on the Trump campaign. Not only did it not work out that he not get to refresh his credentials to be able to go around the world and continue to make these huge sums of money, it has put him very much at risk of potentially spending the rest of his life behind bars.
HAYES: We should note, this is a man who was desperate need of money, who worked for free for the campaign, and within a day or two of that sent an e-mail to the man who has subsequently been indicted, Konstantin Kilimnik to say has the Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska seen this and how do we use this to get made whole, right Natasha?
NATASHA BERTRAND, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Right. I think that that`s key to understanding Manafort in current to the entire saga is that he joined the campaign. He was desperate really. He was in a lot of debt. He was roughly $17 million in debt to pro-Russian interests. And as soon as he got to the campaign, he was trying to figure out a way to leverage his high-level campaign position in order to repay those debts. I mean, we have the e-mails. We`ve seen those conversations that he had with Konstantin Kilimnik who of course has now also been indicted for allegedly being a co-conspirator with Paul Manafort to obstruct justice. He was saying -- he essentially put it in black and white, how can I you know get whole?
HAYES: How could I -- let`s just be clear. I have taken a position running the campaign of one of the two major party presidential nominees in America. How can I use that position for which I am not being compensated to make money, please tell me my Ukrainian buddy who is suspected to be a Russian intelligence asset?
BERTRAND: Right. So Paul Manafort had an extravagant incentive here. I mean, he really had to make it so that he was giving valuable information about the Trump campaign to a Russian. And whether or not that actually panned out, we don`t know. That is obviously something that Mueller is probably looking into quite closely. But of course Paul Manafort rise in terms of his role in the campaign also coincided with all of the most significant Russia-related events during the election. And whether or not that`s a coincidence, it`s a little bit hard to believe but of course, Paul Manafort was at that Trump Tower meeting. He was -- he was the campaign chairman when that platform at the GOP convention was changed to favor Russia in terms of the war in Ukraine. And of course, he resigned a day after it was discovered that he was still in debt to all of these pro- Russian Ukrainian interests.
HAYES: There`s somebody --
VOGEL: And you know, Chris, if I could just point out. It wasn`t just the relationship with Deripaska and the financial you know, the debt there, he was also owed. He and Kilimnik owed. They believe they were owed tens of millions of dollars by this opposition block which is the pro-Russian sort of follow-up party, successor party to Viktor Yanukovych`s party of regents. Kilimnik traveled twice to the U.S. during the campaign when Trump -- when Manafort was chairman of the campaign. Actually, my sources tell me it was at one point said he was in Trump Tower meeting with Manafort and they were discussing both the relationship with Deripaska and how they could collect on what they believed were these unpaid fees from this ongoing political party in Ukraine that was aligned with Russia. This is during the campaign.
HAYES: So here`s the big question, Natasha. I mean, we all look -- we`re all looking at Michael Cohen and we`ll get to that a little bit about there`s news that he might be ready to flip. We keep hearing that. Manafort has shown no signs of wanting to do that despite the fact that there`s a good chance that he enters jail tonight and never sees the outside of a jail cell for the rest of his natural life.
BERTRAND: Right. And prosecutors that I`ve spoken to have expressed confusion about this because if you`re Paul Manafort, you really have an incentive to cooperate with prosecutors here, but then again maybe you don`t. Because of course, from what we saw from Giuliani today kind of signaling to Paul Manafort that he might be able to expect a presidential pardon. Then that might be something and of course, we don`t know for sure but it might be something that the President has essentially dangled in front of Manafort. And if that`s the case, then that is a whole another level of obstruction right, because if he`s promising a presidential pardon to a subject of the investigation, a target of the investigation in exchange for him not talking, then that`s going to be very damaging to the president.
HAYES: Ken Vogel and Natasha Bertrand, thank you both for joining me. Have a great weekend.
BERTRAND: Thanks, Chris.
HAYES: For more on Manafort`s options now he`s behind bars I`m joined by MSNBC Justice Analyst Matt Miller who served as Spokesman for the Justice Department in the Obama Administration and Harry Litman former U.S. Attorney, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General at main Justice. Harry, let me start with you on the -- on the Rudy Giuliani floating of the pardon today. This might all need to be cleaned up. That strikes me -- a pardon of Manafort strikes me as much of a red line at this point is firing Mueller or Rosenstein. Do you agree?
HARRY LITMAN, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL: What a choice of words. It might have to be cleaned up. The -- yes, I totally agree there`s some dispute about the reach of the pardon power but this I think is one that would be front and center a kind of obstruction. When you use it to -- you use this word, Chris, as the right one, dangle in that way. So not even to do the pardon but just with a kind of public wink and a nod, stay quiet it`ll be good at the end of the day. The corrupt intent there just you know, lost from the words. So yes, I mean some of even suggested that Giuliani is putting himself in hot water. I don`t know about that but yes I think it absolutely it stinks as a matter of you know just politics, but it stinks as a matter of law as well. They`d be playing with fire for sure.
HAYES: Matt, here`s what the President tweeted today. Wow, what a tough sentence for Paul Manafort. I should stop there and say it`s not a sentence its detention, who is represented Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, and many other top political people in campaigns. I didn`t know Manafort was head of the mob. What about Comey and crooked Hillary and all others? Very unfair.
MATT MILLER, MSNBC JUSTICE ANALYST: Yes, look what the President and Giuliani did I think today was very dangerous. You`re talking about it being a red line if they were to pardon Manafort, that absolutely should be a red line. You`ve seen Democrats at least come out and say that. But even what they did today has already irreversibly tainted this process. Look how what Paul Manafort is. He is now in the place where he faces the biggest choice of the rest of his life which is to cooperate and potentially less than his sentence. It`s hard to believe he could get a no jail sentence but to lessen his sentence so he doesn`t spend the rest of his life in jail, flip on the President if he has anything to give or not do it. And the President by saying this was unfair and Rudy Giuliani coming out and saying what he did, dangling a pardon has put doubt into Manafort`s mind that maybe he doesn`t have to cooperate. They`ve removed that threat of jail time or at least in his mind possibly removed the threat of jail time. It is a completely insidious thing that they`ve done. And I think at some point, look, I think Harry makes a good point about it. It`s tough to ask whether Rudy Giuliani has crossed a legal line here but I can tell you what. If you saw a mob boss where the number two in the mob family was on trial or was facing trial, and the mob boss` lawyer came out and offered him a financial incentive or dangled a financial incentive not to cooperate, the Justice Department would take that very seriously and would consider whether you have that attorney out of you investigated for obstruction of justice. What Giuliani is done here is worse because he`s potentially taking the entire leverage the Department has a way. I think he`s very close to crossing a serious line.
HAYES: I also have to imagine that Robert Mueller and his team are just watching this Harry, just horrified and flabbergasted. I mean, honestly, these seem like people who are very by-the-book folks, who are very -- take the law very seriously. And watching the president the President`s lawyers behavior in response to all this, I just got to imagine they have to understand what they`re -- what they`re dealing with in terms of the lengths that these people will go to.
LITMAN: You know, we forget about this and but it`s true every week has brought unprecedented, you know, cavalier crass misbehavior of the sort you never see from defendants and no one`s ever seen from public officials. It really is mind-blowing.
HAYES: Yes, let me stop you there. That`s a thing of great importance. Every prosecutor that I`ve talked to has said the same thing. I`ve never seen this kind of behavior from a defendant. I mean, they said -- criminals in my whole time in life, prosecuting people accused of crimes. Many of them were guilty, I`ve never seen them act this way.
LITMAN: Yes, and totally in their face. You know, there`s been one guy actually we found out in the last couple of months has played it by the book and he`s -- and he seems to now possibly be emerging. That`s Jared Kushner with his lawyer Abbe Lowell. But it`s not simply that the tweet was from Trump, it`s everything in this and all the lawyer in which has been both substandard and unbelievably aggressive and confrontational. It`s really been by the book of how -- and including with Manafort this week of how not to be a defendant in a major probe and it just redoubles, redoubles, and redoubles again. In the meantime, Mueller so patiently collects you know, mountains of information that he -- that he`ll be ready to unveil but not knowing exactly what sort of reception it will get given the whole political context that this plays out in.
HAYES: Final point here this a Matt Yglesias tweet I thought was very good. He says Trump says pre-trial detention is too harsh for Paul Manafort, Matt. Trump has thousands of children separated from their moms and dads held an internment camps because he`s ordered pre-trial detention for every asylum seeker who arrives the border. It gives you a sense of how this President thinks about who the law should protect and who it should.
MILLER: Yes, I think you`ve written extensively about this in a way that`s very compelling. One of the things that`s interesting about the situation Manafort faces, the peculiarities of the D.C. system where the D.C. U.S. Attorney doesn`t just prosecute federal crimes but also prosecute state crimes as state prosecutor like in other jurisdictions. The jail that Manafort is going into doesn`t just house federal prisoners but houses state prisoners as well. They`re prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney`s Office. It is a very tough place. He`s going to have a lot to think about the point you make. You know, this morning may have been the last time he ever sees -- ever draws a free breath in his life. It`s a tough choice he has.
HAYES: Matt Miller and Harry Litman, great to have you both.
LITMAN: Thanks, Chris. Ahead, the government announces a treasure trove of a material that Donald Trump`s lawyer did not want them to see. Michael Cohen`s very, very, bad days coming up next. The possible patient zero for Russian collusion with the Trump campaign is now behind bars. The case for collusion in two minutes
HAYES: Maybe the most significant thing about Paul Manafort going to jail today is that if there`s anyone who is most likely to have colluded with Russians during the campaign who allegedly kept colluding with an alleged Russian intelligence asset after being indicted and out on bail it`s a Paul Manafort. According to a law professor Ryan Goodman, the evidence is there in plain sight. "Simply put any fair reading the public record which surely come to the conclusion there are significant evidence of collusion or to put it more precisely evidence of a conspiracy with Russians and violations of federal campaign finance law." Joining me now is the author of that piece, Ryan Goodman, Founding Co-Editor in Chief of the National Security blog which is a must read and I read every day, just, security. OK, make your case.
RYAN GOODMAN, FOUNDING CO-EDITOR IN CHIEF, NATIONAL SECURITY BLOG: So I think it`s a pretty strong case just based on the public record. We have a Paul Manafort, for example, communicating with this Kiev-based operative who the FBI assesses to have current ties or active ties with Russian military intelligence during 2016. Paul Manafort tells Politico that their discussions include the DNC hack. That`s just one piece.
HAYES: Wait, really he told Politico that?
GOODMAN: He told Politico that and then he also adds, but I didn`t know that the Russians had hacked. But that`s impossible because the very first report on the hack from the Washington Post at the outset attributed it to Russia so he`s got a problem with that.
HAYES: So he`s on the record. Somehow even in my capacious and amazing synthesis of this story had missed that little detail that he actually is already admitted on the record to Politico. He discussed the DNC hack with the man who subsequently be indicted and fled to Russia assessed to be an asset of Russian intelligence.
HAYES: OK. That`s a good -- OK that`s a good one.
GOODMAN: That`s one. Two, many people missed this because it was just buried in a CNN report back in August that CNN reported that there are U.S. intercepts of Russian operatives discussing Manafort and that their discussion says that he encouraged them to help in a campaign and that they -- and that they made an effort towards Manafort to coordinate information on Clinton. So that`s number two. Just in terms of evidence op, not proof op --
HAYES: Right, but evidence.
GOODMAN: Yes, I would say strong evidence or significant evidence. It`s even kind of amusing to me in a sense or depressing that there`s even a public discussion about if there is evidence or not evidence.
HAYES: Right. There`s clearly evidence. The question is whether its proof.
GOODMAN: Or this -- or how strong is the evidence is another word --
HAYES: Right, right.
GOODMAN: Yes. Third he -- in 2005 the Associated Press has his e-mails in which he makes a pitch to the Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska who`s Putin ally, and the pitch is that he could work for him too that would greatly benefit Putin. That`s in 2005. They enter the agreement $10 million a year and --
HAYES: Stop right there. That`s a lot of money.
GOODMAN: Yes. What`s he doing for --
HAYES: Like $10 million a year is a lot of money.
HAYES: I want to note that. OK.
GOODMAN: OK. And then in July of 2016, he tells the same operative with an active military -- active ties to the Russian military intelligence that he wants to make himself whole as your previous guest talked about with Oleg Deripaska because they owe Oleg Deripaska, as far as Oleg Deripaska is concerned $18.9 million. How`s he going to make him whole? He offers him private briefings on the status of the Trump campaign. So I would think a private briefing of his just a newsletter within nocuous information is not going to be worth $18.9 million you would think. It`s worth something much more than that. That`s another data point. Another data point is if you look through the Papadopoulos plea agreement, I think there are a lot of signals from Mueller. And Papadopoulos is told by a Russian agent in April of 2016 that the Russians have dirt on Hillary Clinton in the form of a thousands of e-mails.
HAYES: Prior, this is key. Prior to any of it being public.
GOODMAN: Prior to any of it being public. The public has no idea about this.
HAYES: Right. That`s what`s so significant about that disclosure.
GOODMAN: Yes, absolutely. That`s in April. Adam Schiff, Representative Adam Schiff on your show says that if you look at his memo from the House Intelligence Committee, it had a new revelation in it which is that Papadopoulos was also preview -- the Russians previewed it for Papadopoulos their planned to disseminate the e-mails. So that`s even a further step just -- that they have it but they previewed their plan to disseminate.
HAYES: And that Papadopoulos copies Manafort on e-mails related to these exchanges.
GOODMAN: Exactly. One of which is titled something like Russia wants to meet Putin -- sorry, Russia wants to meet Trump. And then after that, after the being told of the e-mails and that Manafort actually sends this e-mail just to Rick Gates that says we shouldn`t let D.T. do this. We should let somebody low level do it so as to send no signal.
HAYES: OK. It`s a pretty good case. That is what is hanging over Paul Manafort, just that. Just the public record stuff that`s hanging over Paul Manafort and panning over his decision making tonight as he spends a night in D.C. jail. Ryan Goodman, thanks for joining us.
GOODMAN: Thank you.
HAYES: I had more exclusive new reporting on the scope of the Trump administration`s family separation policy. We have some documents that no one else is obtained. Plus, Gadi Schwartz with a tour of a new facility and Congressman Beto O`Rourke on the tent encampments for children that are already going up near El Paso. And prosecutors announced they`ve recovered the shredded documents and encrypted data that Michael Cohen didn`t want anyone to see. Michael Cohen`s very bad day, next.
HAYES: There is a new government filing today concerning the April raid on longtime Trump personal lawyer Michael Cohen. And if you are Michael Cohen and hi Michael if you`re watching, it sure does not sound like awesome news. The Fed today informing a judge they`d recovered more than 700 pages worth of encrypted messages and call logs from one of the blackberries seized in that raid. They also said they pieced together and this one hurts, 16 pages worth of documents that were found in a paper shredder. No word yet on the content of the encrypted messages or shredded documents, but one imagines Michael Cohen didn`t want those seen. The new filing comes amid multiple reports that Cohen believes he`s being treated badly by Trump and his allies and has been moving closer to cooperating with federal investigators. In a gaggle with reporters this morning, Trump claimed that he had nothing to worry about.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you worried that Michael Cohen might flip?
TRUMP: I did nothing wrong. You have to understand. This stuff would have come out a long time ago. I did nothing wrong.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is he still your friend?
TRUMP: It`s really nice.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is he still your friend?
TRUMP: I always like Michael. I haven`t spoken to Michael in a long time.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is he still your lawyer?
TRUMP: No, he`s not my lawyer but --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Your personal lawyer, and not anymore.
TRUMP: But I always liked Michael.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you -- are you --
TRUMP: And he`s a good person and I think he`s --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think he`ll cooperate --
TRUMP: Excuse me. Do you mind if I talk?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I just want to know if you`re --
TRUMP: You`re asking me a question, I`m trying to answer.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I just want to know if you`re worried he`s going to cooperate with federal investigators.
TRUMP: No, I did nothing wrong.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Got it.
TRUMP: Nothing wrong.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Of Course. Joining me now to break down Cohen`s situation and its implication for Donald Trump MSNBC Legal Analyst Paul Butler, former Federal Prosecutor, also with me Rosalind Helderman Political Investigations and Enterprise Reporter of The Washington Post. Rosalind, what is your reporting suggest about where Cohen is at right now?
ROSALIND HELDERMAN, POLITICAL INVESTIGATIONS AND ENTERPRISE REPORTER, WASHINGTON POST: Our reporting suggests that Mr. Cohen is very disturbed with his situation. He`s distressed at sort of the lack of attention by the President. He is being crushed by legal bills which is very challenging and understands that he faces sort of intensifying pressure from the Southern District of New York, Prosecutor`s Office but also still from the Mueller probe.
HAYES: We should note that CNN has a story that Cohen is now signaling openness cooperating the federal investigators. CBS saying that he believes Trump and his allies are turning on him. I`m a layperson but 700 pages of encrypted messages and call logs and shredded documents doesn`t seem great from where I stand. What do you think?
PAUL BUTLER, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: You know, when that clip -- when the reporter asked Trump was Mr. Cohen still his lawyer and Trump looked surprise like why would you think that? Because in fact, he was never really a lawyer, he was Mr. Fix It and Mr. Fix It is running out of options. Some of his hopes were pinned on. There are millions of documents but they`re protected by lawyer-client privilege. This judge has gone through the number 13 documents out of 12,000 and for the texts and stuff, 148 out of 300,000. And now today, this secret stuff that he was shredding, putting on (INAUDIBLE) the government has access to that. And so again, it`s a perfect storm for Mr. Trump and it`s a bad day not only for Michael Cohen but for Paul Manafort.
HAYES: You wonder whether Michael Cohen is -- I mean, the -- Mueller seems to be spreading this out a bit right? I mean, I wonder what -- Cohen would just wake up every day wondering if today is the day?
HELDERMAN: Yes, there has been some reporting. I can`t confirm this but that he has told people that he expects to be arrested any day now. And what we do know is that these investigations continue very aggressively. Obviously as you`ve been talking about, the document review continues in New York and we reported this week that a witness who appeared before Mueller`s grand jury within just the last week, a week ago today said that many of the questions that he was asked were all about Michael Cohen and that`s from Robert Mueller here in D.C.
HAYES:: That`s a -- that`s a crucial point. We -- we had relayed that reporting -- that`s a Ukrainian politician who was in town to talk to the grand jury who has passed Michael Cohen a peace proposal that would have lifted sanctions who said that, yes, actually they kept asking me about Michael Cohen which Paul -- Paul is relevant because when the raid first happened there was all this talk about, oh, they kicked over to SD&Y (ph) so it must have nothing to do with Russia.
BUTLER: And Mr. Cohen is in effect being double-teamed.
BUTLER: Because everything that each -- the view prosecutors get and the Mueller prosecutors get, they can share with each other and so, yes, and plus now we know that Mr. Cohen isn`t really fielding Rudy Giuliani and President Trump so he`s primed to cut a deal.
The next step would be a proffer -- if it goes to this, the next step is a proffer which means he goes in, sits down with the special prosecutor Mueller and tells him how he can help him make his case about collusion and obstruction of justice.
HAYES: And -- and Rosalind, and I`ve -- we -- we`ve obviously are reporting here. You have reporting there. There`s no reporting to indicate, as far as I can tell, that that -- that moment has happened. Am I correct?
HELDERMAN: That`s right. In fact, our best reporting is that there`s been really no contact yet. I think the first step would be for the prosecutors to reach out and say, OK, we`re ready to start telling you what we`ve got and you know, we would be interested to hear what you might have to share to -- to mitigate that.
And there`s been no indication that that is happening.
HAYES: So that`s interesting what Rosalind`s says is what I`ve heard as well in conversations I`ve had in other reporting which is that there`s none -- Mueller`s team isn`t reaching out. SD&I (ph) isn`t reaching out. Is that a common tactic?
BUTLER: Yes, they`re going to wave -- they`re going to increase this pressure on him as it is building day by day.
BUTLER: I mean, man, can you imagine they put together shredded documents?
HAYES: Yes, I know.
BUTLER: They`re going hardcore. Real quick, Chris, the main question as we know from his nemesis (AUDIO GAP) about these bank records from Michael Cohen and where did it go and was there some kind of profit sharing arrangement? Cohen`s making all this money off Trump`s name, does Trump know about it, is he getting a piece of the pie?
HAYES: The other thing there is that those documents aren`t just in his possession but other people can get that when he gets there -- Paul Butler and Rosalind Helderman, many thanks to both of you.
Ahead more exclusive on (ph) reporting. We have numbers -- the only people we think that have these numbers on how many children the Trump Administration is tearing away from the parents at the border in the first week of June. And you`ll never guess who has a bunch of new scandals since his last thing -- one thing too on Wednesday. That`s next.
Thing one tonight, when speaker Paul Ryan asked yesterday about his level of confidence in scandal-plagued EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt, he pulled one out of the old "head in the sand" playbook.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAUL RYAN, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Frankly, I haven`t paid that close attention to it. I would refer you to the Authorizing Committee that oversees the EPA. I`m glad with kind of a regulatory position they`ve taken, but I can`t -- I don`t know enough about what Pruitt has or has not done to give you a good comment.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: I don`t know, I just work here. I`m just the Speaker of the House of Representatives. He hadn`t paid that close attention. We know the Speaker is busy, but he really wants us to believe he hasn`t checked any news sites or Twitter or watched TV or a newspaper or talked to anyone in Washington for months? He hasn`t overhead anyone in the House talking about the 15 investigations Pruitt is currently facing or his possible legal exposure for violating federal law?
Well, you know what, that`s OK because we here at All In have been paying attention. We have an update for the Speaker and it`s full of shiny, brand new Pruitt scandals in thing two in 60 seconds.
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt is far and away the swampiest member of the Trump cabinet. Today his ever growing list of scandals somehow, improbably, got even longer. New York Times reporting several more incidents of Pruitt, again, using his position and his EPA government paid staff for personal favors. That`s a no-no, including tasking at least three EPA staff members to help his daughter obtain a summer internship at the White House.
Pruitt also reportedly pulled strings to help his daughter get into law school at the University of Virginia, reaching out to the former Speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates who wrote a letter to the school`s dean. Isn`t that sweet? Merit.
And there were some requests for himself too. Pruitt had an EPA aide, again, who is paid with public money, book his travel to last year`s Rose Bowl where he secured tickets to the sold out game at face value from the head of a large marketing firm whose clients have, you guessed it, business before the EPA.
Today the president sounded a little wobbly on old Scott.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I`m looking at Scott and Scott`s done a fantastic job at EPA but, you know, we`ll --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You don`t see problems with his --
TRUMP: -- we`ll make -- I`m not happy about certain things, I`ll be honest but he`s done a fantastic job running the EPA which is very overriding. But I`m not happy about --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: We cut out a 9 minute monologue about lotion. I spared you that. I`m kidding, of course. But as we have said before, Pruitt remains in office because he is enacting the president`s agenda. Yesterday Pruitt tweeted at Trump announcing the rollback of an Obama era clean water rule. Yes, the EPA Administrator who shops for used mattresses at Trump hotels -- gross -- gave the president the gift of dirty water for his birthday.
HAYES: We have more in inclusive reporting tonight on immigration -- immigrant children being torn from their families. Earlier today NBC news reported that almost 2,000 children were taken from their parents in the 6 weeks from April 19th to May 31st. That`s a rate of about 46 children ripped out of their parent`s hands a day.
Now, we at All In have exclusively obtained internal border patrol documents that show that from June 3rd to June 11th 366 additional children were taken from their families. That`s about 41 children a day, a bit of a slower pace. But if you project these numbers out over a full year, you`re looking at well over 10,000 kids taken by our government.
The documents we`ve obtained also crucially put the lie to the administration`s claim that this is all somehow business as usual. That`s it`s mandated by the law. In fact, one page in here is titled "Prosecution Initiative Update," and there`s a red line labeled "Single Adult Increased Prosecution Initiative" started April 27th, in other words, when they started this policy.
Additionally, the new data we`ve obtained shows that the vast majority of parents and this is really important, a whopping 91% who were referred for prosecution after having their children forcibly taken from them were only being charged with a misdemeanor, that is, first time illegal entry.
Customs and border patrol declined to comment on these numbers, either to confirm or deny, but this new data fits with what we already know about this inhumane practice. Today, NBC`s Gadi Schwartz toured a facility in El Cajon, California where some of those children are being held.
He joins me from outside that facility tonight. Gadi, what did you see behind those gates today?
GADI SCHWARTZ, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Well, a lot to unpack there but first I kind of want to give you the lay of the land because people have been coming out from El Cajon to see it for themselves. They`re pretty incredulous about this happening so close to their homes.
This is basically where the facility is. Its behind this fence that you see from the street. You can`t see what`s going on. You`ve actually got somebody down here -- she just came out to also see. She had seen what was going on on the news. She`s with a mental health organization and she wanted to see for herself.
We`ve seen a bunch of neighbors coming out, but I`m going to show you. It`s not the biggest facility. In fact, it`s a lot smaller than that -- than that Walmart that we saw that Jacob Soboroff showed us earlier this week. That`s where it ends, over there, that fence line.
So it starts from here, goes all the way down this way, and there are 65 kids -- 63 kids being housed in right now. The capacity here is 65 but we understand that there are more beds being brought in across the country in anticipation of -- for what is to be a lot more of these minors being brought to shelters like this because they have been separated from their family.
Right here at this facility, as you were talking about a little bit earlier, we understand that the number is about 10% so far. In the last 6 -- obviously 6 weeks, those numbers have been climbing but 10% of the kids here may have been separated from their families. The other ones were unaccompanied minors that were crossing the border so this facility has been here for quite some time, secretly.
The community around here is flabbergasted about what`s going on. In fact, one man just a little while ago, we talked to ran out here as soon as he saw where it was on MSNBC and here`s what he had to say. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was stunned to find out that one of the facilities was -- was within walking distance of my home. How does this happen in America? I`m a U.S. Navy veteran of 12 years who spent every penny, every dime of that time trying to ensure this sort of thing didn`t happen in our country.
We should point (ph) and say, "Not in our backyard. Not here in America."
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHWARTZ: Now, David (ph) was telling us that as a child, he was abandoned. He was left in a chicken coop and was found and was later adopted and he said that that never left him. He has been traumatized for life because of that, so he was feeling what a lot of these kids were going through.
Now, in terms of what we saw on the inside, there are staff members here that are doing remarkable work trying to make things normal. They -- they have organized events for these kids. It`s very odd to hear some of the things that that these kids are experiencing here.
We were told that they have a prom where there are females that come from other -- other shelters and have a prom here with some of the boys that come to this shelter. But the staff is trying to make things as normal as possible, but as you can imagine, there`s nothing about this that`s normal. Chris?
HAYES: All right, Gadi Schwartz, thank you for that excellent reporting. I really appreciate it. Next, I`m going to talk to a congressman who represents a border city and he`ll get access to some of the immigration facilities we`re talking about. Congressman Pedro O`Rork joins me after this.
HAYES: Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump are ripping an average of about 50 children, just a few less, a day away from their parents at the border. And so repugnant is this policy, so odious to basically everyone`s moral intuitions, the president and his allies keep lying about why they`re doing this or that they`re doing it.
Today, though, a U.S. Attorney from Texas admitted that yes, it is the administration`s choice to be this cruel.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RYAN PATRICK, U.S. ATTORNEY FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS: We are following the law. I mean, there`s many people who --
STEVE INSKEEP, NPR HOSE AND AUTHOR: But let`s remember also, you can follow the law in a different way. Previous administrations have. This is a policy choice.
PATRICK: Well, it is a policy choice by the president and by the attorney general.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Congressman Beto O`Rourke visited several immigration facilities in McAllen, Texas this week and he joins me now. Congressman, the facilities you visited, my understanding, at least some of them are different than the kind of longer term shelters for -- for children that ORR (ph) is running. These are kind of processing intake facilities run by customs and border patrol. What did you see there?
REP. BETO O`ROURKE, D-TX: Well, I went to the border patrol station in McAllen, Texas which is the busiest station and the busiest border patrol sector along the 2,000 miles of U.S.-Mexico border and that`s where families -- mothers in this case and their young children are brought after they are arrested trying to cross in between the ports of entry.
And I should make clear those border patrol agents that I met along with those families are doing the toughest jobs that I can imagine and they tell me that those young mothers and children are turning themself in, not trying to flee or evade detection. They are turning themselves in to those border patrol agents, but that`s where I met a 27 year old mother, her 7 year old child.
They`d just made the 2,000 mile journey from Honduras, had been arrested hours before, and unbeknownst to them, they were about to be separated. And Chris, I will never forget seeing that 7 year old girl clutching her mother`s hand as she must have been for the last three weeks and 2,000 miles of that journey.
And just as they had thought they had reached safety and asylum and refuge, that little girl was about to be taken away from her mother. The next place I went was a border patrol processing center in McAllen where behind those cyclone fence cages we saw in 20x20 foot pods dozens upon dozens of children sleeping on these polished concrete floors on slim mattresses with mylar blankets.
Men who had been separated into their own pods, women into theirs. I went to the International Bridge where I met asylum seekers who are trying to cross into the U.S. and do this lawfully and were being turned away by customs and border protecting thereby providing an incentive for them to try to cross in between ports of entry illegally.
And the last place I went was a privately run detention center by the Geo Corporation in the Rio Grande Valley where I met a young man who had fled Guatemala with his 12 year old daughter whom he had not seen for the last five days. This -- this is what we are doing right now in the United States. And I was able to see all of that for myself.
HAYES: OK, there`s a few things I want to follow up on. One really crucial point -- the position of Jeff Sessions, Department of Justice and prosecutors that it is illegal to present yourself for asylum if you do not go through a port of entry. That is arguable, I should say. It`s not clear that`s what the law says, but stipulating that for a second.
What you`re saying is when people try to do it legally and come through a proper port of entry to present themselves for asylum, they`re being turned away?
O`ROURKE: They`re being told that we do not have capacity and to come back at another time.
I met two asylum seekers from Guatemala who, by the time they`d reached Reynosa which is just on the other side of McAllen in Mexico, they were kidnapped, held for 12 days without their clothes for ransom, which totaled $7,500 upon which they were released, made their way to the International Bridge and were not allowed to petition for asylum in the U.S. and were scared to death, literally, of going back to Reynosa where they might get picked up again by the cartels.
When I asked that 27 year old mother with her 7 year old child, "Why did you not cross at the ports of entry and do this lawfully?" she said, "Tuve miedo. I was scared, I didn`t know where to cross." A border patrol agent pulled me aside and he said, you know what, Beto, she had no choice in where she crossed.
The cartels -- they control all of the crossings. They decide who goes in between the ports of entry and who goes to the ports of entry. And at the end of the day, why are we prosecuting this young mother like a common criminal for doing what any single one of us would do for our own kids in the same situation?
Let us allow her to petition for asylum if she meets the credible fear test, then there`s a process for us to allow her to continue to stay in this country. If she does not, she will sent back to her country of origin. Those are our laws. There`s a way that they`re intended to work. We should allow them to do so.
Right now we are doing something so inhumane, so un-America, that I`m ashamed. But it`s now on all of us. This is who we are. This is what we`re doing as a country. We now have the opportunity to act.
HAYES: The -- the White House, the president, and others are -- are lying about what they`re doing. That -- they are -- they are not admitting that this is a prosecution initiative that they have created. Jeff Sessions has been a bit more honest. People in customs and border patrol know -- know what they`re doing, right?
They understand that this is a new policy they are putting in effect and they started going to work one day where their job now included taking children from parents, right?
O`ROURKE: I met with somebody in customs and border protection that has the job description of "consequence delivery" which sounds like something Orwell would have -- would have come up with. And she was sharing with me that that child who has just been separated from that parent are both assigned what is known as an "A number" as a family group, they`re assigned a number as well.
And that`s for the purposes of the Department of Homeland Security and Customs and Border Protection, but that mother is about to be sent to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution, then to ICE in their Enforcement and Removal Operations. That child becomes property of Health and Human Services in the Office of Refugee and Resettlement, specifically.
And so I asked this woman, "So what happens to those `A numbers` and the family unit numbers? Do those track through DOJ and HHS?" And she said, "I don`t know." So we have no idea when or if mother and child will be reunited, more importantly, they -- that mother and that child have no idea when they`re going to be reunited.
I cannot imagine anything more terrifying for that kid or for that mom whose just risked and sacrificed everything to bring her daughter to safety and now we take her away from her.
HAYES: Let me make sure, so it is an open -- what I hear from you is that it is an open question whether there`s a central database that at least stores the matching numbers between the parent and the children we`re ripping away from them? It is unclear whether that information is stored centrally across the different agencies that are managing the parents and the kids.
O`ROURKE: The people that I`ve spoken with in customs and border protection cannot answer the question. The pro bono attorney with whom I visited that father in a privately run detention center later that night said she had been calling the 1-800 number that she had been given to see if she could help that father find his 12 year old daughter.
They`ve been looking for five days and cannot make the connection. I`m not saying that it doesn`t exist, but you know, a member of Congress -- somebody whose in charge of a processing center in the busiest border patrol sector in the country, an attorney whose working for a client, none of us have been able to find the answer.
This -- this is because in part, my belief, this is brand new for the United States of America at least in my lifetime. We -- we just -- I thought we didn`t do things like this. We`re not prepared to do things like this, but in fact, we`re doing things like this not too far from my hometown where I`m raising my 11, 9, and 7 year old.
We`re building a tent city. There are already 100 kids in Torneo (ph) and it`s 100 degrees in El Paso in June and they`re going to be there, we think, at a minimum for two months. But the reality is no one knows and the lasting consequence and terror of being taken away from your parents in a strange land and not knowing if you`re ever going to be connected, that will be with them for the rest of their lives.
That will be with us, as a country, for the rest of our lives and it is now on us to do everything within our power to make this right. And that`s what I`m committed to and that`s what I know a lot of good people in this country are committed to. I think we can still get this right. We still have time.
HAYES: All right, Beto O`Rourke, thank you very much for your time.
O`ROURKE: Thank you.
HAYES: That is All In for this evening. The Rachel Maddow show starts right now. Good evening, Rachel.
RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: Powerful interview, man, very serious stuff.
HAYES: Thank you.
MADDOW: Well done.
HAYES: Thank you.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. END
Copy: Content and programming copyright 2018 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.