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

The Trump attack on Healthcare. TRANSCRIPT: 3/28/19, All In w/ Chris Hayes.

Guests: Richard Blumenthal, Elizabeth Holtzman, Bob Bauer, Amy Klobuchar,Efren Olivares

CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HOST:  That`s HARDBALL for now.  "ALL IN" with Chris Hayes starts right now.



REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA), CHAIRMAN, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE:  You might say that`s just what you need to do to win but I don`t think it`s OK.  I think it`s immoral.

HAYES:  Republicans attempt a coup in the House.

SCHIFF:  I think it`s unpatriotic and yes, I think it`s corrupt and evidence of collusion.

HAYES:  As we get our first reports about the size of the Mueller report.

ANDREW NAPOLITANO, CONTRIBUTOR, FOX NEWS CHANNEL:  In that report will be evidence of the existence of a conspiracy.

HAYES:  Tonight, what we know about the more than 300 pages in the special counsel report and the Republican effort to keep it hidden.

NAPOLITANO:  In that report will be evidence of obstruction of justice.

HAYES:  Then, 2020 candidate Amy Klobuchar on Mueller, the attack on ObamaCare and her big policy announcement.  Plus, just what is happening at the border, and Trymaine Lee reports on why they need a Green New Deal in the Bronx.


HAYES:  When ALL IN starts right now.


HAYES:  Good evening from New York I`m Chris Hayes.  We now know the length and the title of the actual Mueller report that has been kept from view in the four page book report offered by Attorney General Bill Barr.  New York Times was first to report that it is more than 300 pages long and titled the report on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Because of course the entirety of the investigation itself centered around the fact that a foreign intelligence service intervened as a sophisticated and fairly widespread way to tip the election towards Donald Trump.  The question that we`ve been asking was did any Americans help in that.

Barr quoting a partial sentence in the underlying report said the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

But even the most good-faith four-page summary of a 300-plus page document is necessarily going to leave out a lot of stuff to remain.  Republicans have clearly seen an opportunity with the four-page summary of the 300-page report to win some kind of final rhetorical battle over Democrats who have been pointing out established publicly accessible facts about the behavior of the Trump campaign during that election.

Today all nine GOP members of the House Intelligence Committee demanded Chairman Adam Schiff resign for repeatedly claiming the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government.


REP. MIKE CONAWAY (D), TEXAS:  The findings of the special counsel conclusively refute your past and present assertions and have exposed you as having abused your position to knowingly promote false information.  As such we have no faith in your ability to discharge your duties in a manner consistent with your constitutional responsibilities and urge your immediate resignation as chairman of the committee.


HAYES:  But Schiff was not having it.  It is worth noting that we only have time to play a portion of Schiff`s response.  I`m going to turn to our witnesses who are the top of the hearing today but before I do -- and as it as you have chosen instead of addressing the hearing to simply attacked me consistent with the President`s attacks, I do want to respond in this way.


SCHIFF:  My colleagues may think it`s OK that the Russians offered dirt on a Democratic candidate for president as part of what was described as the Russian government`s effort to help the Trump campaign.  You might think that`s OK.

y colleagues might think it`s OK that when that was offered to the son of the president who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the president`s son did not call the FBI.  He did not adamantly refuse that foreign help.  No instead that son said that he would love the help of the Russians.

And I will tell you one more thing that is apropos of the hearing today.  I don`t think it`s OK that during a presidential campaign Mr. Trump sought the Kremlin`s help to consummate a real estate deal in Moscow that would make him a fortune.  According to special counsel hundreds of millions of dollars.

I don`t think it`s OK that he concealed it from the public.  I don`t think it`s OK that he advocated a new and more favorable policy towards the Russians even as he was seeking the Russians help, the Kremlin`s helped to make money.  I don`t think it`s OK that his attorney lied to our committee.

There`s a different word for that than collusion and it`s called compromise and that is the subject of our hearing today.  Mr. Ambassador, you are recognized for your opening statement.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Will the chairman yield?  Will the chairman yield?  Will the chairman yield?

SCHIFF:  I will not yield.  Mr. Ambassador --

REP. MICHAEL TURNER (R), OHIO:  Will the Chairman yield because you just make some things about all of us that I think we all should get the opportunity to respond to.

SCHIFF:  I will -- I will --I will not yield. 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  You`re going to say we think you ought to allow us to speak of what you think.

SCHIFF:  You can use your five minutes to speak.  You attacked me in your opening statement and --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  I have not had an opportunity respond at all especially to your statements of what we think, because no one over here thinks that.  No one over here --

SCHIFF:  Mr. Turner, you`re not recognized.  Ambassador McFaul, you`re recognized.


HAYES:  Now, Adam Schiff was just one of a list of Democratic targets sent out by of all people the Trump 2020 Campaign that had a memo about how guess that you`re booking might be unreliable.  They don`t like when people are factually unreliable.  And joining me now is another lawmaker on that list Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut.  He sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee.  Good to have you here, Senator.


SCHIFF:  I want to read you the quote that was in the booking memo from the Trump 2020 campaign because it was something he said to me.  On October 17th of last year, the evidence is pretty clear that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.  Were you wrong?

BLUMENTHAL:  I was right and you`ve just heard why I was right from Adam Schiff and I can give you a list of the evidence of collusion.

HAYES:  But isn`t that defining collusion down?  You`re -- what you`re saying is a collusion appropriately names the -- what we already know about the publicly accessible information behavior of the Trump campaign.

BLUMENTHAL:  What we have publicly accessible like the Trump Tower meeting involving the president`s son-in-law, campaign manager and son, or the providing of private polling data to the Russians while they were conducting a social media manipulation campaign, aiding Trump, or the Trump Tower negotiations for a Moscow Tower.  All of these instances and there are many more are already in the public domain.

What we don`t have is the Trump-Mueller report.  We have the Barr book report.  And there is likely to be a lot more evidence of the conspiracy even if it doesn`t rise to the level of proof beyond reasonable doubt.

HAYES:  So I want to -- I want to put some markers down in advance right.  I mean, my position on this is I have no idea what`s in that report.  I am inclined to think there will not be a substantial or shocking distance between the summary is provided by Barr the actual report itself.  What is your expectation?

BLUMENTHAL:  My expectation is that there will be more evidence of both conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians but also more evidence of obstruction.  And the reason that`s important is number one, the Barr book report, its summary of the Mueller report says that it did not exonerate the president.

HAYES:  Explicitly quoted.  One of the few things it quotes is that an explicit non exoneration from Bob Mueller.

BLUMENTHAL:  One of those 42 words that he quote is that there`s no exoneration.  And obstruction is fundamental here because it involves the hindering of an investigation which might have disclosed more evidence of that conspiracy like criminal intent.  But here`s the main point, Chris, none of us know what is in the Mueller report.  The American people deserve.  They paid for it.

They need to know everything that is in it.  And the failure to disclose it fully and completely would smack of a cover-up and forever taint attorney- general.

HAYES:  It does seem to me -- it`s a weird thing because nominally everybody agrees that it should come out.  I saw polling today 75 percent of people, 420-0 in the House, unanimous consent to -- for a similar resolution.  The Senate`s been denied twice now launched by Mitch McConnell launched by Rand Paul.

Barr doesn`t seem to be covering things up or at least dragging his feet or does he?  I mean, what do you think the status of this is?

BLUMENTHAL:  Well, the Attorney General William Barr has been extraordinarily adroit.  This letter is elegantly but brazenly in a way avoidance of the truth.  He has framed the headlines, he has created the message.  We have yet to see the substance.  And he said in response to my urging him to support my legislation with Senator Graham, Senator Grassley, bipartisan, that he would look at it but he couldn`t commit to it.

And that legislation would require full and complete disclosure.  He has yet to commit to it.  My fear is he will redact it.  He will resort to executive privilege.  He will say that certain parts of it should be kept private for reasons that relate to the confidentiality of individuals.  We need to see the whole report.

HAYES:  Are you confident that should there be redactions or things withheld for any of three reasons -- and as I track them I think it`s classified information, grand jury secrecy, and assertions of executive privilege.  I think those are three categories.  Is it your expectation that those redactions will be flagged as such in the report, meaning you will know that there are portions not there?

BLUMENTHAL:  My hope is that they will flag them.  I have no confidence that the attorney general will.  I think given his --

HAYES:  So you think he just edit it out.

BLUMENTHAL:  He may just edit it out --

HAYES:  You don`t trust that he -- you don`t have any --

BLUMENTHAL:  I have no confidence in the Barr version if it is redacted without any explanation as to either of those legitimate reasons.  The 6E order of grand jury secrecy, the need for confidentiality based on ongoing investigations, or certain privacy interests that may be asserted.  But my fear is he will resort to executive privilege which has no basis whatsoever.

HAYES:  All right, Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, good to have you back.  Thank you very much.

BLUMENTHAL:  Thank you.

HAYES:  For more on the Republican push to declare victory on the Mueller report, we`ve got two guests with unique insight on subject.  Elizabeth Holtzman, former Democratic Congresswoman who served in the House Judiciary Committee which voted for the impeachment of President Richard Nixon and she`s also the author of The Case for Impeaching Trump.  And Bob Bauer former White House Counsel to President Barack Obama, now professor of law at New York University Law School.

Let me ask you first your impressions, Liz, about that letter and about the letter with the fact today that it`s a 300-page report that he was summarizing, something that we did not know until today.

ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN (D), FORMER CONGRESSWOMAN:  Well, I think Senator Blumenthal summed it up very correctly.  This letter is a disingenuous effort to try to suggest that the president of the United States is somehow innocent.  The fact of the matter is that not having seen the report, a 300 pages not all about nothing.  It`s all about something.

HAYES:  Right.

HOLTZMAN:  And the American -- the real question here is whether we`re seeing a cover-up in slow motion or fast motion or whether the American people are going to get the facts because the the issue here is if we don`t get the facts, we`re not going to know whether the President of the United States actually engaged in criminal conduct because we have mister Barr`s version right of what is criminal and not, but maybe Mr. Mueller`s assessment of the and suggest something else.

We don`t know how Mueller has presented the evidence.  We don`t know how strong it is and the American people need to know whether the man sitting in the White House is a crook or not.  That is really the central issue here whether he is engaged in criminal conduct.

Remember one of the things that that Barr says is that Mueller failed or did not engage in traditional prosecutorial judgment.

HAYES:  Right.

HOLTZMAN:  Well, what`s that about?  I mean that`s really --

HAYES:  It`s a weird phrase.

HOLTZMAN:  Well, what we need to know is whether under traditional prosecutorial standards a crime was committed or not and we need to know whether the reason the prosecution wasn`t engaged in here was because there was a legal barrier and not a factual barrier.

HAYES:  Bob, you served as White House Counsel in the -- in the Obama administration, and I`m curious about the question of executive privilege.  Is it your expectation that the report in full has gone to the White House Counsel or will go to the White House Counsel in advance of any disclosures by Barr to give an opportunity for redactions and assertions of executive privilege?

BOB BAUER, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL TO PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA:  Yes, that would absolutely be my expectation.  And if there`s one thing I think we know about Attorney General Barr, he has very strong views about executive authority and those translated I think in this instance into strong views about the protection of privileges, I would be absolutely astonished if he did not engage the White House Counsel in a discussion about the basis that they will claim for any redactions grounded in that privilege.

HAYES:  One thing about executive privilege questions that I always find confusing just to follow up on that is essentially who adjudicates them in the end?  I mean, if the White House Counsel says yes, actually all 300 pages are covered by executive privilege, you can give them a sheets of paper with all blacked out go ahead, who`s to say they can`t do that?

BAUER:  Barr would know that if a claim that extreme and absurd is made, he would know perfectly well that should come to a confrontation with the Congress.  Then eventually the courts would decide and the administration would certainly lose.

HAYES:  I see.

Bauer:  So I think Barr would very much not want to lose that kind of battle and I think he would be calling on the White House Council to exercise the best possible judgment in these matters.  Let me -- let me also just say one additional point about this.  It is important to have the report not only as Congresswoman Holtzman said because there`s ongoing questions about whether the President in fact did engage in conduct in violation of the law.

The report is important also because this is a president who is shattering norms one after the other that are essential to the presidency as a constitutional office consistent with our expectations about how the government would run.  And we shouldn`t lose that public interest to mention here as well.

This is not all about the law as important as that inquiry continues to be, it`s also about the judgments we draw about the sort of presidency that we can abide in this country.  So I don`t want to lose sight of that as well.

HAYES:  There`s also to me -- you know, let`s say that -- let`s say there`s three categories of the report.  There`s stuff about obstruction, there`s stuff about whether any Americans, U.S. persons or Trump campaign officials conspire to coordinate with the Russians, and then there`s the stuff on the Russian plot itself, what they did.

Even if everything in those two categories are exculpatory, and we know they`re not on obstruction, but let`s say everything having to do with coordination is exculpatory, even new -- we`d learn new facts that are exculpatory towards the Trump campaign --

HOLTZMAN:  Unlikely.

HAYES:  Unlikely but let`s say that happens, there`s still a lot to know about what the Russians did.  I mean, all we have are basically two indictments.  Why`d they decide to do it?  How did they pull it off?  How long ago did they go?  Did they start with Trump of the primary?  Did they go into general election?

HOLTZMAN:  Well, one of the things you need -- we need to emphasize at this point is that Donald Trump still has not acknowledged the existence of Russian interference in this election.

HAYES:  Right, exactly.

HOLTZMAN:  And that`s a really important thing.  He keeps calling this a hoax but the important thing for the American people to know is that a foreign government tried to put his finger on the scale, try to effect an American election, tried to destroy the right of -- the right of our free vote and that`s -- what are we going to do after the next election.  So this is really important for this -- for this document to become public not only for the reasons that that I suggested and that Mr. Barr -- Professor Barr suggested.

HAYES:  Elizabeth Holtzman and Bob Bauer, thank you both for making time tonight.  I really appreciate it.

HOLTZMAN:  Thank you.

HAYES:  Up next, 2020 presidential candidate Senator Amy Klobuchar accomplishes something the President hasn`t managed to do in two years in office.  The Senator joins me in two minutes.



DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:  We`re working on a plan now.  There`s no very great rush from the standpoint.  We`re waiting for decisions in the court.  If we win on the termination of ObamaCare we will have a plan that`s far better than ObamaCare.


HAYES:  That is a funny bit that he likes to do.  Donald Trump wants to destroy the American health care system as it currently exists under ObamaCare with no plan at all as you just heard for what to do afterwards.  And considering the last time the Republican Party tried to get rid of ObamaCare it cost them control of the House and several state capitals, many Republicans are pretty spooked by the President`s latest anti- ObamaCare push.

One Republican senator who didn`t want to use their name told Politico, "We need a plan and right now we don`t have one.  I`m not going to just throw this to the whims of our creativity."  For years now literally, the President has been promising some beautiful perfect health care plan that is of course yet to materialize which is not unlike his beautiful infrastructure plan.

Well, today, Democratic Senator and Presidential Candidate Amy Klobuchar rolled out an actual infrastructure plan to spend $1 trillion in federal funds for state and local governments to upgrade not only crumbling roads, highways, and bridges, but also schools, airports, water systems, internet access, public transit, and energy systems.

And Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat from Minnesota and 2020 Presidential candidate joins me now.  Senator --


HAYES:  It`s good to see you.  So am I not understand this which is the first big policy rollout you`ve had, this would be your first big domestic priority where you elected president, you had a Congress you could work with, this is the first thing you`d come out with?

KLOBUCHAR:  This is the first big bill that I had worked with to get through the Congress.  I think there`s other things that that I`d like to do immediately like get us back into that climate change agreement.  You can do that with the stroke of a pen or put forward some of these clean power rules.  But this would be a big project that you clearly would have to work with Republicans in the Senate.  Hopefully we will be in control of the Senate.  But you`d want to work with people to get this done.

So what I did here is something the president seemingly has been unable to do even though he said this was one of his top priorities.  And that is lay out a plan for infrastructure, everything from roads and bridges, of course motivated by what happened in my state a mile from my house when that bridge fell down in the middle of a summer day killing 13 people.

Look at rail systems and water system, looks at the flooding that we`re seeing right now in Iowa and a lot of this means infrastructure, it means sewer systems, some of the stuff that`s not so glamorous.  Crumbling public schools like we saw in Baltimore this last winter where the heat wasn`t even working.  So these are things we have to do as a nation.  And I also showed how I was going to pay for it.

And so far this president`s plan has been a mirage, Chris.  He said he wants to do it and then he maybe puts a fifth of the money out there and doesn`t really show how he`s going to pay for it and hasn`t been able to get it done.

HAYES:  One of the things that I think the first item as I was going through his roads and bridges and things like that.  You talk about congestion and the like.  You also talked about the need to build green infrastructure.  Do you see those as intention in any way right?  Building out the infrastructure for fossil fuel driven cars and the way those drive emissions with expanding the transportation infrastructure under the kind of old combustion engine automobile?

KLOBUCHAR:  Not really because I think you`re going to have an electric grid in the future as we`re going to see more and more transition.  You`re still going to need roads but you are going to have to adjust some of the signage and things like that and how those roads work.  But certainly, part of this is transit and making sure we have good rail and other things that are very consistent with those goals. 

And one of the ways you pay for this which you didn`t ask but I just can`t help but want to put out there because there are ways to pay for this, and that is the portion of the Republican tax plan that was so regressive where the corporate tax went all the way down to 21 percent.  Every point was $100 billion.

So literally you could still be at 25 percent and have $400 billion for infrastructure.  The way they did that overseas money which was an avenue - - just unbelievable because no one could really figure it out.  Remember how that thing came up so quickly?

HAYES:  Yes.

KLOBUCHAR:  Well, they did it as an average of all the country`s taxes instead of taking each country`s taxes.  You could say $150 billion on that -- on that overseas money.  And so you combine it plus you do some government bonds and an infrastructure financing authority which will attract some private money, and that`s about a third of this.  And you literally can get to the trillion dollars.  Something that Democrats and Republicans and independents have been asking for a long time.

HAYES:  Yes.  There`s an argument to be made that the depths of the corporate tax cuts give Democrats a kind of pay for a lot of stuff should they take office because they cut so deeply.  You voted present this week along with your colleagues except for four I think on the Green New Deal.  People said it was a sort of gimmick by McConnell.  You weren`t going to play his game.  But do you support it?  What is your feeling about it?

KLOBUCHAR:  Yes.  I`m a co-sponsor and I think it is so important to move forward and just stop talking about this problem and start doing something about it.  You know, if we could put a man on the moon, we can meet some of these goals.  We may not reach every single goal.  I think it is important though not to squelch the energy behind the Green New Deal.

And I was glad that we handled it the way we did because instead of actually coming up with some new plans and how we`re going to do the everything from gas mileage standards that I`d like to bring back, like that squelch to the clean power rules, Mitch McConnell is just playing games.  He wanted to see if he could you know, create a divide among Democrats in the U.S. Senate.  And he pretty much lost that bid.

Because instead, we turned it on them and said OK, just like we`re doing on health care like you started out.  What`s your plan?  You`ve got a president that`s decided he wants to kick everyone off for pre-existing conditions, you have a president that`s going backwards on climate change while fires are raging and floods are coming down the Midwest all the way south.  This is going on right now and instead of playing politics, maybe you should come up with a plan.  And if you can`t, the voters already spoke in 2018 and they`re going to speak again in 2020.

HAYES:  I want to ask you before I let you go about an exchange you have with Rand Paul today on the floor of the Senate.  You --

KLOBUCHAR:  Oh, that`s always fun.

HAYES:  You asked for unanimous consent for a resolution similar to the one that passed in the House 420-0 to make the full Mueller report public.  He objected a unanimous consent, said he wants all of the -- I guess material that began the investigation or Obama to be made public.  You objected to that.  How did you -- how did you read his objection, is it a good-faith one or a bad faith one?

KLOBUCHAR:  I don`t think that was good faith.  And I kept going back to him with you know what, 420-0 in the House of Representatives.  They voted that this report should be public.  Nearly 90 percent of the public wants to see it.  Why?  I think at its core we need to see this for national security.

It`s hundreds of pages.  We`re going to find out much more about what the Russians did, and we`ve got bills on the table right now to secure our election equipment.  My bipartisan bill to have backup paper ballots, this is going to give me what I need to make the case.  And so I think the public needs to see it.  I made a very simple argument.  And I was actually quite surprised that they objected given the vote that we saw in the House.

HAYES:  Yes.  I find the objection a little weird too.  Senator Amy Klobuchar, thanks so much for coming by.  Come back again.

KLOBUCHAR:  Thank you.  It was great to be on, Christ.

HAYES:  All right, coming up, the story behind this image from the southern border of migrants being held in a holding pen beneath a highway overpass.  How it happened, what it means next.


HAYES:  Breaking news tonight on immigration, NBC News reporting that the Department of Homeland Security plans  to ask congress for sweeping authority to deport unaccompanied migrant children faster, along with other changes.

The expected request comes as apprehensions at the southern border have jumped recently, though still well below peaks from the early 2000s, as you see there.

Customs and border protection says now that they`re overwhelmed by the number of migrants arriving, although critics contend that the agency`s own policies have exacerbated the situation.

In the meantime, we now have images like these out of El Paso yesterday showing a makeshift overflowed detention area for migrants trying to cross into the U.S.  As the Washington Post reported, quote, "an improvised holding pen  beneath a highway overpass is serving as a processing center."

Here with me now, NBC News national security and justice reporter Julia Ainsley, who broke the story about the Department of Homeland Security and unaccompanied minors.

What is the latest on that, Julia.

JULIA AINSLEY, NBC NEWS:  So, Chris, I got this letter that is on its way to congress tonight, where Kirstjen Nielsen, secretary of DHS, is laying out what she thinks are the legislative fixes that DHS needs in order to deal with this influx of migrants.  Again, most of these are families with children who are claiming asylum.

Her solution for this, she`s proposing this to congress, so it could be dead on arrival when you have to get past House Democrats, but the solutions are to return unaccompanied Central American children who come here on their own who are typically going to HHS then placed with a relative or sponsor, to go ahead and deport them back to their home countries.  And then she wants to be able to hold families indefinitely, that`s a policy we`ve heard them pitch before, but it`s been held up. 

She also wants for Central Americans to be able to apply for asylum in their home countries.  Critics push back on that and say that that`s not a solution for people fleeing violence.

And then she also wants more money.  And I heard from a senior administration official it`s hundreds of thousands.  So, she`s not talking million/billions, which is usually budget speak for more, but she says it`s for what she thinks will be thousands more beds needed to hold children if they don`t come through with these legislative fixes.

To me, it just outlines the priorities that they are still holding  to in the wake of this influx.

HAYES:  Just quickly, there`s a consent decree that requires them only to hold families for 20 days, so they have to get out of that.  I guess there`s a statutory fix they want for that.

I terms of deportation, I mean, the unaccompanied minors do have a right to asylum, there is a process, right, there is a credible fear intake interview.  Are they going to short circuit that, are they going to change the process?

AINSLEY:  Well, right, so they have that right, and children even have an added right under something called TVPRA, where they`re from a non- contiguous country, we have to bring them in, and they aren`t readily deported.  We have to shelter them, provide some kind of sponsor.  And they take a long time to go through the system.  And there are protections in place for a reason.

But this is a process where she says that now too many children are coming here, and it`s a pull factor.  She thinks that`s dangerous we should shut off that pull factor by deporting children quickly and not putting them through that process where they are have a sponsor advocating for them.

HAYES:  All right, Julia Ainsley, thank you for that great reporting.

Here with me now, Efren Olivares.  He`s the director of racial and economic justice program at the Texas Civil Rights Project, intimately connected to the work that`s happening on the border.

The story from the Trump administration and CBP, as you`ve seen it, is there is this massive surge.  They have numbers that appear to back that up.  We are overwhelmed and can`t deal with this.  We therefore need to truncate the processes in place that give these people a process towards asylum.  What do you think about that?

EFREN OLIVARES, TEXAS CIVIL RIGHTS PROJECT:  Well, as you mentioned, even though there has been an increase in the numbers, it`s nowhere near to the levels that we saw in 90s and the 2000s.  And the reality is that even if there`s is this small increase, that`s not the reason for the current situation.  The reason for that is two-fold.  The first you`ve gotten people being turned away at the ports of entry.  So people are coming to try to apply for asylum at a port of entry.  They are  turned back.  And then they have to cross in between ports, so through the river.  And then they`re arrested by border patrol.  And instead of gradually processing them and releasing them, what the government is doing is accumulating them, literally, in the CBP or border patrol detention facilities, and then releasing them by the hundreds to create the semblance of a crisis, of chaos.

And we saw the images yesterday in El Paso, literally caging immigrants in internment camps to then justify and attempt to dismantle the asylum system.  And that`s what that letter by Secretary Nielsen is.

HAYES:  I just want to be clear about this, so there`s two things here, and I`ve been looking at the numbers.  There clearly is an uptick in crossing between ports of entry because of the new metering rules that are in effect, the people they have to wait in Mexico where it can be very dangerous.  It`s unclear whether that`s driving all of the surge, because there clearly is more -- there are more people coming. 

The second thing you said, I want you to explain that and say what your evidence is, what you are saying is they are manipulating the ways in which they process folks to sort of warehouse a bunch of them and then release a bunch of times so that they can create these images.  What`s the evidence for that?

OLIVARES:  So, the number that we saw under zero tolerance prosecutions, they started dropping from over 100 people a day in the 20s and the teens over two weeks ago.  And instead of families being -- if that was the reason why that people were coming in larger numbers in families and they - - and that`s why they were at capacity, instead of releasing on a daily basis in an orderly fashion, then a few days later, four or five days, we started seeing releases of 500, 600 people, in McAllen in particular.

HAYES:  I see, so what -- as opposed to processing and release on a daily basis, you see them go four or five days, so they have a big group of people releasing them all at the same time.  And I have heard from social service agencies, for instance, in El Paso, who have said that this has been a thing that CBP has undertaken.  They have started dumping hundreds of people at, say, a church at the same time

OLIVARES:  That`s exactly right.  And it happened to conveniently coincide with the visit of Secretary Nielsen to McAllen last week, and the secretary of the CBP commissioner to El Paso yesterday, that`s when they release them, to create these images and this perceptions of a crisis at the border when none exist.

HAYES:  But, OK, but there are numbers going up, and there is a capacity issue, right.  I mean, there really is a capacity issue, it does seem, in HHS, to be able to process the amount of people in terms of immigration judges, and find them sponsors, even if this was done in the most humane way possible.  Do you think they have the resources and capacity they need?

OLIVARES:  So, let`s focus on the resources on that.  Let`s send them some asylum officers to the border to process these families at the ports of entry, instead off trying now to deport Central American children without any recourse, depriving them of their rights under the INA and the TVPRA, the Torture Victim Protections Act.  Instead of focusing on that, let`s revamp the asylum system to provide it with more resources so that we can process these families properly.

HAYES:  We should note, also, that foreign aid to the countries in question, Honduras, Guatemala and Ecuador -- I`m sorry, Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador have gone down quit a bit from peaks in 2017 to what they are currently in 2019, sometimes by as much as 33 percent.

Efren Olivares, thank you for sharing that.

Ahead why did Donald Trump claim Trump Tower was 10 floors taller than it really was?  The newly uncovered financial documents and why congress wants to see them as well.

Plus, draining the swamp.  That`s  tonight`s Thing One, Thing Two starting next.


HAYES:  Thing One tonight, there`s only so much news in the Trump era, and it moves so quickly, it`s easy to forget things that happened not that long ago like, say, the fact that the president`s Interior Secretary, Ryan Zinke, resigned in disgrace just three months ago after becoming the subject of multiple federal investigations, and is, as far as we know, still under investigation by the Justice Department.

That didn`t stop President Trump from nominating an arguably even more corrupt and toxic person to replace him.

David Bernhardt is a former oil lobbyist who served as Zinke`s deputy of Interior, helping shepherd policy, such as loosening the standards of the Endangered Species Act, speeding the path to opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to new oil and gas drilling, and reducing the boundaries of national monuments to open the land to mining and drilling.  Good stuff.

And Bernhardt appeared in front of the Senate Energy Committee today for his confirmation hearing, and Democrats did not hold back.


SEN. RON WYDEN, (D) OREGON:  You asked to come to my office to tell me your ethics are unimpeachable, but these brand new documents I just saw make you sound like just another corrupt official.


HAYES:  Hold on a second.  What is that sitting over Mr. Bernhardt`s right shoulder?  That`s Thing Two in 60 seconds.


HAYES:  So Donald Trump`s choice to replace his scandal plagued former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is ethically challenged former oil lobbyist, David Bernhardt, who has been called, quote, the most dangerous man in America for endangered species and public land by environmentalists.

He`s a swamp creature in the press, of course, referring to the president`s old drain the swamp campaign promise, which explains why at Bernhardt`s confirmation hearing in front of the Senate Energy Committee this morning these two swamp things showed up.  Now, they were actually Green Peace activists protesting Bernhardt`s nomination.  One of them managed to get a prime spot right above Bernhardt`s right shoulder where she appeared during an opening statement and remained for an entire hour, offering amusing subtle reactions throughout his testimony.

The swamp thing performance was highly entertaining for lots of C-SPAN users and Twitter users, but it looks like their message did not quite reach the president.


TRUMP:  We need to finish exactly what we came here to do, drain the swamp. 



HAYES:  In his explosive testimony to congress last month, Michael Cohen explicitly called his long-time boss Donald Trump a cheat, and he told us how the president cheats.


MICHAEL COHEN, FORMER TRUMP LAWYER:  It was my experience that Mr. Trump inflated his total assets when it served his purposes, such as trying to be listed amongst the wealthiest people in Forbes, and deflated his assets to reduce his real estate taxes.


HAYES:  But lying to Forbes to make yourself look richer than you are is sad and weird and kind of broken in a way, but it`s not illegal.  But lying to a bank or insurer about your assets, that`s a different story.


COHEN:  I`m giving to the committee today three years of Mr. Trump`s personal financial statements from 2011, 2012 and 2013, which he gave to Deutsche Bank to inquire about a loan to buy the Buffalo Bills.


HAYES:  Tonight, The Washington Post has some remarkable reporting on those financial statements as well as statements from 2002 and 2004.  The Post showed them to an accounting professor who told the reporters he had never seen a statement full of such egregious lies, I  quote him here, "it`s humorous.  It`s a humorous financial statement."

And he is not wrong.  According to The Post, Trump claimed revenue from 24 lots at a Southern California golf course that don`t exist.  He also added 800 nonexistent acres to the size of his vineyard in Virginia, and my personal favorite, Trump added 10 imaginary stories to Trump Tower, falsely claiming it was 68 stories tall.  It`s not.

There are more examples, more lies, that could come back to haunt Trump.  The House Oversight Committee has requested 10 years of financial records from Trump`s accountant.  And New York`s Department of Financial Services has subpoenaed records from Trump`s insurer Aon (ph) with the Post reporting that a key component of the investigation was questions about whether Trump had given Aon (ph) these documents in an effort to lower his insurance premiums.

With that sort of financial chicanery appears to be a bit of a pattern in Trump world.  Among the charges that Trump`s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort was found guilty of was lying to banks in order to generate cash.  Thanks to that crime, and others, Manafort is set to spend more than seven years in jail.



REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, (D) NEW YORK:  You want to tell people that their concern and desire for clean air and clean water is elitist?  That to the kinds in the South Bronx, which are suffering from the highest rates of childhood asthma in the country, tell that to the families in Flint whose kids have -- their blood is ascending in lead levels, their brains are damaged for the rest of their lives, call them elitist.


HAYES:  There is a reason Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, specifically brought the Bronx this week while defending the Green New Deal, and it`s not just because the Bronx is her  constituency, it`s the same reason we are doing a special event with her in the Bronx tomorrow on the Green New Deal, and it`s because the particular threat that climate change poses to that borough.  Among many other things, it`s home to one of the largest food distribution facilities in the world, threatened by storms and rising tides, its home to some of the poorest people in New York City, indeed in the country, and home to neighborhoods that are already dealing with all kinds of environmental degradation.

All In corespondent Trymaine Lee explains.


TRYMAINE LEE, MSNBC NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT:  The Hunts Point Market is the largest food distribution center on the planet.  Every year, $5 billion worth of meat, produce and fish pass through here feeding some 21 million people in the region.  The vast market spreads across 329 acres on the tip of the South Bronx. 

But this valuable stretch of shoreline is among the most vulnerable in the city.  Nothing protects it from being devastated by storm surge.

DANIEL KANE, PRESIDENT, TEAMSTERS LOCAL 202:  We`re out here on a peninsula.  When Hurricane Sandy came, we got a little bit lucky.  We flooded a little bit, but not as bad as it could have been had the tidal surge been different.

The regional economy could be washed away literally if the storm surge was to breach.  These markets are vulnerable to that and that would be catastrophic to the area.

LEE:  When you think about protecting the environment, you think about the Green New Deal, should workers be scared of those ideas?

KANE:  Workers should be engaged in them.  I think often they are used as political footballs to divide groups.  Well, if you`re for the environment, you`re anti-business.  And I don`t think that`s true.  I know it`s not true, because we worked here to try to do both.

Who wants polluted water?  Nobody wants that.

LEE:  The balance between jobs and a clean environment is an everyday reality for many people in the South Bronx.

MYCHAL JOHNSON, CO-FOUNDER, SOUTH BRONX UNITED:  These communities of color that are on the front line on environmental justice are the ones of climate change, which is one and the same, are the ones who suffer the most.

LEE:  How much of that has to do with who we`re talking about, the racial demographic, that we`re talking about poor black and brown people?

JOHNSON:  Wow, I mean, we call it environmental racism.  This community was mostly a white neighborhood that was more economically affluent, this kind of degradation of our environment would not be existing.  You wouldn`t see a heavy industrial uses in one area, all centralize in a poor community of color.

LEE:  The South Bronx is one of the poorest congressional districts in the nation.  Diesel delivery trucks and industrial sites pollute the air.

DIOR ST. HILLARIE, FOUNDER, GREENFEEN ORGANIX:  The South Bronx is actually one of the districts that processes a large part of New York City`s waste.  We have over 30 percent that`s processed here, and so as a result of that, we have poor, poor air quality, it`s environmental justice community, a community that has waste inequity.

By being able to recruit people that come from these environmental justice communities, they`ve been affected by the waste inequities, and our hope and vision in the future is that we`re able to now give them gainful employment, that they can be part and sustain themselves and their families.


HAYES:  And Trymaine Lee joins me now.

There are a lot of problems in the South Bronx related to sort of poverty and infrastructure, but the air quality is one.  I mean, it`s a place that because of the Diesel trucks, because of the heavy industry, there`s a real -- there`s a real challenge for folks that live there.

LEE:  When you think about environmental concerns, it`s easy to think about the coast, the red and blue-green algae, or fracking in the Midwest.  But when you think about these urban environments, you have the diesel fuel, you have proximity to all these toxins and waste treatment plants, but you also have kids who are dying every single day of asthma and other co- morbidities.

And so when folks talk about it`s elitist, go to the South Bronx and talk about elitist.  You stand on 138th street -- we stood there half of the afternoon, and watched truck after truck go by.  You don`t see that in other communities, you simply don`t.

HAYES:  Yeah, and this -- and in that specific case, right, we`re talking about a diesel engine and you`re talking about a combustion engine, that`s part of what`s driving climate change as well.  I mean, part of the theory behind the Green New Deal, right, is sort of two birds, one stone approach.  What do you learn when you went to Hunts Point Market, which is one of the most fascinating points of this city?

LEE:  You know, I was skeptical going in, because I`m saying they are contributing to this, right.  But when you talk to the union worker, you talk to Daniel who is president of the Teamsters out there, he says it`s simple, right.  We just find ways to cut back on our degradation of the community.  We have to drive trucks through, but let`s find different routes.

I think what`s interesting, also, is that when you talk about this cycle of we create the greenhouse gases and the toxic soup, they had the sledgehammer of hurricanes more often and heavier coming through, but then those who are vulnerable before the storm are made more so after, because when you have low property values, and folks who don`t own much anyway, they`re less likely  to reap any return. 

But the middle class and the upper class, they benefit.  You can expand that market.  You can the new roof on the house.

And so this cycle that we see, the loser always is the poor and working class.

HAYES:  Yeah, one of the things, you know, and New York City is now talking about a sort of climate mitigation project, and, you know, someone I have talked to is talking about about Lower Manhattan, which is the most valuable real estate in the world, that`s probably going to have a huge seawall protecting it.  It`s unclear whether the south Bronx is going to get the same thing.

LEE:  Cinder blocks.  You go there...

HAYES:  It`s wild.

LEE:  It`s amazing.  And you see per usual who and what they are trying to protect.  When you go to the South Bronx, but that market alone, if that goes under water, 12 hours later if Sandy had struck 12 hours later, you would have 12, 13 feet of water flooding place.

HAYES:  Trymaine Lee, that`s great reporting.  That`s Hunt`s Point in New York City, in my home borough of the Bronx, thank you so much for doing that.

LEE:  Thank you.

HAYES:  We`ll see you tomorrow, right?

LEE:  Yes, sir.

HAYES:  All right, that is All In for this evening.  Tomorrow, as I said, we`re going to be holding this special event.  We`ve been working really hard on, it`s in my home borough of the Bronx.  It`s All In America: The Green New Deal with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  We`ve got a bunch of people coming.  We`ve got some experts who are sort of the brains behind the Green New Deal, and we`re going to try to get to the bottom of something that has been really lost in the coverage of this extremely polarizing policy that dominates Trump TV and a lot of conservative talk radio, which is what is it?  What is it?  And what does it mean?  So, don`t miss it tomorrow night right here at 8:00 p.m. Eastern.

"THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW" starts right now. 

Good evening, Rachel.