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

Transcript: The 11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle, 4/28/22

Guests: Kyle Cheney, Barbara McQuade, Jason Johnson, Jason Beardsley, Eugene Daniels, Gary Gensler, Vin Gupta

Summary

January 6 committee sets the stage for public hearings. Trump allies running for officer push "big lie." January 6 committee to begin public hearing in June. New strikes hit Ukraine`s capital Kyiv. WH ask Congress for $33 billion in Ukraine aid. SEC Chair Gary Gensler on transparency, "the stock market & cryptocurrency." Moderna asks FDA to authorize vaccine for kids under 6.

Transcript

LAWRENCE O`DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: The is tonight`s Last Word. THE 11TH HOUR with Stephanie Ruhle starts now.

STEPHANIE RUHLE, MSNBC HOST: Tonight, the battle for democracy. The January 6 committee lays out what`s next in the investigation amid active threats to our fair elections, as more GOP candidates run on the lie that the last one was stolen.

Plus, President Biden asked Congress for 33 billion more dollars to help Ukraine as Russia ramps up attacks. We go inside Bucha where the first war crime charges have been filed.

And the news millions of families have been waiting for the next step and getting young children vaccinated against coronavirus as THE 11TH HOUR gets underway on this Thursday night.

Good evening, once again, I`m Stephanie Ruhle. It is great to be with you from our nation`s capital this evening. We now know when lawmakers investigating the January 6 riot will reveal to the public all that they`ve learned in private about the plot to keep Donald Trump in power.

Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson says hearings will likely start on June 9, which is six weeks from tonight. At least eight hearings are planned with some of them in primetime.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ADAM SCHIFF, (D) CALIFORNIA JAN. 6 SELECT COMMITTEE: It`ll be presented in the context that there were multiple lines of effort involving multiple players at the highest levels of our government to overturn the election. There is ample evidence of criminality, including criminality of the former President.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RUHLE: Committee members, a former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani himself and Donald Trump Jr. are on the shortlist for interviews. But they will not say when that could happen. And they say Republican House members who refused the committee`s first invitation to appear are soon going to get a second invite as soon as tomorrow.

There also could be new interview requests for some Republicans in the Senate. And as that investigation moves forward, there are more alarming signs that Trump`s big lie that the election was stolen, which it wasn`t, is now firing up the Republican Party in the 2022 primaries.

Reuters reporting that Trump allies in at least five different states are now under investigation for trying to access voting systems to look for evidence of voter fraud in the 2020 election. And that report says in some cases, voting systems have been compromised by those breaches.

In the state of Pennsylvania, one Trump backer who was relentless in pushing the big lie, well, he`s not running for governor. He was actually at the Capitol on January 6, and he now faces a subpoena from the House Committee. And at a debate last night, he promised to purge voter rolls if he gets elected.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STATE SEN. DOUG MASTRIANO, (R) PENNSYLVANIA GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: The most important thing is I get to appoint the Secretary of State, and that Secretary of State is going to clean up the election logs, we`re going to reset, in fact, registration, you have to re-register. We`re going to start all over again.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RUHLE: And then there`s this, The New York Times reporting other Republican candidates are claiming without any proof that undocumented migrants are stealing votes from Republicans by casting fraudulent ballots for Democrats.

So let`s get to the facts. With that, let`s bring in our experts Barbara McQuade, a Veteran Federal Prosecutor and former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan. She worked with the Department of Justice during the Biden transition, and as a Professor at the University of Michigan`s Law School. And of course, she`s an MSNBC Legal Analyst.

My dear friend, Jason Johnson, back with us, Politics and Journalism Professor at Morgan State University, also an MSNBC Political Contributor, and Kyle Cheney, Senior Legal Affairs Reporter for Politico whose reporting is focused specifically on January 6.

Kyle, we`ve been waiting for details on potential January 6 hearings for weeks. So tell us more about what this is going to look like?

KYLE CHENEY, POLITICO, SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER: Sure, so we got our first real glimpse at that. Now, we`ve been wondering for a while, you know, how are they going to organize this? They have an enormous trove of evidence, 800 and counting interviews, 10s of 1000s of documents, how are they going to present this to the American people.

We now know what`s going to be take place over several weeks in June 8 hearings, we`re told. Some in primetime, some during the day, and each will sort of focus on sort of a specific topic area of their investigation. So this is going to be what they want to be a very dramatic and intense presentation of what they found. They don`t want this to be sort of just, you know, anodized on paper kind of material. They want people to really feel the intensity of what happened in the attack and why it`s so crucial to the future of democracy.

RUHLE: All right, well, then, let`s add to today`s dramatics, Kyle, the second invitations to some Republicans, those who refused the first invitations, they`re just invites, they`re not subpoenas. Is there any evidence that these guys have changed their minds?

[23:05:09]

CHENEY: I think no, I think that`s really more of a sign that the committee is reaching this sort of endgame of its investigation. They want this is closing up loose ends. They want to say, look, we have a lot of evidence about you already. We got it from other people, if you want to tell us your version of events, your side of the story, come on in. But at this point, we don`t necessarily need you. We`d love to hear from you. But we don`t necessarily need you. So here`s your last chance.

RUHLE: Then what`s the holdup on scheduling Don Jr. and Rudy Giuliani announcing they`re going to announce inviting them like just do it already.

CHENEY: I mean, these are to the highest profile witnesses you can go after. So it`s not surprise to see them for the end. I don`t know the precise date they`re coming. But the fact that either of them may be coming at all. The question is, will they provide substantive testimony? I still don`t know the answer to that. But the fact that they`re coming at all is actually somewhat of a win for the committee to get them in the door. You know, I expect that to happen before these hearings take place.

RUHLE: What`s this thing we`re learning that the committee might also bring in senators that they haven`t before? What are they talking about? Who could that be?

CHENEY: Sure, sure. Well, you know, they haven`t told us yet. But our you know, assumption is they`re talking about people like Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley, who were the lead organizers of challenges to the election results on the Senate side, people like Tommy Tuberville, who received a call from Donald Trump during the riot. So those are people who have been part of the reporting and really essential parts of the narrative of what happened on January 6, but have not yet had any engagement with the committee.

RUHLE: Barb, I`m not saying this isn`t massively important, it is. But many people are growing weary saying let`s just get on with it. The committee chairman says more and of your requests are going to go out to House and Senate members maybe tomorrow. And I want to share what Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren said on this very subject.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ZOE LOFGREN, (D) CALIFORNIA JANUARY 6TH COMMITTEE: We have detailed some of the questions we have based on some of the evidence that we have obtained. So it`s not just general, gosh, we`d like to know what`s on your mind. But specific areas of inquiry.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RUHLE: Not only that, Barb, there are reports that they might be weighing immunity for some witnesses, what does that tell you?

BARBARA MCQUADE, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: Well, it does tell me that there`s potential criminal exposure for some of these witnesses who might be testifying. And to the extent they`re talking about members of Congress, this is really high stakes, because I think every member of Congress is aware that what goes around comes around. So I think there`s a great reluctance to use subpoenas against other members of Congress.

But I think, Stephanie, one thing that makes this case so different, is that this is not a normal matter that Congress considers this is an attack on their own house. These people were the victims and the witnesses to this attack. And to the extent they have important information here, I think that they have a duty to request it, and use subpoenas and enforce them if that`s necessary.

And even if they come in and aren`t terribly helpful, like Rudy Giuliani or Donald Trump Jr, that we don`t expect to see a lot of confessions or things like that, you at least lock them into a story, you get their answers, you get an under oath, and then it makes it much more difficult later for them to wiggle out of it.

RUHLE: Do we know what the Department of Justice is doing with Mark Meadows contempt case, it has been more than four months, and he`s still just sitting pretty. If I`m one of these other people that gets called in for an interview, I can just look and say, why don`t go the Mark Meadows route, nothing happened to him?

MCQUADE: Well, I don`t know. But one theory that`s possible is the Justice Department is supposed to file criminal charges, if there`s probable cause, and there`s no adequate alternative remedy.

Here, we know that Mark Meadows filed his own lawsuit in December to challenge those subpoenas. And in fact, there`s been a motion for summary judgment filed by the committee. So that case is coming to a head where a judge in that case is going to make a ruling, either allowing him to quash the subpoena or telling him he`s got to go testify. And that could be a critical point in the litigation that the Justice Department is waiting for. And it seems like that`s likely to happen in a matter of days.

RUHLE: Let`s talk about the leaky, leaky house. First was Mark Meadows text then recordings of Kevin McCarthy. Kyle, take us to your reporting tealeaves, anything else we could get soon?

CHENEY: Well, I hope that in advance of the hearing, they released some of the deposition transcripts they`ve taken, you know, that`s not necessarily a leak. I`d love to see some of these text messages that have been, you know, apparently leaking out of the committee with a little more frequency lately, which is to their chagrin. But I think we will start to see some of the actual evidence they`ve compiled. They`ve released, you know, Barb mentioned the motion for summary judgment in the Meadows case. They use that filing to unload a lot of documents and testimony that they`ve amassed. So they`ve released it periodically, but I think we may see a bigger troll before these hearings get underway.

RUHLE: That folks from the two New York Times reporters is also said to get into Mitch McConnell`s actions around January 6 and it says he actually over counted the votes, he thought he had for Trump`s impeachment. Could there be more surprises coming?

[23:10:15]

CHENEY: Certainly I, you know, I think the last couple of weeks have showed us that there`s plenty left to learn about what people were saying in private around January 6, I do think, though, it`s so important to remember how much we already know about the -- how extreme this plot was, and what song was already come out is just -- is so jaw dropping, it`s almost hard to remember it all, because it`s come out in this slow motion over the last, you know, eight or nine months.

RUHLE: Jason, what Democrats need to do for the midterms is get their base fired up and motivated to go out and vote. Is there any risk here that these hearings we`re waiting for with great anticipation could end up being a flop like the Mueller report was, because after that, a lot of people as angry as they were with Bill Barr, they were just frustrated with everything, they were tuning out of TV, and just saying I`m done with politics for now?

JASON JOHNSON, PROFESSOR MORGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: Well, Stephanie, the thing about the Mueller report is, in the moment, people weren`t as angry, they got angrier as time went on. And it just sort of sat there on the table like an unpaid bill at dinner. And nobody was doing anything with the Mueller report. And then it was like, well, maybe once Biden gets in the office.

So the frustration with Mueller took a long time after the report came out. It wasn`t necessarily a flop in the moment. What we have with these hearings, I think is more catharsis. This is the attack on the United States. This is when we were all collectively punched in the gut. And if the Democrats do a good job, especially of holding members of Congress accountable, who have to come in front of this hearing, that may actually be something that galvanize voters who really feel that the Democratic Party in Washington at least hasn`t done a good job of representing their interests.

RUHLE: That`s the hope. But what if they`re unable to do that? What could the downside for Democrats be? Especially because all of America watched what happened on January 6, there`s no ambiguity about it?

JOHNSON: Well, the thing, Stephanie, I don`t think that Congress can do that much. They can galvanize people. But ultimately, I`ve been saying all along, this falls on the shoulders of the Department of Justice, until you see people, I`m not talking about Shaman`s with Viking horns. But until you see people in suits, until you see state representatives, until you see people who flew to Washington, D.C. and private just to try and overthrow our country until the Department of Justice starts bringing people in to do perp walks, I don`t think you`ll have a lot of satisfaction. I think the Democrats can gin people up, I think they can say, hey, look, this was wrong, you were responsible, you were planning to take over the country. But ultimately, all they can do is have a hearing, all they can do is bring attention to it. The true consequences have to come in the forms of Department of Justice, which thus far really hasn`t done anything other than continue to do investigations and try and tell us that one day, they`re actually going to do something which has led to a lot of people being very frustrated, including members of Congress who say that Merrick Garland isn`t moving fast enough or aggressively enough.

RUHLE: Barb, that is such an important point. Because again, it takes us back to the Mueller report, where people were saying, wait a minute, why didn`t he do anything at the end, when that wasn`t what he was charged with. He was charged with putting together a report. And he specifically said, it`s not my place to make a recommendation. So people misunderstood what Robert Mueller`s job was, and maybe again, we`re misunderstanding what Congress` capabilities are.

MCQUADE: I think that`s right. I think people will tend to conflate what Congress is doing here with what the Justice Department is doing here. I think both of the roles of those institutions are really important here. What Congress is doing is really much more like what they did after the 9/11 attacks, when they did that full investigation and wrote the 9/11 Commission Report. And from that report came a great deal of legislation, efforts to prevent these attacks from happening again. And I think that`s the mission of what the committee has here.

The Justice Department does have the mission of holding people accountable through criminal charges. And I hear in Jason`s voice, great frustration, and I feel it too. But I think the idea that the Justice Department would have charged somebody to date is just not realistic. I had a public corruption case just against a former mayor, that took five years to put together, I think it`s unlikely that we`ll see criminal charges before the midterm elections. And I don`t think DOJ sees that as their deadline. It`s very difficult to build enough evidence to prove someone guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a unanimous jury of 12 people. And so that evidence has to be airtight. So all the stuff that we`re hearing, I`m sure they`re collecting and analyzing, but they`re going to need to know that they have gone down every rabbit hole and they`ve also disproved all the negative possibilities for defenses before we`re going to see criminal charges. So I think we`re talking well into next year before we would ever see any criminal charges.

RUHLE: Jason humor me and play Republican political strategist for just a moment. Why is it that we would have all of these Republicans now running, pushing the big lie when they don`t need to? Inflation is the number one issue across many American households today alone, we learned that the economy shrunk in the first quarter, why wouldn`t they just run on that?

[23:15:18]

Ah, we`ve lost Jason. Kyle, to you?

CHENEY: Sure. I mean, I think the answer is clear. It`s the audience of one, it`s Donald Trump, that he`s still a powerful figure in the party, the most powerful figure in the party and his blessing, his endorsement could make or break you in a primary, which is the point in the election cycle that we`re at. People trying to win primaries for the most part. And so I think that that`s what you`re seeing a lot of is candidates, you know, essentially, going to him for his blessing. And that`s why I think the committee in particular is so concerned about this being an ongoing crisis, that this is going to affect people taking office, you know, running on this 2020 issue, but saying they`re going to do something about it in 2024 or beyond. And that`s where the fear is that these people are going to be elected, who are willing to do what others were not in 2020.

RUHLE: It`s just ridiculous and stupid. The big lie just feeds Donald Trump`s ego. And if they want to run on something, they can run on the fact that Americans are worried about the cost of feeding their families. Makes no sense.

Barbara McQuade, always great to see you. Thank you, Jason Johnson, I know we lost his audio. But hopefully he`s home watching, and Kyle Cheney, I appreciate you. You better rest out. You got six weeks, Kyle, those hearings are coming.

And coming up next, it has been a violent night in Kyiv, missiles fall after the White House asks for 10s of billions more dollars in military help for Ukraine. We`re going to go live to Ukraine.

And later, one drug company takes a big step toward getting COVID shots in little arms. THE 11TH HOUR just getting underway in Washington D.C. on a Thursday night.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:21:08]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, (D) U.S. PRESIDENT: The cost of this fight is not cheap, but caving to aggression is going to be more costly if we allow it to happen. We either back Ukrainian as they defend their country or we stand by as Russia is continue their atrocities and aggression in Ukraine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RUHLE: And the President is asking Congress to pass his $33 billion aid package as soon as possible. His request came the same day Russia was firing cruise missiles into the heart of Kyiv. NBC`s Kelly Cobiella has more from Ukraine.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KELLY COBIELLA, NBC NEWS FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT: Late tonight, two explosions and the desperate scramble to find survivors under the rubble after new strikes in Kyiv. Ukrainian officials saying two buildings were hit, a stunning bombardment on the city, soon after the United Nations Secretary General met with Ukraine`s President and toured Kyiv`s devastated suburbs, seeing the total Russian forces left behind before they retreated weeks ago.

ANTONIO GUTERRES, UNITED NATIONS SECRETARY-GENERAL: There is no way a war can be acceptable in the 21st century. Look at that.

COBIELLA: And tonight, there are new signs Russia`s assault is gaining momentum in the East including this strike in Donetsk and another in Zaporizhzhia, in Kherson now under Russian occupation, a television tower struck, though it`s unclear who`s responsible for that attack.

And then there`s besieged Mariupol. The U.N. Secretary General said President Putin told him this week he agreed in principle to a rescue plan. But today inside the steel plant where Ukrainian soldiers and civilians are still hold up, Ukraine`s national guard putting out this video it says of people desperately digging wounded soldiers from the rubble after a makeshift hospital was hit with a concrete busting bomb.

In the ruins of the city, 100,000. People tonight the mayor told me Russian soldiers won`t let them leave. All the people who escaped they use only one word to describe it, hell. There`s no water, no electricity, nothing. Locals are forced to clear bodies from the streets in exchange for food and water, he said. In Russia, he said the decisions are made by one man. He decides who lives and who dies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RUHLE: Our thanks to Kelly Cobiella for that reporting. It is now just after six in the morning in Ukraine`s capital, where Cal Perry is standing by live. Cal, tell us about where you are this missile attack. When I saw you last, the sun was coming up and Kyiv, you were feeling a sense of calm. That`s all lost.

CAL PERRY, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, absolutely. Look, it was about a mile from where I am. We felt two distinct explosions. We know now it was a 25-storey apartment building and the timing of this, Stephanie, cannot be lost.

The Secretary General was meeting with the Prime Minister of Ukraine when those missiles struck. And according to the Prime Minister, they were discussing how to put an end to this war, it raises a number of questions the least of which people have been asking here for a long time. What kind of role does the U.N. have to play when we see these atrocities and this violence continuing to play out on the ground here, Stephanie?

RUHLE: Well, I know you also went to Bucha today and the U.N. will certainly play a role there. It`s been reported that is going to be the first place where we see war crimes charged.

PERRY: Absolutely. There`s already been an indictment on the Ukrainian side pushing for more tribunals, pushing for more of an investigation at least 400 people were massacred in Bucha, the town was laid waste to, and today we were able to spend time at the main morgue where family members are coming and trying to claim their loved ones. It is an international effort. You have French forensic experts doing tests on the body to identify them. You have Americans who are helping to actually handle the bodies.

Here`s a little a bit of my conversation with one of those American volunteers. Take a listen.

[23:25:04]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DARRELL LOVELESS, AMERICAN VOLUNTEER: It`s unlike anything I`ve ever experienced. It`s probably the hardest thing I`ve ever had to do. Not just with transporting and moving the bodies, but just to see the family members in pain, it rips my heart out. It`s just -- I just -- it`s almost -- it`s just hard -- it`s hard, very hard.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERRY: Stephanie, two stories that I wanted to share with you. First, this woman who came to find her loved one and actually went in to one of those trucks to look into one of those body bags. Her loved one, she couldn`t identify because the body was so badly mutilated, her family had identified a piece of clothing, a single sock, that`s how she identify her loved one. It was incredibly difficult to watch.

And then the worst of it was when you see children coming to the center, we saw a young boy, maybe seven, maybe eight years old, looking for his father with his mother. And it is a reminder, Stephanie, that there is just some things that you cannot rebuild. This is that woman who was looking for her loved one. And again, the unimaginable tragedy of having to get into one of these trucks. And then again, Stephanie, just there`s no coming back for some of these generations, for some of these children, this young boy was looking for his father, his hero, he will find him probably later today. And you just -- you just cannot help but think as this war drags on, what will that next generation think of what happened here in Bucha? Stephanie.

RUHLE: Cal Perry, thank you so much for being there. These are the stories we need to hear, because we cannot forget that this all happened. Cal, thank you, stay safe.

Here with us now to discuss more, Jason Beardsley, a decorated U.S. military veteran with over 20 years of experience in the army and the Navy. He`s now the National Executive Director for the Association of the Navy, and Eugene Daniels joins us, White House correspondent for Politico and an MSNBC Senior Contributor.

Jason, I want to share a tweet I saw from former Ambassador Michael McFaul today where he writes, "Putin has lost his war in Ukraine, he may still win some battles, but he has already lost the war." After just seeing what we watched in Bucha. It`s hard for me to get my head around that, has Putin lost?

JASON BEARDSLEY, NATIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ASSOCIATION OF THE U.S. NAVY: You know, it looks very much like Russia lost this war, about three days into the invasion. Everything we`ve seen on the ground suggest that the logistics have been hampered. The strategy was ambiguous. The soldiers are, they`ve lost morale. They`ve lost a lot of equipment to the Ukrainians. They don`t have the spirit. They didn`t have the training, Putin got way over his skis. All we`re seeing now is desperation throughout the cities like Mariupol. And you`re watching that in these tragic atrocities in places like Bucha.

So I think this is a -- there is no good victory here. There`s no great outcome. But Russia would have a very difficult time putting together what would be a strategical win.

RUHLE: If Putin lost three days in? Why didn`t the U.S. and our NATO allies send in all the heavy artillery back then, between day three and day 65, where we are now 1000s of people lost their lives?

BEARDSLEY: Yeah, well, that`s the right -- that`s the right question. In fact, Stephanie, that equipment should have been in before the war began to have really kept Putin from us seeing this as easy terrain, easy pickings. They should have put these weapons on the ground within that six month timeframe that the White House says we had intelligence that this was going to happen. So they had an opportunity to get in front of this. We`re behind it now. It`s more expensive. And it`s very difficult in the middle of a conflict, to get logistics supplies of new weapon systems into the fight in such a time that they can have an effect, that`s hard to do.

RUHLE: Well, the way you do that is with approving more money, President Biden trying to do that asking Congress for another $33 billion. I`m not saying it seems like a no brainer, but it is obvious, Ukraine needs more money. How is Congress muddling this up? Now, we`re hearing some lawmakers trying to tie Ukraine aid with COVID aid? What do they have to do with one another?

EUGENE DANIELS, POLITICO WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: So Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is expected to try to tie the aid.

RUHLE: Why?

DANIELS: Because they see the COVID aid as something that they want it to be must pass is something that this Congress in the White House has wanted to do for weeks and weeks. And they see it as also a big priority for them. But like you`re saying, you know, there are people in both the House and the Senate Republicans and Democrats that are ready to do everything they can for Ukraine, right? But Republicans do not want to approve more COVID funding, more COVID relief funding. And so they`ve already said .

RUHLE: But couldn`t this end up costing the $33 billion that they need for Ukraine because they want more COVID money. I mean, this kind of politics is what gets lots of Americans who don`t care about politics to say I can`t stay in government.

DANIELS: Right. Well, also then you have Republicans who are saying they`re going to put on Title 42 which is the immigration -- immigration order about the pandemic to this bill if they if it`s tied together.

[23:30:03]

So, there`s all these politics playing and as you said and as we just watched that terrible things that are happening, still happening in Ukraine, the administration is concerned about it. And I don`t know that they really want the timing to occur. They do see all of that as really important, but they want this $32 billion to move forward. They see it as vital to getting -- to really ending what is happening in Ukraine with Russia, and to make it clear, more importantly, to both the allies and to Putin and the Ukrainians that America is going to continue to do whatever they can to help them.

RUHLE: Jason, President Zelenskyy is on the cover of Time magazine this week. The reporter Simon Shuster spent some time inside the presidential compound. And I want to share a bit of what he said, "Zelenskyy has learned that friendly requests will not get the Ukraine weapons it needs. That is how he understands his core responsibility, not as a military strategist empowered to move battalions around a map, but as a communicator, a living symbol of the state, whose ability to grab and hold the world`s attention will help determine whether his nation lives or dies."

Do you agree with that? How much of a factor is Zelenskyy`s ability to hold all of our attention in this?

BEARDSLEY: Yeah, it`s actually a great question. The communications aspect, the sort of the will, the spirit of leadership, that is what communication requires. And it`s one of the reasons why in the West, when we do these things that really requires leadership to stand up and be clear and articulate about the cause. Because you`ve got to get people behind you.

Zelenskyy has done a phenomenal job of that. It`s no surprise he comes from entertainment. He understands the medium. And I think like you said, you know, he`s had to make a case to his country to stand up and the bravest move he did is when he rejected the U.S. offer to get out of country and flee. So that was the first indication that Zelenskyy was going to stand up and stand through this test. The Ukrainians are beneficiaries of that. But the cost is extremely high.

RUHLE: I know I`m out of time, but I need you to solve another congressional question for me. The President also wants to make it easier for the U.S. to seize assets from Russian oligarchs, take those assets, liquidate them and use them literally to help Ukrainians. I mean, this sounds like a no brainer. You had eight liberal and conservative House members vote against it, why? Who and why? This one, I truly don`t get.

DANIELS: Yeah, you see and see in some of those faces there, some folks that are using not together.

RUHLE: The extreme team.

DANIELS: Yeah.

RUHLE: Those on the extreme team on both sides.

DANIELS: And, you know, this is again, playing politics with different things, right? Some of the frustrations are they don`t want -- this not the way they want to do these kinds of things. They want the funding to happen in different ways. But this is an administration that wants everyone to do as much as they can be creative and how they do it. OK --

RUHLE: Yes, but isn`t Biden, saying let`s be a Robin Hood, right? Steals from the rich, give to the poor?

DANIELS: Yeah.

RUHLE: And if you`re AOC and you`re looking to say wait a minute, I`m on the same team as Madison Cawthorn and MTG, don`t I want to get off this team?

DANIELS: Yeah, they don`t see it like that.

BEARDSLEY: It looks like no brainer.

RUHLE: Again, no brainer.

DANIELS: Yeah, yeah, but not in Congress. There`s a lot -- you know, all of the ways that they`re thinking about it they don`t see like, oh, I`m with Madison Cawthorn on, with MTG they said, this is, you know, this is my stance and I`m sticking to it. And you know, whether people agree with it or not, you know, that is how things work in Washington, D.C. as you will, as you guys will know, it has been happening for a long time. And there`s not a lot of political backlash for those kinds of things.

RUHLE: This is my stance. I don`t want to be a Robin Hood. Gentlemen, thank you both for joining me tonight. And thank you both for your coordinating ensembles.

DANIELS: Caught each other.

RUHLE: Excellent, excellent across the board. I appreciate it. Jason Beardsley, Eugene Daniels, great to see you both in-person.

Coming up, my exclusive interview, a rare sit down in-person with Wall Street`s top cop and what he can reveal about Elon Musk and Twitter when THE 11TH HOUR continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:38:35]

RUHLE: He`s the chief enforcer on Wall Street and says protecting everyday investors is his top priority. That means the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission is keeping a very close eye on issues like cryptocurrencies and the Elon Musk takeover of Twitter. Despite the SEC still being worked from home, Gary Gensler made a rare appearance today at the office and I had a chance to sit down with him for an exclusive interview.

We started by discussing what oversight looks like. And when a company the size of Twitter is no longer public, who`s watching over them.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GARY GENSLER, SECURITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION CHAIR: So the SEC helps protect the public, when you, the public invest in companies to make sure that you get full and fair disclosure, and that the public is not lied to fraud, right? If it`s a private company that`s not under the SEC.

RUHLE: When a company is public, and let`s say those shareholders who you protect are selling shares to somebody who is buying up shares and mass to potentially become the largest shareholder, similar to what Elon Musk may have done last week, and was possibly delayed in disclosing that. Is that a violation? Is there some sort of protection for those shareholders who were selling to a guy who didn`t notify the SEC in a timely manner?

GENSLER: Stephanie, you`re really good at your job. But I hopefully you respect -

[23:40:02]

RUHLE: I`m just trying to understand what rules are?

GENSLER: I can`t comment on any specific matter. But we`ve a law in the U.S. it`s about 50 some years ago that said that there would be disclosures when people go past a certain ownership 5% of a company. That`s something that the SEC oversees those public disclosures when people buy into companies, and this was really important, 50 years ago, it`s still important. Now, it`s certainly important as it relates to some rules we`re trying to enhance.

RUHLE: Are you looking to change or enhance the rules around moving markets, in terms of governing a business in the public square?

GENSLER: I think anybody in a job like the one I mentioned, we technology neutral, we`re not policy neutral, though. And so regardless of the medium, but we were founded in the 1930s, and television came along after that, and the internet came along after that. And so there`s new forms of communicating with the public through social media and the like, but the time tested policies are still there, that you can`t defraud the public lie to the public. And if you have material information, you can`t tell some shareholders and not others.

RUHLE: Do you worry about the road ahead? There`s been a lot of financial innovation, whether you`re talking fax, or crypto or mean stocks, a lot of things out there that weren`t even here just a few years ago.

GENSLER: You know, Warren Buffett has this famous line, he said years ago and one of his annual reports, when the tide goes out, you see who`s been swimming with their trunks off. And so yes, Stephanie, that we`re in a transitional period right now, the war in Ukraine. COVID is still here and changing some of the economics. But we`re also in somewhat of a transitioning time where central banks around the globe are transitioning, as well. So but our job at the SEC is to be that cop on the beat to look out for investors, and to ensure that the markets are free of fraud and manipulation.

RUHLE: In theory or metaphorically when the tide goes out, and we can see who`s been swimming without their shorts on, how worried are you that again, we`re going to see a whole bunch of individual investors who wanted to get in the game really get screwed here and realize they didn`t know what they were getting involved with?

GENSLER: I`m particularly concerned in something called the crypto token, crypto is $2 trillion, crypto asset space.

RUHLE: And a whole lot of people who have gotten mind-blowingly rich.

GENSLER: Well, have they? You know, for a moment, and is it really your listeners? Or is it a few people at hedge funds and family offices?

RUHLE: I don`t know. Go down to Miami and you`re going to see a lot more Lamborghinis driving around today than you did three years ago, one word, crypto.

GENSLER: So I do think that the Securities and Exchange Commission is important agency looking out for regular investors, and they don`t all have those Lamborghinis. I think that`s why it`s so important that the agenda that we have this is trying to reform the markets on behalf of the American public.

RUHLE: How complicated is it for you, though, to sort of have this balance between giving the little guy a seat at the table because they want to play ball and also protect them?

GENSLER: You know, when I was little, my dad didn`t have much money. But he, every once in a while, would try to buy a few shares of stock, maybe 50 shares or something.

RUHLE: Things are different now though.

GENSLER: Things are different now. Things are different now. But I believe individuals can make investment decisions. What`s critical, though, is one that the market where buyers and sellers meet in these markets, that there`s sufficient competition and we protect the markets against manipulation and fraud. And I think our current stock markets, we can enhance them, we can make them better.

RUHLE: Chairperson Gensler, thank you so much for your time.

GENSLER: Thank you, Stephanie.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RUHLE: Coming up, it is the news parents of the very youngest kids have been impatiently waiting for Dr. Vin Gupta, a parent of young children himself joins us to talk kids vaccines when THE 11TH HOUR continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:49:18]

RUHLE: Parents of children five and under have been in a holding pattern for months. Many can`t return to normal life without a safe vaccine for their children. Well, those families finally got some good news today.

Moderna submitted vaccination data asking the FDA to approve the shots for children six months to five years old. So let`s discuss. With us tonight, Dr. Vin Gupta, a Critical Care Pulmonologist in Seattle. He`s also a faculty member at the University of Washington Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. And maybe most importantly, he himself is a dad of two young children, which is one of the reasons I really wanted you to be here tonight because I know you are absolutely studying this data, what does it tell you?

[23:50:02]

DR. VIN GUPTA, MSNBC MEDICAL CONTRIBUTOR: Stephanie, good evening. Yeah, for all the parents watching out there that have kiddos under five at home they`re wondering the same thing I`m wondering, when can we get our kids vaccinated? The data that is released at least in press release, Stephanie, I should qualify it, is reassuring.

First, from a safety standpoint, none of these issues of myocarditis, this inflammation of the heart, which is a big muscle, inflammation of the heart or of a muscle is myocarditis. None of those instances occurred here amongst kids under five. The Moderna results that were published suggest that this was a non-event, this is not something that parents of young kids need to worry about. So that is, first and foremost, safety is at the top of mind of anything that the FDA is going to think about and provide clearance for so that Americans can utilize like a vaccine. So that met the bar very clearly.

On the health related aspects of getting vaccines under five. Let`s look at Moderna, they`re talking about submitting their data to the FDA very shortly. The first week of May, we note that these vaccines actually -- kids that got the vaccines stayed out of the hospital. That is the clear definition of success here. It does not matter. Stephanie, our audiences or in the American public might hear about, well, these vaccines were not as great at preventing positive tests from mild symptoms. That does not matter. Coming from a lung doc, that does not matter. That`s not what great vaccines against contagious respiratory viruses are intended to do. They kept all kiddos under five out of the hospital. So on safety and on health related metrics, these vaccines were very effective. So that`s why I believe Moderna is going to get approval for under five likely in early June.

RUHLE: When they do, when and if they do, will you vaccinate your own kids?

GUPTA: Absolutely. Because I think -- the big question is, why? Parents are probably wondering, well, you know, I have kids under five I`m hearing kids under-fives aren`t don`t get as often as sick as adults say 65 and older. That`s true, but they still get sick. Many kids ended up in the hospital in the Omicron wave.

Stephanie, five times the rate of hospitalizations amongst kids pediatric group was observed in the Omicron wave versus the Delta wave, five times the rate of hospitalizations in a pediatric group. So this does not necessarily spare kids. We`re also noticing that hospitalizations amongst kid in the COVID-era vastly dwarfs what we see in the normal cold and flu season. As a pulmonologist that worries me. So this is a clear threat, this virus remains a clear threat more so than the threat that your kids normally would face in any normal cold and flu season. This virus is definitely a worst threat, which is why I would vaccinate my kids as soon as they`re eligible.

RUHLE: So this is very good news, families like yours, I know have been waiting for a long time. But I want to talk about another group of people who can get the vaccine and choose not to. I saw the data today. COVID was the number one cause of death for law enforcement officers last year, more than all the other causes combined. Those law enforcement officers, they have the facts, they know where they can get vaccinated, and they`re choosing not to. At this point, is there anything left to do to persuade those that are holding out?

GUPTA: You know, I`ll say as a member of the military reserves, Air Force Reserves, I know there`s individuals in the Cadre at least in 2021, when they were forced to make decisions and said, you know what, I am not going to make a decision, I`m going to seek an exception. Many cases, they were not granted. And they ended up leaving the force. There was nothing I could say to them that was going to change their mind. So Stephanie, there`s going to be a group of people to which nothing you can say will change their mind. That`s why it`s really important that Congress funds the supplemental COVID funding that is part of the assistance package for Ukraine. It`s critical because that assistance package, that supplemental, that includes critical funding for COVID therapeutics will help these folks that end up unfortunately, getting exposed to COVID and are at increased risk of ending up in the hospital. Somebody like me, I`m in the ICU right now, this week at nights. That`s exactly where they`re going to end up threatening increased risk of ending up, so --

RUHLE: But hold on, those people are choosing not to be vaccinated. So we should hold up money for Ukraine for those who are making the decision not to get the vaccine?

GUPTA: Well, I think what`s critical here is actually as part of that, that package Stephanie, there is COVID funding. I don`t want anything to be held up for Ukraine, but it`s part and parcel of -- if nobody wants to go back to things like mass mandates, or any sort of restrictions on normal way of life, regardless of what the county looks like. The best way to get there, Stephanie, is to fund this package, fund this COVID funding so that we can continue to live life as it is, maybe with some momentary blips in terms of possible searches, but no type of disruption that we saw in 2020.

RUHLE: Or a better way just get vaccinated. Dr. Vin Gupta always good to see you. Thanks for joining.

[23:55:04]

Coming up, a display of sportsmanship from the pitch destined to go directly to the heart, when THE 11TH HOUR continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RUHLE: The last thing before we go tonight and I love this one, the power of words. A video recently posted by a boarding school in the U.K. has gone viral for very good reason. It captures a genuine moment of true sportsmanship and friendship offered up at a time when we all need it most. During a game at Rugby Camp, a young, discouraged player was on the verge of giving up and that is when his teammates stepped up with a pep talk that would inspire all of us on or off the pitch. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s OK.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Everyone`s older than me, everyone`s bigger than me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have to tackle.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (Inaudible). Trust me, look at me, look at me. Look at me bud. I`m the shortest kid here. Listen, it does not matter who you are. It does not matter if you are short or young. It doesn`t matter if you are taller, it does not matter if you are fat. It does not matter at all. Bud, you are a brilliant rugby player. You understand that? You are insane. You are actually insane for your age. You`re insane. Come here, give me a hug.

It`s all right, all right. We`re really good. Come on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RUHLE: Brilliant rugby player. The school shared that video on Instagram with this caption, "The incredible connection and heart-warming friendship between these boys is the perfect demonstration of the ethos of our Sedbergh Courses, and we could not be prouder. Growth. Originality. Leadership. Determination."

And on that absolutely beautiful note from our nation`s capital, I wish you all a good night. From all of our colleagues across the networks of NBC News, thank you for staying up late with us. I won`t see you at the end of tomorrow. Chris Jansing will be here. But I`ll see you next week.