tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC August 21, 2018 12:00am-1:00am PDT
with us and good night from nbc news headquarters in new york. tonight on "all in." >> we have a good sense obviously of what mr. mcghan testified to i can figure it out. >> the president is worried he's got a rat in the white house. >> do you intend to communicate with the special counsel, mr. mcghan in. >> tonight the white house testimony to the mueller probe and the furious reaction from donald trump. then -- >> i always liked michael. >> the president's former fixer michael cohen nation potential criminal charges on bank fraud. >> he'll lie like crazy, he's lied all his life. >> the manafort jury back to deliberating three days after this. >> i think it's very sad what they've done to paul manafort. thank you very much. >> when "all in" starts right now.
good evening from new york, i'm chris hayes. the president appears to be terrified he has a quote rat in his midst. inside the white house. >> that i should be clear, that's his word. rat. it's not the kind of language we are used to hearing from the president of the united states who is, of course, entrusted by our constitution when suring the nation's laws are faithfully executed and who is responsible for appointing our most senior law enforcement officers. you'd expect to hear that word in a very different context. >> your uncle was a rat. sit down, sit down. your uncle was a rat and now he's in the witness protection program. >> that's my father's brother you're talking about. >> now the president is assuring the country not that he has obeyed and upheld the law but that he does not hire snitchs. tweeting the naming north korea
times wrote a fake piece today implying that because white house counsel don mcgahn was giving hours of testimony to the special council, he must be a john dean type. >> reporter: i have nothing to hide the president referring to nixon white house counsel john dean credited with breaking the whesle and ultimately leading to his undoing. that's how the president responded to the new york blockbuster this weekend, don mcghan has been cooperating for months, participating in at least three voluntary interviews over a remarkable 30 hours. it's jaw developing news, a huge development in the probe, examining whether the president, himself, obstructed justice or might have done other this engs that exceeded his powers. mcgahn, the president tut put i. he is driving trump's successful efforts to fill the courts with conservative judges. >> that, includes, okay, supreme
court nominee brett kavanaugh mcgahn escorted to capitol hill today. though reporters were interested in a different topic. >> why did you take so long to the special counsel, mr. mcgahn. >> were you afraid the president would betray you? >> do you regret that decision? >> will you continue to comploo i? >> have you briefed the white house on everything you told the special counsel? >> mcgahn has been involved in most of the key events in mueller's obstruction probe as far as we know, including michael flynn's early ouster of the white house and getting jeff sessions to recuse himself the firing of james comey. it was mcgahn you will recall according to "time's" who threatened to have mueller fired, in fact, ordered him to do so. the "time's" lays out how se is controlling the investigation. he kaugsd investigators that he never saw the president go
beyond highs legal authorities. it's not clear past or present has a real grasp of what mcgahn toll mueller's team. >> we have a good sense, obviously, of what mr. mcgahn testified to i can figure it out. >> how do say that good sense? are you debriefed until. >> no, mr. dowd has a good sense of it. he talked to him at the time. >> you don't know 100% of what he testified to, mr. mueller? >> i think that through john dowd, we have have a a pretty good sense, john dowd said yesterday, i'll use his words, mcgahn was a strong witness for the president. i don't teed to know much more than that. >> this teams to be cleared up. while the president agonizing of what he called a rat inside the white house, although he says he wasn't one, his former employee michael cohen is about to face charges for $20 million in bank fraud, his attorney says he's been in up the with, you guessed
it, howard dean on how to flip on the president the jury deliberates over paul manafort, they're still deliberating they ended deliberation today the president publicly defended manafort and attacked the prosecution, which certainly looks a lot like an attempt to taint the jury pool. now, get this, the president threatening to go further, telling reuters, he has chosen not to be involved in the mueller probe, but is totally allowed to be if he wanted to i've decided to stay out, now i don't have to, i could do whatever, i could run it. i am joined be aformer associate white house counsel under president obama and executive director of protect democracy now and a reporter for the washington post. carol, have you news about don mcgahn or what he has been saying to robert mueller what have you learned in.
>> so i'm going to be a little contrary here, chris, say i see where the president is coming from when he says this is a bit old news, my colleague, bob costa and i wrote in november when don mcgahn went before bob mueller's interview team, sat down with verdicts two days straight so people have known for a long time that don mcgahn was cooperating with the investigation, that everyone who was in the white house was encouraged to voluntarily be engaged in these interviews. now what we do know now is that after the week stories, by the "time's" don mcgahn's attorney has alerted and assured trump's own legal team that don mcgahn provided no information that was incriminating to the president, did not incriminate him. in fact, don mcgahn's lawyer was putting tear mind to ease, sent them information saying my guy does not incriminate your guy.
now, of course the one caution there is don mcgahn doesn't know everything, doesn't know all the evidence that mueller has gathered. so it's ha ready to know that you've provided this was that pieced together in a mosaic could ultimately be damaged to the president. but i'll stress, he never saw the president communicate in criminal wrong doing and he didn't assert that to robert mueller. >> right. we should note here this is all the through a little bit of hall of pierors, we're not in the room with any of these people. we're certainly not in the president's mind or know the facts of the matter, which continues to fact of the case. we do not know what happened during the campaign and what might have happened as a result of. that that remains the big mystery. you worked in the white house counsel's office what do you make of the last 48 hours in this story? >> well, one things that's challenging when you are a lawyer, in the white house for that matter, you essentially are trying to serve two clients at every given moment.
are you serving the office of the presidency and you are serving the american public. you've got to balance those two interestsle. now, unmost under most president, it's you have to be challenging, they're dealing with the president who serves neither necessarily the public or the office of the presidency. he's trying to steve the interests of donald j. trump personally and seems to be expecting his staff to do that as well. what i make of the mcgahn interview, mcgahn is recognizing the last time his staff send him personally was richard nixon and john dean served four months in prison. mcgahn is what is the course for me that avoids that as the staff as well. >> am i right in reporting the incriminal nation's from it. it seems someone is trying to lay some blame on dowd and cobb.
it seems part of what i'm getting here in the subtext and between the lines is leak, look, boss, or i don't know who is saying it, these other guys screwed you when they told you to cooperate. if it ends up being unfavoritable to you, like they're the ones to blame in. >> i like the way you're thinking, chris, because there is a -- there's definitely a subtech here. it's not exactly that, though. i this think the subtext is there is a battle going on since the spring of 2017 about what was the right legal strategy for the president. right? and so ty cobb, who came in a little after dodd, the two agreed on something, that was at the start, let's get this thing rolling. let's not fight with grand jury appearances and testimony for staffers. let's get all the documents released. let's sends them all on over to mueller and let him sort through this there were two reasons they
did that. one was they believed very strongly in a 1990 case a ruling, which a clinton era case, which basically said you can't force the president to sit down for an interview, if you have all information you need from other sources. voilla, all the staffers, all those records. well, now it's looking pretty smart to have done what they did in the sense that, trump doesn't want to sit down or at least trump's lawyers at this moment don't want him to sit down for an interview, are petrified he will perjure himself by mistake or intentionally the strategy which was heavily criticized has this one nice wrinkle to it. this one nice layer. now, that doesn't change the fact that don mcgahn hated this strategy from day one. he thought it was dangerous for exactly the reason i has pointed out this rule has two special duties. you are representing the office of the president and are you representing the president.
if you are sitting in all these private meetings and some investigator gets to quiz you about everything the president said to you, that's, you know, potentially explosive. he didn't want that to happen. >> quickly, let me ask you this, the word rat, it really is striking to hear the president of the united states use the word rat and john dean, the whistleblower of watergate. >> think about the spirited effect it has on prosecutors around the country desperately trying to enforce the laws to protect us as american citizens from people doing harm, looking to get witnesses to work with them to prevent people literally from being murdered. here's the president backing up the arguments of mob bosses getting people out to testify. here's why i think the president is going out with the all out sort of attacking not just don member gahn. he's weak and nervous. he has thought from the beginning everybody around him was there to protect him. he wanted loyalty fro james
comey, he couldn't believe jeff sessions would recuse himself. now he is lashing out to try to prevent the one person that can bring him down which is this generation's john dean. >> thank you. for more on don mcgahn's rules. and what he may so told. i am joined by a former u.s. attorney and sherry you know mcgahn. you moved in political structuries he was a fixture. >> i don't know him. my personal contact with him or my lawyers was when he was trying to get many tow sign an nda too shut me up and silence me about a soup you are pac, i remember going back during the primary. but look, i think that he's between a rock and a hard place. he wants to come off like the good guy. he probably did incriminate the president maybe without knowing he did. so he has been with trump, he was the count sell for the
campaign. so it's not just white house chief count sell. he goes way, way back, chris. he knows from the beginning. he could be there 30 hours, they're trying to check raw data. that's what the february fib does. they check raw data, he could be providing information that could, in fact, incriminate trump but mcgan might not even know it. look. he's a good lawyer. he's not a genius or a wizard. it's not a realistic expectation to sit there 30 hours and give a lot of raw data. at some point he will be giving them something they need for this case or something else. again he goes back on the company where they were very, very sloppy, nobody thought they'd win the primary. so they didn't care. >> harry, my amateur is like 30 hours sounds like a lot. what do you make of that? >> 30 hours is a lot. and he would have focused on the fact.
remember, mcgahn says, calls trump king kong, because of his volcanic outbursts. mcgahn is the guy who trump says, go to sessions and tell him to recuse before he knows. mcgahn is the guy who argues against the comey firing. and i just don't see how they can blindly say he couldn't have given him anything. it's not the good point that carol makes they don't know what mueller already knows, but the whom core point of evidence that remains here for mueller is trump's state of mind. >> right. >> and mcgahn is shoulder to shoulder with trump daily. he sees him screaming. he sees these tirades. he sees him talk about comey, talk about sessions. it seems implausible the info he provide, just the factual enno could be ill num lateing what was if trump's mind when he did
these key personnel actions. >> sherry, mcgahn strikes me as something that occupancy an interesting diagram. she a kinds of movement gop lawyer. he was close to mcdidn'tal a w bush appointee, squirreling brett kavanaugh around as they prepare for the hearings. cavanaugh a movement conservative lawyer in the senate judiciary. he's in the trump orbit. he strikes me as a kind of -- he's represented a much broader set of people sort of squeezed between those two things. >> i don't know if they can be squeezed anymore. i guess what you are talking about is establishment republicans. so many came on board late. they wanted to keep their lobbying gig, keep things as they were going some they pretended trump was like any other republican president. mcgahn was in there early. his uncle worked with him 'regard to the casino. so there was some family connection in trump world beyond
mcgahn being a junior republican establishment movement guy. maybe he has a foot in both camps. i think he might be trying to have it both ways right now. that's how he strikes me. early on, chris, i think he knew he better make a phone call to mueller real quickly and get on the right side of this, but again, he's still trying to have it both ways, that itself what i finds fascinate to go see him straddle the two worlds. >> there is this lean in the "new york times" that mcgahn and his lawyer who started to grow suspicious, because they're being encouraged to cooperate. so they thought that maybe they were going to be, mcgahn was going to be set up as a fall guy that was part of what prompted him to agree to so much of the interviews. what do you think of that? >> first, think of that in the context of the question you just asked me. if he's thinking he will be made the fall guy.
he must think there is possible criminal acttist that has occurred that he needs to give his version of. again, it's hard to say that it would have been completely exculpatory. but then, you know, second, just this whole kind of dance between representing the office of the president and donald j. trump. by the way, i think this representation by the president that he just let him go forward is wrong. he probably won wouldn't have had a choice under executive privilege or attorney/client privilege. but i think the basic point, you know, he has been in washington. he has seen history. right. i'm not going to be the rat. remember john dean's statement when he told the press, you know, if they're fitting me for this outfit. they got the wrong guy. unlike some of these other people, mcgahn has a future a stand income town will go to lunches and be in future federalist society meetings, has done the heroic work with the supreme court. he doesn't want to go down with the ship. >> ultimately, they ask is any guy worth going to prison for?
michael cohen's lawyer says he has been talking with richard nixon's former white house counsel, john dean, who, of course, helped bring down nixon's presidency, his lawyer lonnie davis telling politico, i reaped out to my old friend john dean because of what he went through with watergate and i saw some parallels. what michael cohen is experiencing right now according to "new york times" is the threat of bank and fraud charges. federal prosecutors reportedly weighing whether to file criminal charges by the end of this month. to talk more about this, i am joined by the federal prosecutor in the southern district of new
york, u.s. attorney's office investigating cohen and andrea bernstein co-host of trump, inc. cohen gets raided. there is all this discussion about what is he being raided for? so then the times has a story saying it's possible bank fraud and it has to do possibly with a taxi medallion business? >> right. this is something michael cohen has been dock for quite some time because in new york, these taxi medallions pre irish were very valuable. gave you the right to pick up fares in new york city. >> that i could be worth more than a million dollars. michael conheld a lot of them. >> you could kind of people and hoard and you make money off them? >> exactly, like real staechlt can you trade and borrow money off of. that's what he was doing. and his fornl former partner, two former part first have been convicted. one recently in, no jane friedland known as the taxi king for allegedly or actually not allegedly, is sending $60 million offshore as a part of a
plea deal he made, he agreed to cooperate potentially against michael cohen. so there is the whole gene friedland source of information and these million documents that they seized, which they said from the get-go. these were about michael cohen's interest, the special master on friday finished her review. she found some 7,000 out of more than a million documents privilege. but that the an awful lot of documents the southern district still has to sift through and use in a case potentially against michael cohen. >> we should be clear in terms of the southern district. in fact, they're the ones pursuing this nothing with the tax me medallion has anything to do with donald trump. >> it's a great way to flip one guy against another guy. we have done nit mob cases. you never know, you pull on that thread.
you could start with a relatively obscure taxicab lawyer like gene friedland, roll it into michaelco zbln think about the social network if you were on the map, you start with the taxi king of new york, who the taxi medallion business as you noted it's a legitimate business. it tends to attract a fair amount of shadiness it's fair to say. your checker move to the president of the united states. >> the two checker moves from the short of shady offices in gene queens and brooklyn, the outer boroughs, he was dealing with people losing their licenses being indicted to being with the president of the united states. i think it's worth keeping in mind like with paul manafort he was allegedly committing these crimes while working for donald trump. i think that's what makes him so interesting. he was a most intimate adviser, setting up deals aall over the soviet union.
that's what he is doing. so he is not some sort of random person. he is somebody right in there in the trump organization, while he may have been doing things. we haven't heard yet, whether the southern district is going to charge him. >> we should say, of course, cohen says, clear my family and country, not president trump, it's his first loyalty. what do you think about the time line as floated in the "time's" article which is possibly before labor day. >> this is a moment of truth for michael cohen. he has to get serious and quick. one he is in the process of cooperating. there is some evidence of that, he lawyer went from being out there to all of a sudden very silent. >> i noted that as well. >> if i was a prosecutor and lanny davis came in i would say knock it off, silence, there is the other indicators the loyalty, he could be cooperating. if he's fought cooperating, what
today's story tells him you need to get real and quick. >> you may just get charged. >> if you had him skating through as a witness, forget it. >> it's america, presumption of innocence. a million document given the business record of the people he has left in his wake. i would be a little stressed out if i were him. thanks for joining us. >> thank you. coming up, president trump pitching himself as the law and order president while telling the world he thinks his former campaign chair is getting a raw deal on 18 criminal charges. that's next.
we must maintain law and order at the highest level or we will cease to have a country. i am the law and order candidate. [ cheers ] >> donald trump, of course, loves to assert he stands for law and order. he was at it again today delivering a speech to celebrate federal immigration officials and making this astonishing claim. >> we have a little opposition called the democrats. i guess they just don't mind crime. i think we will have much more of a red wave than you will see as a phony blue wave. blue wave means crime. it means open borders. not good. >> so that's a message, blue wave means crime, trump means law and order. it's a curious argument from the man who just yesterday was sounding much more like a mob boss, calling john dean a rat because he cooperated with law enforcement in the investigation with richard nixon and with a jury actively delivering the fate of paul manafort, who is
accused of serious crimes, trump on friday used the bully pulpit to suggest his campaign chair should be set free regardless of the evidence. >> i think the whole manafort trial is very sad when you look at what's going on. i think it's a sad day for our country. he worked for me for a very short period of time. you know what, he happens to be a very good person and i think it's very sad what they've done to paul manafort. >> and now to brake down donald trump's view, msnbc credibilitior. and let me start with you, in the span of two day, you got a president saying, to the jury, basically, which is fought sequestered, you should probably lay off my campaign manager who is a good guy, calling john dean a rat. like i don't know people that refer to people as a rat. i honestly have not heard it used as a part of a schtick,
ironically calling someone a rat. then i am a law and order president. what do people like yourself think of that who work in the fbi. >> certain laws and certain orders, not all of them. public corruption, white collar, these sorts of things are not where he tends to focus. >> a misdemeanor entry into the country, we take your child away. >> a blue wave by the way, someone might tell him it's synonymous with loads of cops showing up at your door. that's another blue wave. he apparently has not heard that one. maybe he'll see it at some point or somebody on his team. i think the.is the in terms of law and order, he has bragged about deregulation, he's taken thing ace way and enforced certain things he likes. he made assertion about crime, crime has been going down dramatically for the past two decades, anything involving next crime, homicides, there is no real proof to that pudding.
what he tends to do is buddy himself up to military and law enforcement, especially at the lower ranks or local level. this is very classic of other schemes where you see people trying to actually skirt the law. >> right. >> i think when we watch this, it's interesting to watch, you will always discred i'd people at the federal level he's actually in charge of. then he preys on people at the local level, which i finds kind of odd, if he's in charge of the fib february, he's in charge of the department of justice, he can fix it. he is the president. >> also, hoo tess person charged when acting the laws. today he tells reuters, i've stayed away from mueller. this sounds so mobster. i stayed away, ki go in there if i. to. i can run it if i wanted to. can he? is that true? >> it's not true in the sense that constitutional norms that have governed our country for hundreds of years would say, no. now, if he does it, who can stop him? the answer is congress can top him.
we have a mechanism for impeachment. >> or possibly the courts. >> possibly the courts, depending on how he does it. in the future after he leaves office a president can be prosecuted if he commits a crime like obstruction of justice, that's why nixon needed the pard frein ford many years ago. it's a total subversion of the system to say the person supposed to execute the laws faithfully can undercut them for the benefit of his friends, it's totally inconsistent with the notion on law and order, unless you pointed out in the "times" a few months ago, unless law and order means you protect your friends and go after people different from you. >> natasha, as someone that follows a lot that's happened between the initial "time's" story about mcgahn the fallout. the piece of cohen, it does feel like they continue to squeeze and squeeze. i'm curious what you make of it. >> definitely. it feels like we are reaching a breaking point. all of these threads are
starting to unravel. some are starting to come back toke like the manafort trial is on the verge essentially of completing, if the jury gets back with a verdict this week. have you michael cohen now who reports say that prosecutors are finalizing charges against him and of course, you have the president weighing whether or not he's going to sit down with the special count sell. we're at a precipice right now in the mueller investigation and it's kind of the void into which the president has kind of been launching his tweets. it seems like he's getting more and more anxious about how this thing is going to play out. of course, if the mueller, if the manafort trial ends in a conviction, that is going to give mueller a lot of momentum, of course, manafort still has to stand trial in d.c., but mueller has said he has over three times as much evidence in that trial as he did for this one. so this one was not necessarily a slam dunk case because the jury has been deliberating on it for longer than some people expected them to.
the one in d.c. may well be. okay. the michael cohen charges are something that the president has always been more worried about than anything else in this entire investigation. because michael cohen was his long-time fixer and knows virtually everything about trump and the trump empire. so this is definitelying is that we are seeing. it's reaching a critical mass. i think the president is now panicking and making these kind of ridiculous arguments on twitter. >> there is also his lawyer's representation. i want to play this clip. rudy guiliani does epistomology 1010. take a listen. >> when you tell me he should testify because he's going to tell the truth. he shouldn't worry. that's so silly because it's somebody's version of the truth. not the truth. he didn't have a conversation -- >> the truth is truth. >> no, it isn't truth. truth isn't truth. >> truth isn't truth. >> here's my fear about rudy guiliani. he's not making arguments.
he's not trying to persuade someone what is he doing? >> i think he's trying to rally the base and rally the 40 or 45% of the people who are in the president's corner. this can't be meant to be aimed at a prosecutor or a law enforce. . it's nonsensic am in that sense. so you go out with these orwellian line, tomorrow he will say war is peace and ignorance is truth and other orwellian lines, but it can't persuade anybody already in the president's corner and to make them angry about the investigation. >> the other part is the perjury trap. they are loving this line, perjury traps only exist if you don't tell the truth or tell your story, it's not he said, he said. it's he said the president versus they said. he's going to be the last one that shows up in terms of an interview, if he ever shows up. >> quickly, he's not going to testify? >> he's being advised not to. he says he wants to sit down and
clear his name. politically, people will have questions what he has to hide if he does not sit down with special counsel, that's a peril he will have to be wary of. >> thanks for being with me. ahead, democrats are in a good position to win back the house, all things considered. how about the senate? that's next. from the very beginning ... it was always our singular focus, a distinct determination. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. specialists focused on treating cancer. using advanced technologies. and more precise treatments than before. working as hard as we can- doing all that we can- for everyone who walks through our doors. this is cancer treatment
thing one tonight as we've discussed here, donald trump never misses an opportunity to parade around law enforcement officers in order to boost his image as we were discussing, a law and order president. almost without fail, these events have led to epic moments of awkward ness, like the time he stumbled and the teleprompter state of the union and gave a guy a new name right from in front of the nation. >> here tonight is one leader in the effort to defend our country, homelands investigation certainly agency celestino martinez, he goes by cj and dj, he said call me either one. so we'll call you jj. >> i wonder if that poor guy has to pretend he goes by dj and cj. you thought that was cringe worthy a salute to the heroes of i.c.e., thing two if 60 seconds
at the white house today called a salute to i.c.e. and i.c.e. canada for immigration customs enforcement. cbp stands for we're not sure in congressional black caucus. >> we're here for the incredible brave patriots that keep america safe the heroes of i.c.e. and cbc. let me extends my gratitude to every law enforcement professional representing ice and cbc. i.c.e. and cbc. cbc. cbc, officers, the officers and acts of ice and cbc. a true and loyal friends of i.c.e. and cbc. is there so during the event, trump highlighted an individual cbc, i'm sorry, cvp angel anza dua. >> adrian, come here, i want to ask you a question, how did you, come here, you're not nervous,
right? speaks perfect english. come here, i want to ask you apt that. >> yes, adrian anza duo, an american patrol agent speaks perfect english. angel took it if stride as one must do when one comes in with our president. it wasn't totally weird or offensive at all. >> celestino martinez, he called by cj and dj. he said call me either one. so we'll call you cj. as the president was celebrating
as the president was celebrating i.c.e. today, the government has immigrant children still celebrated from their families. the government says the parents of 154 children have waived their right to get their kids back, literally signed a form saying they chose not to be reunited with their children. why would anyone sign a form leak that? many of the parents say they were coerced. we went the find one father that seened the form. here's what happened. >> where are we going? where are we headed right now? >> to see one of our clients a dad separate fareed his son. >> reporter: the executive director of the immigrant law center.
today most of her time is separating families. it turns out many ended up in the los angeles area. some parents still behind bars. we are going to the ottowa detention facility about 90 miles outside of l.a. we have attorneys up here almost every day of the week. >> reporter: lindsay and other lawyers head out here on a regular basis to push back on the government's contention that parents of 154 kids didn't want to be reunited and intentionally signed documents giving up that right. >> you represent ten people in this facility alone or fathers separate fareed their kids and signed papers that basically said i don't want to be reunited with my kid? >> yeah. >> so this guy his name is -- hos kins young. >> yeah. >> did he want to give up his right to be unified with his son? >> actually not. he refers to him signing this document that he didn't understand as a sin. >> a sin? >> yes.
because he didn't know what he was signing. it's only now he is working with attorneys understands repercussions of what he signed. and people will sign because it's an office near uniform telling them that they should sign this. >> so this is adelanto. >> yes, a detention facility. >> that's alfonso. >> what's up? i'm jacob. nice to meet you. >> so even though he signed something that said i am affirmatively returning to my country of citizenship without my minor children. they say i didn't know what that men. >> yeah. and they say they've been intimidate into signing this. that they will be deported
regardless and it is up to them to decide whether they want their child deported with them or released to some family member here. >> so they said those are your only options. >> are those only options? >> no. >> i'll go in to meet him. he signed this form and gave up his right to be unified with his son. >> we head in the and after three hours inside, we came back out. i didn't get on meet with him even though i.c.e. knew i was coming for days. but lindsey is that alfonso did. >> what happened? >> we talked little about his son. >> did you talk about the form and that he signed in it error? >> did he know that i was here? >> he really wanted to talk to you. he wants people to know story of what happened to him and his son. >> did you say he wrote a note? >> did he. >> can you read to it me? >> sure. they are deporting me without me even knowing. i feel like the government here is treating me really bad. i feel ignored and i feel like i'm going crazy. i am in an inhumane situation. this does not have a name. i fear they will deport me.
with only 78 days until the mid-term elections, democrats have a pretty good shot at retaking the house. the senate is another matter entirely. as dave wasserman, the u.s. editor for the nonpartisan cook report tweeted today, if every state/district's result in november were an 8% uniform swing in the democrats' favor, democrats would simultaneously gain 44 house seats, almost twice plus 23 they need, but lose four senate seats. dave wasserman joins me to walk us through the math. it is a really, really striking
way at looking at the difference between these two houses in terms of the races this fall. >> it's like mars and venus. the senate will be decided by red rural states where democrats on defense. and the house will be decided by swing urban states. it is possible one party could control both after this november but thanks to this geographical divergence, there's a really wide window of opportunity for a split decision where democrats win control of the house while falling short in the senate. >> what's crazy is that no one, of all the forecasts i've looked at, i've never really encountered a person who says when you take aggregate total, that republican there's get more votes. in the senate or the house, than the democrats. no one thinks that. the question is whether the structural impediments will thwart the majority. >> geographical bias of congress has never been this tilted
against democrats. we went back 80 years worth of date and realized the median house and senate veets 5 points more pro trump than the nation as a whole. for very different reasons. in the senate you place a premium on small states where trump did better on average. in the house, republicans have the advantage not only thanks to democrats love to live in cities because they're clustered there, but thanks on gerrymandering after the last census. so we think, democrats need to win 7% to 8% more votes than republicans just to break even in the house. the good news for democrats is that they're polling 7 to 8% ahead of republicans but this is a penalty for them over the long term. >> when you think about this, they're all democrats running for this re-election in red
states that trump carried. you had this amazing point about the math of the senate which is that a long-term problem for democrats. the majority represents 18% of the country's population which is pretty wild. >> it is. >> and 60% represents 20% of the population and you have to wonder what this means over the long term. the fact the senate is even close owes to democrats having 11 red state seats. and ten of those seats are up for grabs this november. it is possible thanks to the candidates' skill and some luck that has benefited them over the years, that they could hang on. if it ever breaks, if it goes republican, then democrats could get locked out of power. the senate could be answering to a group of voters that is more rural, and pro trump.
>> what we're seeing is sort of happening, less ticket splitting. right now, there's, that sorting hasn't reached the place where it has a lot of democrats winning statewide in these states that are very red, very trump. if that goes away, you end up with this perfect sorting where you can have a locked in majority of some of the most sparsely populated, most pro trump states. >> that's correct. and how would democrats respond? they badly need to expand their appeal if they want to be relevant, to continue to be relevant in the senate. but look. over the long term, if republicans have this structural advantage, you wonder how urban and coastal states will react. will they be patient? >> yeah.
there was a long period of time in which the solid south exerted a kind of geographical veto on much of the country's politics, which brought some very severe and significant problems in the long run throughout the country. that's it for me. tonight president trump tells reuters, he is totally allowed to be involved in the mueller investigation and quote, i could run it if i want. meanwhile, what does white house counsel don mcgahn know and more importantly, what did he tell the special counsel during a report 30 hours of questioning? after some blockbuster reporting in the "new york times," trump allies realized they were in the dark. and rudolph giuliani's fantastic weekend declaring truth isn't truth and going completely and boldly against the facts regarding a key part of trump's path to the white house. all of it as the 11th hour gets underway for a new week on a monday night.