tv MSNBC Live With Ali Velshi MSNBC June 14, 2018 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT
university lawsuit that the new york ag also brought against him. he would never settle that lawsuit. he settled it for $25 million. >> we will continue to watch this one. we will see if he changes his mind. that's for sure. >> talks a big game on twitter. kristen welker. that does it for me. ali val she picks things up right now. >> wasn't there supposed to be white house press briefing. i thought i would be rolling in here during the briefing. >> it's going to happen during ali's hour. >> that's not how it was supposed to be. katy tur. it's supposed to be done by my hour. >> do you want you have scripts? >> i wasn't planning on scripts. i thought there was a white house press briefing. good afternoon, i'm ali very well she. yes i am the guy who gets the press briefing. the trump administration is in a too familiar stance for more than a year. sarah huckabee sanders is expected to be back on defense as she gets ready to answer
questions on a number of issues at today's briefing which hasn't begun yet. the inspector general report on the investigation into hillary clinton's private e-mail server is out. it found no indication, no indication of political bias with one possible exception on a questionable text message. but the investigator general's report is being overshadowed by two controversies surrounding the president this hour. the administration is taking serious heat from both sides of the aisle over trump's new policy of separating parents from their children at the u.s./mexico border. today, on donald trump's 72nd birthday we learned that the new york attorney general is suing the trump foundation. the suit alleges the president and his adult children illegally used money from the private foundation for personal, business, and political expenses. the lawsuit alleges it has been happening more than a decade. the president sprung into action
with his twitter fingers saying witch-hunt, no collusion, no crime, blaming democrats and then saying i won't settle this case. the inspector general's report, the one president trump has been pressuring the justice department to release for months is out. that's the big story. the conclusions do not back donald trump's claims of political bias against his presidential campaign. this highly anticipated report, probably the reason why the white house press briefing is delayed -- it is a report into the investigation into hillary clinton's private e-mail server. finds that former fbi director james comey was insubordinate in the handling of the investigation during the 2016 election. it did not find political bias within the fbi in its decision not to prosecute hillary clinton. with me with the latest on that is pete williams. pete you have had a little bit of time. i know you have been on tv a whole lot so you haven't had a ton of time to go through it but
you can bring us the main points of this investigation? >> the insub or the gnat claim that the inspector general says in his report is for comey's decision to have that news conference july 5th of 2016 without telling the justice department what he was going to say. namely that the fbi concluded that hillary clinton was not prosecutable for the way she handled her private e-mail server that included some classified e-mails. and the ig says it doesn't take issue in any way with the fbi's investigative decisions. here's a quote from the report. it says, we found no evidence that the conclusions by department prosecutors were affected by bias or other improper considerations. rather we concluded they were based on the prosecutor's assessments of facts, the law, and past department practice. now, the department -- the report does reveal a new exchange of text messages in the month preceding the discovery of additional e-mails on the laptop of anthony wiener, who was
married to huma abedin a close clinton aide. that became a big deal in late october when the fbi announced they found them and later said they were of no consequence. here's what the fbi says was a text he cans change between two top fbi officials. on august 6th lisa page texted in essence, trump cess not ever to going to become president, right, right. peter struck, a senior official in the e-mail investigation said no, no, he's not. we'll stop it. now, struck was one of the officials who the inspector general report says could have moved the fbi to more aggressively go after those anthony wiener e-mails. they were found in late september but the fbi sort of waited around a month before they got energetic about actually looking at them and getting the court permission to actually search the laptop for him. the ag says it can't explain why the fbi waited around that there were many official who shared the blame for not moving more
quickly. as for stuk, it says given that exchange they can't rule out there may have been bias in his mind. but overall the conclusion is that the fbi showed no political bias. but the e-mail exchanges of those two it says casts a cloud over the fbi's handling of this investigation and its reputation overall. >> let me get this clear. the idea is that the investigation concludes or suggests that peter struck, this fbi agent was biased. it does not conclude that the investigation was biased? >> it doesn't say that. no. no. not quite. it says there is a question whether he was biassed. >> got it. >> you about it doesn't reach the question that he was. by the way his lawyer issued a statement saying look, struck had a decision to make. either turn the heat back up on the clinton e-mail investigation or pursue the russia investigation which he was involved in and his lawyer says that was a justifiable decision,
that a potential foreign country's meddling in our election was a big deal and they had already decided not the prosecute hillary clinton. so he said the reason struck didn't turn it up more aggressively was justifiable. >> thanks pete. nobody can break this down like you can. pete williams our justice correspondent. joining me now, stephanie douglas of the fbi national security branch who worked with robert mueller and clint watts, author of messing with the enemy, surviving in the social media world of hackers, terrorists, russians, and fake news. i want to start with you on this, clint. to pete's point about peter strok. i don't know this guy. i don't know why he sent the text he sent and i don't know what his biases are. but it's an interesting argument that his lawyer makes, in a decision whether you turn up the heat on the clinton e-mail investigation at that point in the political cycle or the russia investigation, he seemed to have come to the judgment
that the russia investigation is more important. i'm sure the agency was pivoting in an aggressive way to look at hey is russia trying to influence the u.s. election, are they trying to penetrate campaigns? that would have been top priority across the board. i think it's legitimate. what we have learned is u.s. government personnel speaking on their government cell phones all of that is ultimately going to be out in public. not only did strzok say disparaging things about trump, he said it about a lot of people. just don't do it. >> be judicious. stephanie, also definitely stuff in this report that is critical and that the fbi has to take a hard look at, including the
stuff that clint just talked about. it's definitely not the gift basket that donald trump has been hoping for or that back up his argument that there is institutional bias in the fbi against him and against his campaign. >> that's right. i mean, at the end of the day, the big takeaway here is that the i.g. did not find evidence of any kind of institutional bias for or against any candidate in the 2016 election. like you said, i mean, there are obviously some unflattering thing as part of the ig report but the director of the fbi will take those very, very seriously. we anticipate a press release -- or a press conference from him later on this afternoon i know where he will be making a statement. but the fbi takes the ig's report and any work done relative to any kind of personnel performance matter very seriously and they will be reviewing it thoroughly for any action. >> comey tweeted out. i respect the dodge ig office which is why i urged them to do
this review. the conclusions are reasonable although i disagree with some. i pray no director faces it again. thanks to the ig's people for hard work. one of the things that it criticizes comey for in particular was insubordination, for taking the lead on going out to the public to talk about hillary clinton's e-mails when in fact that according to this report was really the attorney general's domain. >> right. so the director reports essentially to the department of justice.it should be the attorney general that would come up with whatever the finding is, whether they are going to pursue charges or not. the fbi director is not the one who pursues. >> that's a distinction. >> you recommend charges to the attorney general, deputy of justice, u.s. attorneys in one of these districts and they mange the decision do we move forward wi. this was unprecedented. comey's sort of justification for this was we have to keep away from the politics of it. if i come out with my
recommendation in public i can dodge essentially this. it was interesting that in the peter strzok influence they didn't want the russia influence to get leaked out because they were afraid it would unions the election cycle. can the d.o.j. be independent today? my takeaway is maybe we need a structural change in our government how the attorney general is picked and do they report to the president or are they an independent body. >> last year and a half a lot of americans who hadn't given much thought to this have. another thing is how you do with the president's attack on major institutions, including the judiciary and the media. but the fbi and the dech justice. at this point, christopher wray is going the make a statement within the next two hours or so. what does the fbi have to do now, to stop the hemorrhaging, to stop the ongoing attack on the fbi in the face of these
findings? are there things that the fbi can says we will look at ourselves, fix this, and we will move on? >> yes, i mean the fbi doesn't have control over external forces. so the president can continue to tweet, and mach statements relative to the fbi. but what the fbi has to do is take that report, review it thoroughly, make common sense decisions relative to the information that's provided. and make some change s. with all due respect to director comey, he thought he was doing the right thing with making that press release in july of 2016. in fact, it put the bureau right smack dab into the middle of political chaos. the bureau is continuing to fight its way out of that. >> stephanie douglas and clint watts thank you very much.
>> now to another very big story today. i want to bring in the reporter who broke the news of the new york attorney general's lawsuit against the trump charity. david farenthold is an msnbc political analyst, and author. also with us, msnbc legal analyst danny salve owes. david, this is a remarkable discovery about the trump foundation. tell us what the story is. >> the trump foundation is supposed to be a tax exempt charity spending money for the public good. it's being accused of using it for personal expenses, buying art. and most importantly during the 2016 campaign she is accusing
him of using this tax exempt theoretical charity into an arm of the trump campaign. >> danny is a val owes let's talk about this. clearly it's not clear to everybody how the charities are supposed to work and what the rules are. what's the legality around this? >> it's important to take a look at donald trump's tweet where he talks about how much money the charity took in and how much it gave out. he pointed to the fact that the charity gave more than it may have received. that's all well and good. but the mere fact that a charity creates a net good a net profit on behalf of -- by profit i mean for the charitable cause, doesn't necessarily mean it's operated in a legal way. there are many rules for the privilege of running a charitable organization and getting the tax benefits, these organizations have to follow a number of rules. that includes prohibitions or severe restrictions on what's called related party transactions for example.
and that's just shifting money from column a to column b or transactions that are really thinly disguised beneficial transactions for one of the 501 c 3's members. there are a number of rules that have to be followed. a charitable organization can run afoul of them even if their net benefit to the community is greater than that which they have taken in. >> so david i just want to bring up an example for instance. the attorney general suit says in addition to the iowa fund-raiser which directly benefitted from trump and his presidential campaign the foundation entered into the following self benefiting transactions that directly benefitted mr. trump. the foundation made a $100,000 payment to the fisher house foundation, a charitable organization to settle legal claims against mar-a-lago. on february 14th, 2012 the foundation made a $156,000 payment to the martin b. greenberg foundation, a
charitable organization to settle legal claims against the trump national golf club. we don't have to be lawyers or journalists or charity experts to presume that you are not supposed to be using charitable fund to settle legal cases against your business entities. >> that's right. you are not. one thing that trump has said today and all along in defense of this issis abouted on a fundamental misunderstanding of the tax law. trump thinks as long as my charity is giving money to another charity it must be okay. there is no rules other than that. as long as the charity is getting the money then i don't have to worry about it it. that's obviously wrong otherwise we would all put money in charities and use to it pay kids' private school tuitions. >> right. >> in this case he used his business's incurred debt as far as legal settlements. both of these instances owed money to a charity. it doesn't matter, the debt was on up from's business. he then takes money out of the
foundation, an independent charity whose money is meant to have served the public good. he takes money out of the foundation and uses it to save his businesses $258,000. the charity got the money to the end but that's not the question. the question is who owed the money? if it's trump's business and he uses the foundation to pay the money that's against the law. >> if you give money that is in your foundation that is otherwise benefiting you -- in other words this could have an impact on campaign finance. >> it could have a big impact on campaign finance. there is a lot of evidence in the face of the complaint itself -- >> danny, i have to interrupt you. we have got sarah huckabee sanders. >> the president will highlight the strong american economy and tout the benefits we are seeing from tax reform and egg deregulation including that small business optimism has hit
its highest level in more than 30 years. as you know, national economic council director and assistant to the president larry custody low was discharged from the hospital and is recovering at home. the president has spoken with larry and he's in good spirit. we look forward to having him back here at the white house soon. tonight at nationals park they will play the game. after last year's shooting where capital police acted heroically in the line of fire to save lives we are happy to see them returning to the field including steve scalise. we will be cheering them on. i have heard the republican team looked good in practice and that they are headed for a victory. on june 14th we celebrate flag day commemorating the adoption of our american flag. the founding our brave u.s. army. and last but not least we would
like to wish the president a very, very happy birthday. if i do say so, i don't think he looks a day over 35. with that. i'll take your questions. little sucking up. never bad. >> if you would please comment on the recently released ig report, your impressions of what you have read so far. and have you had an opportunity to did you say with the president the new york attorney general's idea of suing the trump foundation to have it shut down in the state? >> the president was briefed on the ig report earlier today. and it reaffirmed the president's suspicions about comey's conduct and the political bias among some of the members of the fbi. director wrai as you know will be holding a press conference lates they are afternoon. we would encourage you totine tune in for specific questions. as to your other question, the president has tweeted about this, specifically earlier today tlt foundation raised $18 million while giving $19 million
to charity child virtually having disagree expenses. the previous new york ag who was forced to retire in disgrace made it a stated mission to advance his own political gain. and the current acting ag stated battling the white house is the most important job she has ever done. that sounds outrageously biassed and certainly problematic and very concerning. cecilia. >> in the state of the union, the president had harsh words for north korea. said no regime has oppressed its own citizens more brutally than north korea. why is he now down playing north korea's horrific atrocities? >> the president hasn't down played. like you said, the president has read north korea's human rights record and some of the abuses of the north korean regime on a number of occasions. the focus of the summit was denuclearization and peace on
the peninsula. that was the purpose of the president's conversation and that was the focus of what took place there. mara. >> on fox news he said lot of other people have done some really bad things. how is that not down playing the atrocities? >> certainly, that's a factual statement. a lot of people have done bad things. however, the president hasn't ignored the bad things of that been done by the north korean edge eem. he directly called it out on a number of occasions as you yourself mentioned and he brought it up at the summit. again, the purpose of the summit was to focus on denuclearization and looking towards that brighter future. and that was what the president was trying to do. margaret. >> thank you sarah. could you confirm there is a meeting today, chinese tariffs coming to the. and there was a report that -- >> a lot of questions, we will go one at a time. >> it's the same -- >> yes, there is a trade meeting today. in terms of any announcements, i'll keep you posted when we have something to announce.
>> the third part of my question, there has been a question -- third part of a two part question. >> 00 to 900 chinese chinese products will be on the tariffs list. i seems like a high number. even though the highest number 1300. if that number is higher than it really is, could you tell us now? >> since i'm not making any announcements, it would be hard for me to give details of an announcement we are not ready to make. we will keep you posted. beyond that i can't get into any details. david. >> thank you sarah. two questions if you don't mind. the president said earlier this week that he did speak with kim jong-un about human rights abuses. can you tell us exactly what areas of concern they talked about? was it the work camps, torture, public executions, the lack of freedom of religion and the press, kidnapping, women's rights? what did they actually talk about? >> again, they cuffed a number of different topics. a couple that you listed. i won't get into all of the
details of their private conferring. but i can tell you as the president publicly stated that he did bring up human rights abuses of the north korean regime. jim. sorry -- >> rudy giuliani spent 20 minutes today talking with one of our reporters about his love life and proclaimed that in his words he is not going to be a priest if he's separated from his third wife. has this become too big of a distrack to the point where the president could consider getting another lawyer? also, he said his soon to be ex judith called the president last week. can you tell us what they talked about. >> i'm not today or tomorrow or at any point going to comment on jool joule's love life. i will be glad to leave that to you and the report hear the spoke with him. i am not aware and don't have information on that. jim. >> tell us why the president is a lulted the north koreans when he was over in singapore. >> it is a common courtesy when a military official from another
government is a lutes that you return that. >> second question, unrelated as the children are being separated from their families as they come cross the border. the attorney general said somehow there is a justification for this in the bible. where does of the say in the bible that it's moral to take children away from their mothers? >> i'm not aware of the attorney general's comments or what he would be referencing. i can say that it is biblical to enforce the law. that is actually repeated a number of times throughout the bible. however this -- hold on jim, if you will let me finish. again i'm not going to comment on the comments i haven't seen. >> he said it's in the bible to follow the law. >> it's not what i said. i know it's hard to understand even short sentences. don't take my word out of context. but the separation of illegal alien families is the product of the same legal loopholes that democrats refuse to close. and these laws are the same that
have been on the books for over a decade ask. the president is simply enforcing them. >> policy to take children away from their parents. can you imagine the horror that -- >> following the law. >> they come with their parents and suddenly they are pulled away from their parents. why is the government doing this? >> because it's the law. that's what the law states. >> they don't have to do that it is your policy. >> it doesn't have to be the law. the president has called on democrats in congress to fix those loopholes testimony democrats have failed to come to the table, failed to help this president close the loopholes and fix this problem. would don't want this to be a problem. the president has tried to address it a number of occasions. we have laid out a proposal and democrats simply refuse to do their job and fix the problem. sorry jim, i've given you enough time. >> two questions. there is no law that requires families to be separate tad border, this was the administration's choice to move from civil matters into
criminal. they come across the border illegally and therefore they have to separate families. why are they following this policy? >> again, the laws have been on the books for over a decade. the president is enforcing them. we would like to fix the broken system that our immigration -- and fix our immigration problem. however, until democrats are willing to actually fix this problem, it's going to continue. but we would like to see it fixed. jill. >> take responsibility for its policy change from handling them as civil matters to criminal prosecutions. >> it is not a policy change to enforce the law. that's been this administration's policy since the day we got here. >> in april, went from civil to criminal. >> it is our administration's policy. >> they are separating families to deter team from coming here illegally. >> our administration has had the same position since we started on day one that we were going to enforce the law. i know it was something that wasn't high on the priority list in the previous administration.
but it is on ours. we are a country of law and order, and we are enforcing the law and protecting our borders. we would like to fix these loopholes. if democrats want to get serious about it instead of playing political games they are welcome to couple here and sit down with the president and actually do something about it. >> you are a parent. don't you have empathy. come on sarah, you are a parent. don't you have empathy for what these people are going for. they have less than you. >> brian, guys, settle down. >> seriously. >> i'm being serious. i am not going to let i yell out of turn. brian, i you you want more tv time but that's not what this is about. i want i don't want to recognize you. go ahead, jill. >> it is a serious question. they have nothing, they come to the border with nothing and you throw children in cages. your parent, a parent of young children, don't you have any empathy for what they go through. >> jill, go ahead. >> does the president believe
crimea is part of the of russia because everyone there speaks russian? second -- >> let me answer your first question. i am not aware of any comment like that. i know it's been reported but i'm to the going to comment on a private conversation i wasn't a part of that i don't have information on. second part. >> president said that kim jong-un told him north korea was working to destroy a major missile engine testing site. is that the sohig site as it's been referred to. >> we will have specific details later. we are working with the department of defense we will get you that information. trey, about go. >> two questions on the ig report. earlier this year, the president suggested that the dom inspector general horowitz was, quote an obama guy. how does the president view horowitz today and does he feel that this investigation was thorough? >> again, the president thinks that this report reaffirms the suspicions that he had about comey. and director wray is going to hold a press conference later today. i would encourage you to tune in for that.
>> the text message exchange -- >> go ahead. >> the text message exchange highlighted in the report between lisa page and peter strzok. the fbi agent said we will stop it. and he was referring to candidate trump becoming president. did the president have any reaction to this information when you spoke with him after he was briefed today? >> certainly, again, cause as great deal of concern. and i think points out the political bias that the president has been talking about that has been repeatedly mentioned from this administration that we found to be a huge problem and we are glad they are looking into it. kristen. >> sarah, thank you. president or anyone else used funds from the trump foundation to pay for personal, business, or campaign expenses? >> i'm not aware of any of that taking place. >> can you definitively say no? >> again, i'm not aware of it. i would have to get more information but i would refer you to the trump foundation for that specific point. i haven't spoken with him about that specifically.
>> president trump said he doesn't think michael cohen is going to flip several months ago. is that still the case? >> i'm sorry. i didn't hear the question. >> the president stated several months ago that he doesn't think michael cohen is is going to flip. does he still think that's the case? >> i would refer you back to the president's comment. john. >> a, thank you. first, there have been reports on almost a daily basis, and in punk tillious detail about epa head scott pruitt doing things that border on the unethical and almost on a daily basis republican members of congress call for his resignation. what is his status within the administration? and does the president have confidence in him to remain as administrator? >> certainly we have some areas of concern and some of these allegations, but i don't have any personnel announcements at this point. >> my second question is, congressman mark sanford blamed the president's tweet as the
final straw in his defeat, making him the second republican house member to go down in defeat. this is the first time in 48 years a sitting president has opposed a member of congress of his own party. does the president intend to speak future to for primary challenges to other critics of him within the congress? if so, who? >> i don't have any announcements on any candidates that the president may or may not endorse and wouldn't be able to address that from this venue either. sorry -- that's right. i'll come back to you. >> appreciate it. >> two questions. first on the two immigration bills that the house is considering, does the president have a preference for one over the other? or both just fine him then i have another one. >> the president laid out a proposal that closes the legal loopholes and provides the resources to secure our border. if the he process leads to a
permanent solution as outlined by the president we would support it. >> have you looked at those two? >> we have laid out what we want to see. if this gets to a permanent solution we would support it. >> do you blame the democrats for not closing the loopholes. republicans control both houses of congress. despite the president's repeated preference for mitch mcconnell to get rid of the legislative filibuster so they could pass something without democratic votes they have not done that. don't republicans face some responsibility for the immigration -- >> if a handful of democrats wanted to solve this problem we could quickly get it done. but they don't. they have refused to come to the table and actually be part of a solution instead of playing political games attacking the president. >> the president asked mcconnell about the filibuster many times. that's not a barrier. >> there are a majority of republicans who want to support fixing the loop hopes hole. the president wants to work with them. we have laid out a proposal to do that. we are hopeful that republicans
and democrats will come together and fix the system. i called on you next. >> immigration problems at the border. >> look, the president wants to pick it. we have laid out a number of different plans and proposals that would close these loopholes, and we continue to be ready and willing to work with congress to get it done. >> two questions. on immigration, what does the president want to see the house of representatives do in the next week? >> again, we have laid that out. we would like to see a permanent solution to fix the loopholes and fix the border. >> and daca. on the upcoming votes, is there a particular bill he favors or a particular -- >> again, he wants to see all of the different components that we laid out several months ago addressed f. any of the legislation comes to the table that would create a permanent solution that does that, then we would support it. >> on nafta, the president's threat of tariffs, does that mean he will be draw from nafta in the coming days? >> i don't have any announ announcements on that. >> whether the president believe
has the inspector general report was author. several have called for a second special counsel. would he supportan inirery into the report or does this settle the matter? >> certainly this creates a great deal of concern. we will tune into director wray's comments this afternoon. certainly, there are a lot of things in this report that not only worry those of us in the administration but should worry a lot of americans that people played this political bias and injected that into a department that shouldn't have any of that. >> follow-up. does the president believe that peter strzok should have a job still at the fbi? >> i haven't asked him specifically that question but my guess would be no. unmore question. ayman. >> officials here at the white house are reportedly eyeing the exits, including mark short, rod shaw, and yourself. are any of those officials leaving, and what's the plan to
replace all of those high level people? >> i don't know there is a need to replace them. as i stated last night in a tweet, i think cbs got ahead of their skis since they put out a story about my thinking without ever actually talking to he moo. seems be that problematic. in terms of personnel announcements, i don't have any to make. i can tell you that i show up here every day. i love my job. i'm glad to work for the president. and each and every day i'll play for clarity and discernment on what my future looks like. right now, i think the country's looks pretty good and i'm glad to get to be a part of that process and i'm going to continue to do my job. thanks, guys. >> sarah huckabee sanders issuing a non-denial denial whether or not she is thinking about leaving her be jo. it was speculated she and rod shaw and mark short the director of legislative affairs and the deputy press secretary were all thinking about leaving the white house. she tweeted that is not information she had confirmed or they hadn't consulted her about
it. she didn't say she was not leaving. she said cbs or whoever reported that may have been ahead of their skis. kristen welker joins us. that got more intense than these briefs usually get on the issue of parents and children being separated at the southern border. >> sarah huckabee sanders fielded a number of questions had a number of heated exchanges frankly ali about that question, about the administration's policy. her argument is look we haven't changed the policy as it relates to parents and children. war processing parents who have crossed the border and who have done so without the proper documentation. however, the problem with that argument of course, jeff sessions, several weeks ago announced a zero tolerance policy. that did indicate a shift. it meant that people who were coming here illegally were going to be potentially prosecuted. and that is why you are seeing children separated from their
parents. so sarah sanders pressed on that repeatedly. you heard jim acosta ask her where in the bible it says it's okay to do that. another one of my colleagues, brian carom interrupting actually another exchange and saying, you are a mother. trying to make this personal for sarah sanders. you saw that she didn't respond to him and instead moved on to another reporter, in part, i think, because that was sort of a question he wasn't asked -- he wasn't pointed on to ask. she tried to sort of move on from that very heated topic. but there is no doubt, ali that some of these exchanges were very heated and underscore the fact that this administration still doesn't have a good answer for what is becoming a growing political problem and growing crisis at the border. she was also asked repeatedly about the d.o.j. ig report. she said exactly what you would expect her to. she indicated that it essentially supports what the president has been saying about former fbi director james comey,
that the firing was justified. and she also tried to make the argument that it shows that there was some political bias although as i heard you discussing with pete williams, the report doesn't actually find that. now i asked her about another legal matter. the new york attorney general filing a lawsuit against the trump foundation alleging that funds were misused for personal reasons, for political reasons. take a listen to how sarah sanders answered those questions. >> has the president or anyone else used funds from the trump foundation to pay for personal, business, or campaign expenses? >> i'm not aware of any of that tyking place. >> did you definitively say no? >> again i'm not aware of it. i would have to debt more information but i would refer you to the trump foundation for that specific point. >> have you spoken with the president? >> i haven't spoken to him on that point. >> trump said several months ago he doesn't think michael cohen
going to flip. is that still the case? >> i'm sorry? >> the president said several months ago he doesn't think michael cohen is going to flip. does he still think that's the case? >> i would refer you back to the president's comment. >> one more point, when she was asked by another reporter about that suit in new york she essentially repeated some of what president trump tweeted earlier today. tried to argue this is politics at its worst. and also argued that the trump foundation actually gave aamour money than it took in. we are starting to see the political talking points, president trump saying he is not going to settle. we will have to track and see how this civil case unfolds. >> the important point there, the fact that you give away more money than you take in doesn't whitewash whether or not there was illegality. as kristen just mentioned there was an emotional exchange in the white house briefing over the government's practice of separating children from their families at a border. next we will take you to the border and inside the largest
licensed facility where these children are staying. more than 1100 children by way are being detained in this way. it is a place that looks more like incarceration than a shelter. it took a whole lot more. that's why i switched to the spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on everything i buy. everything. and that 2% cash back adds up to thousands of dollars each year... so i can keep growing my business in big leaps! what's in your wallet? there's nothing more important than your health. so if you're on medicare or will be soon, you may want more than parts a and b here's why. medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. you might want to consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan,
insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any medicare supplement insurance plan, these help pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and, these plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you could stay with the doctor or specialist you trust... or go with someone new. you're not stuck in a network... because there aren't any. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. there's a range to choose from, depending on your needs and your budget. rates are competitive. and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. like any of these types of plans, they let you apply whenever you want.
there's no enrollment window... no waiting to apply. so call now. remember, medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. you'll be able to choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. whether you're on medicare now or turning 65 soon, it's a good time to get your ducks in a row. duck: quack! call to request your free decision guide now. because the time to think about tomorrow is today. man 1: this is my body of proof. woman 1: proof of less joint pain... woman 2: ...and clearer skin. woman 3: this is my body of proof. man 2: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 4: ...with humira. woman 5: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage,
and clear skin in many adults. humira is the #1 prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. avo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. woman 6: need more proof? woman 7: ask your rheumatologist about humira. man 1: what's your body of proof?
house briefing minutes ago as the trump administration faces harsh criticism from both sides of the aisle over its policy of separating undocumented immigrants children from their parents. the white house blamed partisan lits. >> it is biblical to enforce the law. that is actually repeated a number of times throughout the bible -- hold on jim, if you will let me finish i'm not going to comment on the attorney's specific comments i haven't seen. >> you just said it is anyway the bible to follow the law. >> i know it's hard for you to understand even short sentences and please don't take my words out of context. it is the product the same legal loopholes that the democrats refuse to close. it doesn't have to be the law. and the president has called on democrats in congress to fix those loopholes, the democrats have failed to come to the table. failed to help this president close the loopholes and fix this
problem. we don't want this to be a rob. >> sarah you are a parent. don't you have any empathy for what these people are going for. they have less than you do. >> brian, guys, settle down. >> seriously. >> i'm trying to be serious but i'm not going to let you yell out of turn. >> that was brian carom. and jim acosta who she says has trouble understanding even small sentences. the number of children in custody spiked since the administration started enforcing this policy. -- i misspoke earlier. 11,000. there are shellers in 17 states. one of those shelters you prbl me heard a little bit about. because a u.s. senator went there and didn't get in. it is a converted walmart in brownsville texas known as casa
padre. it houses 1,500 boys ages ranging from 10 to 17. we are told the majority of the boys crossed the border on their own before the new policy took effect. it is hard for us to get transparency on exactly what happened. casa padre garnered national attention after oregon senator jeff merkley tried to visit the center earlier this month. it is a private organization contracted by the federal government. he was turned away. jacob soboroff joins us from brownsville, texas. you are the eyes of the world now into one of 100 facilities holding kids who are separated from their parents. >> ali, when you were just playing that sound from the white house briefing it's like sometimes you want to have teleportation our from here on the ground in south texas into the white house briefing room
because it was just untrue what sarah huckabee sanders said. she said it wasn't a policy change to separate as a policy and charge 100% of people who cross the border illegally with a crime resulting in family separation. it's just not true. that did not happen under the obama administration. there were people that have been in the past, around 30%, charged with crimes for entering the border illegally. it's basically up to the discretion of the department of justice and federal prosecutors. and the attorney general of the united states announced a policy saying they are going to prosecute 100% of those cases. right now the number is around 60%. which has been told to us by the white house's own department of homeland security. they are trying the get it to 100%. again, that's based to an policy announced by the attorney general that is appoint booed at this president of the united states. so to hear sarah huckabee sanders say the influx of kids coming into the facility, where there are 1,500 kids more than
ever before, separated from their families is not the result of a new policy is absolutely incorrect. we went inside yesterday and saw with our own eyes. >> jake, you and i had conferring earlier today. and after that i spoke with the acting director of customs and border expro. he was trying to convince me that most -- i don't know whether he was talking about this particular facility or most of the 11,000 who are held in detention or whatever you want to call it were people who come across on their own. unaccompanied by their parents. so it is not a situation where they are being separated from their parents at the border when their parents ask for asylum. these these are people who come across to across at the unguarded border. what do you know about that? >> that is true n. to 14 that was the initial crisis that created the first wave of tent cities. in 2016 there was a repeat of that. breaking news, we found out
today near el paso at a port of entry there will be the first new tent city erected by the trump administration to house the overflow. we are seeing it on the screen. that is all a product of this new policy. the crisis that is happening today and the increasing number 30% today ofities kids in there who have been rate issed from their parents is directly a result of that policy. there is nothing new about unaccompanied minors coming across the border. what is new, again, the issue that sarah huckabee sanders has a hard time wrapping her around because of the new policy you have more children this become unaccompanied minors after they were torn away, taken apart, and separated from their parents. >> the other issue, i was a bit surprised when i talked to the deputy commission better this because i understand he is there to enforce law. he has been doing so since the 1980s, when the laws or policies changed. i asked him given his experience
if he were in charge of or culted about policy, would he change anything. >> no, i wouldn't, we need to send the message that crossing the border is illegal. there needs to be a consequence. we will get less of it if that works. these are policies, steps we asked the secretary and the attorney general to take. if you apply consequence to illegal activity you get less of it. that's when we are asking for. >> what's your take on the deterrent effect of separating children from their parents or the holding of young kids? you are dealing with kids 10 to 17 in the facility behind you. what's your take on that? >> there was an additional policy in 1994 that the border control created called detention through deterrence. did direct result of that -- --
border patrol deterrence policy. deterrence policies are proven to result in more people crossing illegally, trying to find new ways a wall or a approximately see wall like is erected by the the yuma sector n arizona is seeing an increase in the amount of people crossing illegally. i wouldn't be surprise today see more people getting hurt or dying while they try to cross because this they decide to not declare asylum. now this additional policy barrier has been erected with the zero tolerance policy. >> you mentioned something we don't talk about enough. we'll talk about it another time, it's important. there are a lot of people who die. they want whatever the american promise is so much, that lots and lots of people, the yuma county morgue is a testament of that, die in attempt to crossing the border. thanks for your reporting. jacob soboroff at the largest licensed facility for kids brought into the country illegally. the house is set to vote on immigration legislation.
house speaker paul ryan says lawmakers will vote on two bills next week. one is a conserve proposal from house chair bob goodlatte. the other is a compromise bill. the text was released moments ago. joining us to talk about this is nevada republican. congressman, good to see you. this conversation has taken a different turn because of these kids in detention centers. at some point it's futile and it's not productive to discuss whether this is democrats to blame or republicans to blame. we have not succeeded as a nation for a long time in creating sophisticated immigration policy that doesn't lead to nonsense like 100 detention centers with 11,000 kids in them. >> well, ali, your discussion that i've been listening to leading in just underscores the point if anybody thinks the status quo is working, i beg to differ. whether you're a democrat or republican. >> right. >> so that's the importance of, my, what a difference 215 signatures on a discharge petition makes. sounds like we're going to get to start voting on things next
week. yea. we're only 90 days past the deadline that the president gave us of march 6th and god knows 35 years since the last time we did anything people were listening to cassettes. so, yay, finally, i think we're going to be at the point we're going to start voting on things. >> at the district, you and i were talking about this just before the discharge petition didn't get to where it was fully going to get. but instead we have this compromi compromise bill. we're really looking at two bills. they're not all that different. one of them is going to garner more support, the one you seem to be behind is going to garner more support. is there adequate debate -- has there been adequate discussion in order to get people to support the bill that you are behind? >> well, i guess that depends on how my colleagues spend their time between now and next week. but i'll tell you this. the thing that people shouldn't skip beyond is those bills both have to go through the rules process and i can assure you there will be some people talking about amending one or both of them in terms of areas that they think they can get 218
votes for. so, what you got released a little while ago is subject to amendment unless leadership shuts it down and makes it a closed rule. >> all right. what is it that -- what are the sticking points at this point? what's the stuff that's different between these two bills that you're hoping to convince people makes at least one of them worth supporting and moving forward with? >> well, we want to look at basically how those folks, the daca folks are treated, whether there is some sort of solution there that's responsible, where they can earn status or not, or whether they are kind of kept in a perpetual reapplication logo. you've been talking about one of them which is the whole asylum and separating families issue. you've got chain migration. you've got immigration based on what's best for the country. so, those are all things that are great. you've got prefunding in the wall. there's a lot to talk about. >> are you confident that something -- unfortunately, you and i talk a lot about these things. are you confident at some point
in the near future we're going to have a bill that at least starts us down the road to, to repairing our broken immigration sis democrat? >> well, i'll tell you what, ali. i'm going to look for a way to vote yes for something. even though the senate didn't find their way to voting yes for something, it's like, listen, this is an opportunity to start. speaking only for myself, i'm going to take a real hard look at trying to stake the first step. >> congressman, i was hoping by the time we talked now it would be done. let's hope again it will be done the next time we talk. i always appreciate your willingness to get involved in the conversation and to not go down a road that i think is misinformed for us to blame different parties and stuff. let's just get this fixed. this is a serious, serious issue that we need to deal. with congressman mark from nevada. thank you. >> thank you. >> we're going to be right back.
it's pretty amazing out there. the world is full of more possibilities than ever before. and american express has your back every step of the way- whether it's the comfort of knowing help is just a call away with global assist. or getting financing to fund your business. no one has your back like american express. so where ever you go. we're right there with you. the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it. don't live life without it.
with a $500,000 life insurance policy. how much do you think it cost him? $100 a month? $75? $50? actually,duncan got his $500,000 for under $28 a month. less than a dollar a day. his secret? selectquote. in just minutes, a selectquote agent will comparison shop nearly a dozen highly-rated life insurance companies, and give you a choice of your five best rates. duncans wife cassie got a $750,000 policy for under $22 a month. give your family the security it needs at a price you can afford.
all right. anybody who knows me knows my trusty oil barrel. i haven't had much opportunity to bring it out. this is what it is. in the old days this is what oil traded in. it's a blue barrel. that's why when you look at the price of oil it's slash bbl, this is where it settled today, 6.98. today is june 14. yesterday june 13 the president tweeted out opec is keeping oil prices too high. that's strange. oil at this price is down quite a bit from where it was. this is the tweet. oil prices are too high. opec is at it again. not good. this is a little puzzling. oil prices have started to come down, one has to be careful. last week we had a 7 at the
front of the price of oil. now it's 66.98. once it's below 60 bucks it's good for you the consumer. bad for producers. a lot of our production is fracking. fracking is more expensive like in texas and saudi arabia getting oil gushing out of the ground. that costs 20 bucks a barrel depe depend on what your fixed costs of. fracking requires the price of oil to be a little higher so we're a little perplexed as to what the president was tweeting about but i figured it's a good opportunity to get you up to speed. this is about where world experts had thought oil prices would be right now. $66.98, $67, that's where we are right now. we start to get worried when oil gets above 75 bucks. it was getting there last week at some point. and when it gets too low, oil producers in america have to lay people off. we're looking at a comfort zone between 55 and 70 bucks a barrel. we're there now. i will keep you up to date on oil spikes ands how it affects your oil your oil and gas. thank you for being with me.
i'll see you back here tomorrow 11:00 eastern with stephanie ruhle, again 3:00 p.m. eastern. now it's time for "deadline white house" with my friend nicolle wallace. >> hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. we start with breaking news from the department of justice. a report just out from the department's inspector general on the bureau's handling of the investigation into hillary clinton's use of a private e-mail server during the 2016 campaign finds that the conclusions reached by prosecutors were not affected by any bias and that they were based on, quote, the prosecutor's assessment of the facts, the law, and past department practice. the inspector general was less generous to former director james comey writing that he, quote, chose to deviate from the fbi's and department's established procedures and norms and instead engaged in his own subjective ad hoc decision making. and that these decisions usurped the authority of the attorney general. former fbi director comey