tv MSNBC Live With Stephanie Ruhle MSNBC June 15, 2018 6:00am-7:00am PDT
at attention. i want my people to do the same. president trump talking about kim jong-un. >> wow. >> oh, mr. president, you have our attention. that does it for us this morning. stephanie ruhle picks up the coverage right now. >> thanks so much, mika. hi there, i'm stephanie ruhle. quite a lot of breaking news this morning. starting with president trump. blasting the fbi leadership on his way to an impromptu visit to his favorite morning show. after a scathing inspector general report calls jim comey insubordinate. while at the same time saying political bias did not, you heard me there, did not play a role in the lead-up to the 2016 election. >> that was the most biased set of circumstances i've ever seen in my life. honestly, to read it was very sad. >> and while the president calls it a witch hunt, former trump campaign manager paul manafort arriving in court any moment now. could this man be headed to
jail? as the state of new york files a lawsuit against the trump foundation and the family, accusing them of using their family charity, their foundation, like a personal checkbook. wow. >> this is a straight forward case of violation of the laws governing charity foundations and nonprofit organizations in new york. >> misusing your charity, yuck. and bible study. plans to build tent cities for the overflow of immigrant children are moving forward as the administration defers to a higher power to defend ripping those kids from their parents. >> i would cite you to the apostle paul and his clear command in romans 13 to obey the laws of the government. >> it is very biblical to enforce the law. >> well, i'm no biblical
scholar. and the question, what would jesus do, the answer is not this. breaking news. president trump just a couple of minutes ago outside the white house weighing in on the inspector general's report. it found fbi director jim comey was insubordinate but not politically motivated in the lead-up to the 2016 election. take a listen to the president on fox news just a minute ago. >> the end result was wrong. i mean, there was total bias. when you look at peter strzok and what he said about me. when you look at comey, all his moves. so i guess, you know, it was a pretty good report. and then i say that the ig blew it at the very end with that statement. because when you read the report. it was almost like comey. he goes point after point about how guilty -- >> president trump's taking questions on the hahn riglawn r. let's listen in. >> -- so passionately about otto -- >> i think actually if you take a look, when he totally exonerated her -- because i call
it comey 3. comey 3. he had 1, 2, then comey 3. he totally exonerated her. if anything you're saying is correct, what she did is tried to pretend it didn't happen. i would have gone out there and had the greatest news conference in history. now, the exoneration wasn't correct. because there's no way they could have checked that number of e-mails in just a few days. if you remember, just before the election, he went out and exonerated her. and they didn't even talk about it. that was the greatest political mistake. >> president -- >> with all of that being said, i won wisconsin, i won michigan, i won states that, you know, republicans haven't won in many, many decades, years. she didn't do a good job. and you never gave me credit for doing a great job. the fact is, i did a great job. >> mr. president -- >> mr. president, there was a fox news report this week that the deputy attorney general rod
rosenstein is pushing back and threatening to investigate the congressional investigators who just want documents. you think that -- >> well, i hope that's not so. and i know they're getting documents. if you see what i've done with north korea and with the state department, mike pompeo, it's running so well. i have this running so well. i have purposely, because of this ridiculous witch hunt, i have said i'm going to stay away from the justice department until it's completed. so i've wanted to stay away. that doesn't mean i have to. but i don't want you people to say i'm interfering. that i'm doing anything. i think that the report yesterday may be more importantly than anything, it totally exonerates me. there was no collusion. there was no obstruction. and if you read the report, you'll see that. really -- excuse me, wait, wait. what you really see is you'll see bias against me and millions and tens of millions of my followers that is really a
disgrace. and yet, yet -- >> -- suspend miller? >> and yet, if you look at the fbi, and you went in and polled the fbi, the real fbi, those guys love me and i love them. >> -- are you thinking of suspending mueller? >> no, but i think the whole investigation now is -- look, the problem with the mueller investigation is everybody's got massive conflicts. you have this person who was at hillary clinton's funeral. meaning her party that turned into a funeral. they were screaming, crying, going crazy. i call them the 13 angry democrats. you have tremendous animosity. now, here's the good news. i did nothing wrong. there was no collusion. there was no obstruction. the ig report went a long way to show that. and i think that the mueller investigation has been totally
discredited. >> so passionately about the circumstances that led to otto wa warmbier's death. in the same breath, you're defending kim jong-un's human rights record. >> you know why, because i don't want to see a nuclear weapon destroy you and your family -- >> -- when it's over -- >> excuse me, because i don't want to see a nuclear weapon destroy you and your family. i want to have a good relationship with north korea. i want to have a good relationship with many other countries. and what i've done -- remember, if you're fair, which most of you aren't, but if you're fair, when i came in, people thought we were probably going to war with north korea. if we did -- quiet, quiet, quiet -- >> is it over -- >> if we did, millions of people would have been killed. i don't mean like, you know, people saying 100,000. seoul has 28 million people 30 miles off the border. you would have had 30 million, 40 million, 50 million people killed. who knows what would have happened. i came in. that is what i was inherited.
i should have never inherited. that should have been solved long before i got there. i did a great job this weekend. the fake news said, oh, you met. the only thing they saw that i gave up. one broadcast said, he gave up so much. you know what i gave up? i met him. i met. we had great chemistry. he gave us a lot. you haven't had a missile test in seven months. you haven't had a firing. you haven't had a nuclear test in 8 1/2 months. you haven't had missiles flying over japan. he gave us the remains of our great heroes. i have had so many people begging me, parents and fathers, mothers, daughters, sons, wherever i went, could you please get the remains of my boy back? they're giving them back. nobody thought that was possible. wait, wait, wait, excuse me, wait. they're doing so much for us. and now we're well on our way to get denuclearization. and the agreement says there will be total denuclearization. nobody wants to report that. so the only thing i did was i
met. i got along with him great. he is great -- we have a great chemistry together. that's a good thing, not a bad thing. >> mr. president -- >> how can he love his people if he's killing them? >> i can't speak to that. i can only speak to the fact that we signed an incredible agreement. it's great. it's going to be great for them too. because now north korea can develop -- north korea can become a great country, economically. it can become whatever they want. but there won't be nuclear weapons. and they won't be aimed at you and your family. >> why did you offer to halt the military exercises -- >> that was my offer. okay, do you want to hear? okay. military -- i call them war games. i hated them from the day i came in. i said, why aren't we being reimbur reimbursed. >> that's north korea's term, war games. >> that's my term. >> they use it too. >> they might use it. we pay for it. we pay millions and millions of dollars for planes and all of this. it's my term.
i said i'd like to halt it. because it's bad to be negotiating and doing it. costs us a lot of money. i saved us a lot of money. that's a good thing for us. okay, go ahead. >> what do you mean when you said you wished americans would sit up at attention -- >> i'm kidding. you don't understand sarcasm. wait, wait, who are you with? >> cnn. >> you're with cnn? you are the worst. >> mr. president -- >> mr. president -- >> there are a few different court cases going on -- >> wait, wait, wait, we have time, we have time. >> -- some high-profile court cases going on. you've got former campaign manager, your former lawyer, they're all dealing with legal troubles. are you paying close attention -- >> i feel badly about a lot of them because i think a lot of it is very unfair. i look at some of them where they go back 12 years. like man nafort has nothing to with our campaign. i feel a little badly about it. they went back 12 years. you know, paul manafort worked for me for a very short period of time.
he worked for ronald reagan. he worked for bob dole. he worked for many other republicans. he worked for me, what, 49 days or something. very short period of time. i feel badly for some people because they've gone back 12 years to find things about somebody. and i don't think it's right. i don't think it's right that they burst into a lawyer's office on a weekend and early in the morning. i never heard of that before. i mean, could you imagine if they burst into barack obama's lawyer's office? it would not be acceptable. it would not be acceptable. i mean, that's really a terrible thing. now, i feel badly for a lot of those people. i feel badly for general flynn. he lost his house. he's lost his life. and some people say he lied. and some people say he didn't lie. i mean, really, it turned out maybe he didn't lie. but -- >> -- talking about -- >> because who's lied more than comey? i mean, comey lied a tremendous
amount. >> -- feel badly -- you say you feel badly, is there any consideration at any point of a pardon -- >> i don't want to talk about that. i don't want to talk about that. but look, i do want to see people treated fairly. that's what it's all about. i mentioned -- i mentioned the other day -- you saw what i did with the woman, she's in jail for 23 years on charges where other people are out after three months. i thought it was very unfair. and she had another 20 years left, okay. she was 63 years old. >> -- talking for them -- >> what? >> about all those folks who don't have kim kardashian -- >> i'm looking at them too, if you don't mind -- >> are you worried that gary cohen might flip? >> look, did i nothing wrong. this stuff would have come out a long time ago. >> it's really nice. >> is he still your friend? >> i haven't spoken to michael in a long time. >> is he still your lawyer? >> no, he's not my lawyer. >> your personal lawyer -- >> i always liked michael.
do you mind if i talk? >> just want to know if you're worried he's going to cooperate -- >> no, i'm not worried because i did nothing wrong, nothing wrong -- >> got it. >> mr. president, about don jr., did you dictate the statement about -- >> let's not talk about it. you know what that is? it's irrelevant. it's a statement to "the new york times." the phony failing "new york times." just wait a minute, wait a minute. >> to clear it up. >> that's not a statement to a high tribunal of judges. >> understand. >> that's a statement to the phony "new york times." in fact, frankly, he shouldn't even speak to "the new york times" because they only write phony stories anyway. although yesterday they wrote a nice story -- >> did you dictate it -- >> on the ig report, you said twice now it exonerated you and proved there's no collusion. >> if you read the ig report, i've been totally exonerated. take a look at it. no, take a look at the investigation. take a look at how it started.
take a look at the horrible statements that peter strzok, the chief investigator, said, and take a look at what he did with hillary clinton. take a look at -- >> should he be fired -- >> take a look at -- >> nothing to do with collusion -- >> i tell you what, you're asking me about peter strzok being fired, i am amazed that peter strzok is still at the fbi. and so is everybody else that read that report. and i'm not even talking about the report. i'm talking about long before the report. peter strzok should have been fired a long time ago. and others should have been fired. >> why isn't he -- [ reporters shouting questions ] >> i'm looking at scott. scott's doing a fantastic job at epa. i'm not happy about certain things, i'll be honest -- excuse me, i'm not happy about certain things, but he's done a fantastic job running the epa which is very overriding but i am not happy about -- [ overlapping reporter
questions ] >> do you agree with children being taken away -- >> no, i hate it, i hate the children being taken away. the democrats have to change their law. that's their law -- >> sir, do you -- >> -- why do you lie about it, sir -- >> that's the democrat's law. we can change it tonight. we can change it right now. i will leave here -- no, no, you need their votes. you need their votes. >> you guys have their votes -- >> the democrats -- >> mr. president, you control both chambers of congress, the republicans do. >> excuse me, by one vote? you need 60 votes -- >> in the white house -- >> excuse me, we have a one-vote edge. so we need ten votes. we can't get in front of the democrats. >> mr. president -- >> wait, wait, you can't do it through an executive order. >> mr. president -- [ overlapping reporter questions ] >> can we do one question at a time? wait, one question -- the children, the children can be taken care of quickly, beautifully and immediately. the democrats forced that law
upon our nation. i hate it. i hate to see separation of parents and children. the democrats can come to us as they actually are, in all fairness, we are talking to them, and they can change the whole border security. we need a wall. we need border security. we got to get rid of catch and release. you catch a criminal, you take his name, you release him and he never shows up again. he goes into our society. and then we end up getting him in a different way, oftentimes after he's killed somebody. we've got to change our laws. the democrats have control because we don't have the votes. the republicans need -- we need more republicans, frankly. that's why i think we're going to do so well in the midterms. that and because -- wait, that and because we have the strongest economy in the history of our nation. we have the best job numbers in the last 44 years. top of drudge. the best job numbers in 44 years. >> mr. president -- >> -- announces a zero tolerance policy at the border on may 7th. >> because he's following the law.
no, he's following laws. he's following a law -- >> that was a direct order -- >> can i answer your question, please? >> yes. >> okay, you're just asking me the same question over and over. he's following laws, very simply, that were given to us and forced upon us by the democrats. >> but there's no law that the families have to be separated at the border. >> the democrats gave us the laws. now, i want the laws to be beautiful. humane. but strong. i don't want bad people coming in. i don't want drugs coming in. and we can solve that problem in one meeting. tell the democrats, your friends, to call me, okay? >> mr. president, at the end of the "fox and friends" interview you said you were going to spend father's day weekend doing work and calling north korea. >> i'm going to speak to people in north korea and speak to my people who are over in north korea. a lot of things are happening. i'll tell you this, we now have a very good relationship with north korea. when i came into this job, it looked like war. not because of me but -- if you remember the sit-down with barack obama, i think he will admit this, he said the biggest
problem that the united states has, and by far the most dangerous problem, and he said to me, that we've ever had, because of nuclear, is north korea. now, that was shortly before i entered office. i have solved that problem. now, we're getting it memorialized and all, but that problem is largely solved. and part of the reason is we signed a very good document -- but you know what, more importantly than the document, more importantly than the document, i have a good relationship with kim jong-un. that's a very important thing. i can now -- wait, i can now call him. i can now say, well, we have a problem. i told him, i gave him a very direct number. he can now call me if he has any difficulty. i can call him. we have communications. it's a very good thing. people are shocked. they thought trump was going to get in, he was going to throw bombs all over the place. it's actually the opposite. but we're building a military so strong, $716 billion, next year,
$700 billion this year, we're building a military so strong, nobody's going to mess with us. i never want to have to use it. quiet. quiet. so obnoxious. >> -- americans can sleep well at night -- >> -- process going to look like -- >> we're going to have a strong process. if you read the agreement, which most of you didn't, point after point after point he gave. including getting back our -- the remains of our great heroes, okay, our great, great heroes. we means some people are crying in the streets they're so happy. nobody thought we were going to get that. point after point. all they said about me is you met, you met, it's terrible, you met. of course i met. meeting was a good thing, not a bad thing. i spoke with china. they're very happy. actually they were much happier. they may not be as happy today because of what i'm doing with trade. you probably heard that.
i assume it's been announced by now. but we're putting tariffs on $50 billion worth of technology and other things. because we have to. because we've been treated very unfairly. but china's been terrific. president xi has been terrific, president moon, everybody, we're all working together because of me. >> mr. president, how long will you give kim jong-un to follow through on denuclearization -- >> well, we're working as fast as possible. we're working it as fast as possible. we're working that. we're working denuclearization as fast as possible. >> manafort -- >> -- meet with putin this summer? >> it's possible we'll meet, yes. this all started because somebody -- one of you asked should putin be in the g-7. i said no, he should be in the g-8. a few years ago, putin was in what was called the g-8. i think it's better to have russia in than to have russia out. because just like north korea, just like somebody else, it's much better if we get along with him than if we don't.
so it's possible. just so you understand. no, no, president obama lost crimea, just so you understand. i want to make it so the fake news prints it properly. president obama lost crimea. wait, wait. that's his fault, yes, yes, it's his fault, it's his fault. president -- just so you -- because putin didn't respect president obama. president obama lost crimea because president putin didn't respect president obama. didn't respect our country. and didn't respect ukraine. president obama, not trump. when it's my fault, i'll tell you. but president obama gave away -- president obama, by not going across the red line in the sand that he drew. i went across it with the 59 missile hits. but president obama when he didn't go across the red line, what he gave away, nobody even knows.
but just to put it -- one more time, president obama gave away crimea. that should have never happened. good-bye, everybody. >> well, well, well. that was a lot, a lot to get through. i don't even know where to start. let's go straight to the white house. nbc's geoff bennett is standing by along with an extraordinary panel. nbc's national security and justice reporter julia ainsley. michael steele, former rnc chairman and msnbc political analyst. stephanie cutter, would served as deputy campaign manager for obama's 2012 re-election campaign. my head's spinning a little bit. let's actually take a listen at what the president said on fox news about meeting kim jong-un and respect. >> he's the head of a country and i mean he's the strong head, don't let anyone think anything different. he speaks and his people sit up
at attention. i want my people to do the same. >> "i want my people to sit up and do the same." michael steele, to you. who does that remind you of? >> it reminds me of a lot of bad people. that he wants obviously to emulate in some way. what we heard just now in this press gaggle with the president confirmed there's a lot in this country for sure. i think we need to appreciate the context. you had the president riffing on the ig report he clearly had not read. >> the ig report that he said exonerated him. >> exactly. >> the ig report that had nothing to do with him. >> which tells me he may not have read it. he got a talking point in his head that someone on his staff gave him and he's running with it. out there talking about the russian president and crimea and putting it on the previous administration. again, not understanding the historic facts involved there. >> he also said he was asked
about russia rejoining the g-7. he wasn't asked that. he volunteered that. >> he probably was asked that by putin. >> ah. >> so let's be clear. he probably was asked by putin to go in and say why don't you ask the fellas. >> putin did see xi jinping just before the singapore summit and what did president trump agree to? what china asked for last year that nikki haley said no way, jose. >> of all of that, though, the most interesting and i think consistently disturbing thing was what you just raised about i want my people to set up just like the people in north korea set up when kim jong-un speaks. >> who, those people in prison camps? president trump -- >> talking about citizens, talking about just staff? it doesn't matter. the fact of the matter is, he's got a megalomaniac kind of personality with respect to the presidency. he does not understand what the job entails. and if he does, he clearly wants to change what that job entails to fit his own personality.
i think it's a very dangerous time for this country. for a whole lot of reasons and a whole lot of way, people need to sit up and pay attention, not sit up and follow what this president's saying half the time because it's just crazy at this point. you can fertilize a lot of farms with what you heard today. >> i'm looking at twitter, people saying why are you airing the president saying this? i think it makes a lot of sense. while the president can say this is fake news, no one needs to slander him. you can play the president over and over and we can sit here and simply fact check. >> that's it. >> line after line. the president telling countless -- i mean, even paul manafort, i knew him for a short period of time. he was your campaign chair. michael flynn, he's a good guy, he lost his house. he's pled guilty. give me a break. >> right. i think what people are saying on twitter is that just by replaying what trump said, there are some people in america who did believe him. so why give him air time. but your point, stephanie, is important. let's take the time to fact check exactly what he said. he's talking about it's more important to get along with
north korea. my question is where does he draw a line about not getting along with somebody. if somebody is killing their own people. huge humanitarian crisis. nuclear weapons pointed at us. a long history of human rights abuses. who is he not going to get along with? if he finds something in common with that person? instead, he's fighting with our allies. canada. the uk. france. people who have stood by us. and who are thriving democracies. yet he's befriending the dictator. we've seen this with putin. we've seen it with north korea. >> right. i think what we're seeing here is values that just completely conflict. so these were people -- you're talking about north korea and human rights. think about state of the union. people who he had stand up and he told these tear jerking stories. now he's act like human rights is something we need to dismiss. >> lots of people do lots of bad things. >> and think about how he's handling human rights at the border now. he's trying to blame this on democrats. well, why weren't children separated from parents under the democratic administration.
>> it's because -- it is not the law to separate -- and this is an important fact check. it is not the law to separate parents and children at the border. that is not the law. the the their interpretation of the law. we are, or used to be america's greatest democracy. we can't find a solution to this problem without harming children? >> i would say, stephanie, it's not even an interpretation of the law, it is a policy. >> a new policy. >> a policy evoked by the president of the united states. and dictated to his attorney general who goes out and quotes the bible. by the way, a passage that was used to justify slavery in this country. to justify encamping children. i call this a concentration camp for kids because that's exactly what it's turning out to. when you give kids 22 hours of lockup time and two hours of air time, what else can it be? and if this is where this country is going, the american
people need to wake up and pay attention. because your kids could be next. >> right. je geoff, take us inside the white house and the white house's sort of approach. because while i watched the president there talk about the big beautiful jobs picture in this country, hasn't been this good in 44 years, how do you square that off with saying let's get these immigrants out who are stealing all our jobs. which one is it? >> well, that's right, stef. i think two things can be seen as a play for the midterms. >> but which one? you cannot possibly make both arguments work. >> i'm not saying there's any sort of intellectual honesty here. i'm just saying these are messages that the president has tested, that he thinks works for him. look, you talked about the comments the president made about michael cohen and paul manafort. we are seeing the president continue to rationalize and minimize his connections to people, his former friends who are now ensnared by either the russia probe -- >> where he said i liked, with a "d" at the end, i mean, michael
cohen's watching -- just in past tense. >> i remember a couple of days ago perhaps the president sent a tweet where he was like, look, if paul manafort was the subject of an fbi investigation, it would have been helpful if the fbi had told me that. we know based on nbc's own reporting that shortly after hillary clinton and donald trump became the respective nominees of their parties, they were, in fact, briefed by federal officials, telling them, hey, look, you now are more susceptible to being spied on, infiltrated by foreign adversaries. it was no secret that he made his fortune as a political consultant to dictators overseas and when he joined the trump campaign, he had been missing from the ranks of political consultants for about 20 years. he was with the campaign from mid-march to august 2016. he was with the trump campaign during the period of the national convention, stef, when the only change was related to
ukraine. so there are a lot of dots to connect here. but we've seen in the latest -- in a series of surreal days here at the white house how the president is continuing this pr push to discredit overall the mueller investigation, stephanie. >> paul manafort who the president and others like to say he was just a volunteer. they often like to say. and jared and ivanka who aren't taking a salary. they're just packing 82 million bucks into their annual income for businesses that maybe they're getting hooked up by because they sit in the white house. what's your take? >> the idea that he doesn't want to talk about pardons, that could really look like a dog whistle to a lot of these people. we know the dangling of pardons is one of the things that mueller's looking at in the obstruction case. i think dangling means he's not going to talk about it. he's actually not closing that door. >> it's a smart move if you're him. >> yes, and on cohen as well. i mean, he wants to -- he doesn't want cohen to flip. we've seen his legal bills be taken care of. this is a man who doesn't want
this to get away from him. he's being very selective with the facts. he probably did not read that report and said it exonerated him when it doesn't talk about him. he also says what they did is criminal. there's nothing in that report about criminal charges. not even for strzok who is being referred for an internal investigation. nothing in it was criminal. and he's just pulling what he wants to. >> he talks about the raid at michael cohen's office and his apartment or the hotel. they broke in there. they didn't. and michael cohen himself has said they were professional and courteous. put all of that aside. we can go through this and fact check it and talk about how absurd it is. you tell me, michael, why does this work? where's paul ryan? i mean, paul ryan -- >> well, that's why it works. >> i haven't really been caught up on what scott pruitt's doing. i didn't realize paul ryan was living in some sort of bubble on another planet. >> the fact paul ryan would stand before a camera, let alone a bank of cameras, and say he is unaware of what scott pruitt is doing is laughable.
because he is very much aware. but that is why it works. because they put the blinders on. and each side of the blinders says trump. and they are just focused on the fact that trump has them by, how shall we put this -- >> the short hairs. >> a nice way. >> i was going to say -- >> we're going to go with short hairs. >> we're going to go with short hairs. hey, let's call it what it is. and they looked at what happened in south carolina and they looked at what was happening in other races. and they go, oh, my god, we cannot afford to have trump come after us. because holding our seats is more important than any value, philosophy or ideology we've held on to before. >> okay, but then, stephanie, tell me what american is watching this and saying right on, mr. president, and for what reason? what is he doing that is making a portion of this country so proud and so happy that they will stand by him no matter what in a way that has the mitch
mcconnells of the world simply too afraid to stand up? >> well, i think he's locking our borders. i think he's -- >> how many americans want that though? >> a lot more than you probably -- >> there you go. >> a lot more than we would like. >> that's right. >> except i don't think that this is permanent. i think if yn , you know, we we talking about putting the blinders on. paul ryan is not running for re-election. this is not the paul ryan that we even knew just a few years ago pretrump. remember paul ryan stood up against trump during the election. if paul ryan had an ounce of courage, or remembers who he used to be a couple of years ago, he would stand up against these concentration camps with kids. he did say i don't agree with putting kids in concentration camps. how about using your powers as the third branch of government to stop it. it is not up to democrats coming to the table. it is up to the people and power. who is the republican party?
they control two branches of government. to stand up and say no to this president. even if his own administration. we all watched the press conference yesterday with sarah sanders standing by and blaming democrats and reporters pushing back on her, you know, you're a mother, don't you have any empathy for these kids? >> it shouldn't have to be about morals or values. she's up there, straight-up lying, saying it was democrats. whether or not i have a heart, you can put to the side. but she's saying, well, this is the democrats. it's not. that's just a lie. you don't need to be a mother to tell you you're a liar. >> even to step back and look at that policy, the one thing they're blaming is a 1997 federal court decision. it wasn't a policy at all. it was a court decision that said you cannot hold children longer than 21 days. since we usually thought you should hold parents with children, we decided we would release mothers with their children at the same time. the obama administration would use ankle monitors to monitor where these people were going after the 21 days.
they decided really for deterrence more than anything that that meant they were going to separate them so they could hold the mothers as long as they wanted to and separate these children. but that is not a democratic policy by any means. so that's already a stretch. if you're really concerned about securingth border, i think they'll be a point where we look at the numbers and realize a wall doesn't do anything. these people are presenting themselves for asylum at points of entry. what does a wall do? >> how about fiscal conservatives? about these camps being constructed? all that's involved in all this? that doesn't happen for free. >> it doesn't happen for free. you've got the -- >> because if we are workforce development programs here that would help americans get better jobs. >> of course it would. there are a lot of these independent pieces out there, particularly on the economic side, where you have to step back and ask yourself, so when did we become the party that supports this kind of spending that you just referenced? when did we become the party that supports $1.5 trillion of
additional debt on top of future generations. so even from the economic piece, the political piece obviously with the capitol hill. but even on the humanitarian piece. where republicans at least in the past have acknowledged that certain policies should not be a, you know, out there that reflect badly on our values. a policy that would call out familiy ies and immigrants. it's changed because of something you touched on. there is a growing swath of americans who are looking at the changing of this country. who are looking at the demographic shifts and are scared. they see their america, their america of their parents and their grandparents disappearing. >> you know who also thought
that? navajo indians. >> absolutely. so the point is -- the point is that what they don't -- what they don't appreciate is how much all of the changes that are happening in this country has always been a part of its long arc of history. how this country has evolved. from its very founding has been about assimilation. a place where you come for freedom. not a place where you come to build walls to protect you against others. >> many of those people -- we quickly say, you know, they must be racist, that's why they want to change this. their racism isn't necessarily born out of hate, it could be born out of hopelessness. because where they live there is not fast wifi. there are not jobs. there's not beautiful schools. they are living in dying communities. so why is it that this approach by this administration is meant to help those communities when those communities are going to get nothing out of this except some cheering at a rally? >> they're actually going to get
harmed because of what he's doing with trade and how he's handling the economy. those communities are not going to be helped by donald trump. i agree about the lack of hopelessness. i also think we should not brush over what this president has done to divide us by race. you know, going after the nfl for kneeling during the anthem. what happened with the alt right. charlottesville. those things are very much part of what's happening in this country. it's not just about economic hopelessness. and this president is tapping into it every single day. >> okay, we could sit here for the last 30 minutes and go through what the president said. was the president successful in making today's news cycle about look at him, he's a liar, let's fact check. because had he not gone and done this interview, guess what we'd be talking about, cohen and manafort and the lawsuit against the trump charity where his family won't be able to run a charitable trust for ten years. was he successful today?
because now that's not the first thing -- >> he threw a bright shining object up in the air and that was his going out to do the interview with fox, right. and then the rabbit hole was doing what we just saw, getting all those reporters to go into that space where he was standing there holding court for 15, 20 minutes, right. and when it's all over, you're not talking about the things that you would otherwise be talking about this morning. >> i think what the bigger purpose of what he just did, why he originally went out to fox, was to -- to tarnish comey. they are running a concerted effort to ruin the credibility of comey. so he is not a witness. when they know what is coming. >> and confuse everyone -- >> and confuse. your average person out there -- >> mueller and comey. >> mueller report, ig report. >> and they are spending every ounce of energy to disparage comey as a witness as the investigator. >> as you noted, the ig report had nothing to do with trump.
>> but no one knows that. >> ig report, mueller report, all the same. >> what it did have to do with is what comey did is wrong in terms of what he said about the clinton e-mail's investigation and sending the letter to congress. and what he's worried about is people thinking that that's the only reason why he won the election. he didn't win it fair and square. he won it because the fbi tilted the scales in his favor. >> well, here's the thing. whether or not we get distracted, whether or not the president goes out there and we have an opportunity to fact check him for half an hour, the news will still go on and paul manafort is going to be showing up in court. he showed up just a few minutes ago. my own colleague ken dilanian is outside the courthouse. so ken, here's the thing. the beauty of that 24-hour news cycle is there's always more time to cover what's going on in washington. distractions don't mean that we forget about it. what's going on? >> that's right, stephanie, in this courthouse behind me in about 20 minutes, paul manafort is facing a legal reckoning like
he has never faced before. because the special counsel's office is seeking to revoke his $10 million bail and send him to jail immediately after this hearing. there is a chance, just a chance, that the judge in this case will order exactly that. whether he brought his toothbrush or not. the issue here is mueller's office has accused manafort of witness tampering. of reaching out while he was on bail on his bank and tax and lobbying fraud case. this is back in february. and essentially trying to communicate to him. essentially they were accused of improperly lobbying inside the united states without registering. lobbying on behalf of the government of ukraine. look, we didn't lobby in the united states. my view is we didn't lobby in the united states. they were so rattled they immediately turned these communications, over to the fbi which has now, in addition to this, they've indicted him on these charges. also arraigned on that
indictment today. the real drama is will this judge order him today to be taken to jail, stephanie. >> who is this? who is this judge? because there's one that's tougher on him than others. >> this is a federal judge in washington, d.c. as you know, he's also facing charges in virginia. that's his decision. he could have combined these cases. but he's got two separate cases. his trial date in virginia is set for july 25th. if he was jailed today, he would be in custody until that time. and then he would be in the courthouse in virginia in custody facing that trial, stephanie. >> all right, ken, stick around. i want to get my panel to weigh in. michael, how does the trump administration successfully, or do they, continue to call this an absolute witch hunt? i mean, how can you when you've got scores of people, whether they're indict order ed or at t point pleading guilty? >> because it's the narrative the president started at the beginning, a lot of it is fake
news. >> because it is fake news. >> the one thing about donald trump's talent is his ability to name a product. and to brand that product -- >> he was doing it right there. i call it this, i call it that. >> exactly. >> the 13 angry democrats. >> he does that. but what makes it work is the repetition. it doesn't matter what else is going on. it doesn't matter what truth is revealed about that thing. it's that he will continue to pound it. why? because in his view it helps him. because this isn't about paul manafort anymore. this isn't about anything -- it all relates back to him. so if the narrative works going back to what you were saying before, stephanie, about getting people to the point that whatever drops out of mueller's shop, it is instantly viewed as not credible, not believable, because the brand is already put into your head that this is a witch hunt that this is fake news, that this isn't real. and why? because donald trump has been
saying that for the last two years. >> speaking of the witch hunt, and the brand really is that he would not -- it would not be good for his brand to see his former campaign manager in jail. while this plays out. if manafort goes to jail even for a temporary amount of time, really i think in the american mind is beyond just pleading guilty to something while the trial weighs out. i mean, he would be the man who stood up there, who was pushing for pro-ukrainian agenda at the rnc, now going to jail -- >> but will it -- >> -- pushes it to a place that trump -- >> but will it? a indictment, do you really think it changes anyone's opinion of the president? >> i think -- i'm going to take us in a slightly different direction. the thing that keeps giving me -- solace isn't the right word but i keep thinking of what is our system of checks and balances. all of these multiple cases, investigates, lawsuits, eventually the president is going to have to do a deposition.
he's going to have to go under oath. might not be in the muller investigation. it might be in another lawsuit. could be in the foundation case. who knows. but eventually he's going to be under oath in a deposition which is going to be ultimately his downfall. and that is our system of checks and balances. that's why they're scared to death of these things coming after them. that's why they're painting this as a witch hunt. they don't want this investigation because they know that there's something there. >> michael, do you actually think that republicans around the country care? as much as they're interested and they care about the russia investigation, they care more about jobs and health care and president trump claims he's going to deliver for them. so do they pay attention to this or not? because i don't know that i ever see anyone's opinion change. >> no, they don't. >> i feel like we get news and on either side it's "i told you so." >> by and large, they don't. i think when you get 50 miles outside of washington, d.c., the landscape, or the conversation, the talking points even, change completely. >> why? >> it's not focused on the things we've been talking about this morning.
it's not even focused so much on what we saw in that presser with the president. what they do see when they see that is the president's holding court with the press and pushing back. and pushing back against this fourth estate that they've come to think of as harmful or somehow -- after going after the president. and he's in there fighting. that's why he stands there. the staff is going crazy. they don't want that to happen. but he loves it. for him, because he's the center of assistance. number two, it shows to his folks i'm in the game. i'm out here doing what i said i was going to do for you and that's fight for you. even though he's only fighting for himself. >> yes. >> but the impression that he gives is that he's the fighter that's going to take it to the mat with these guys coming after you. that's why to your point when the question's asked, they're like, that's not important. >> right, but i do think -- you're right, i don't think that the american people are looking at every single development and
what mueller is doing. that they're more caring about, you know, their jobs, paying for college, putting food on the table. but i do think there's a reason why upwards of 60% of this country doesn't think the president is honest. >> they also don't think he was honest when they voted for him. >> but they -- >> compared to what or who. >> right. >> but also, remember, he didn't win the popular vote. this was basically 70,000 votes that swung the election towards him. an important record came out yesterday with an indication of why. honestly, according to whom. >> all right, up next, new york attorney general, this one kills me, sues president trump and his family, claiming they had used their charity as a personal checkbook. i think back to republican lee zelden who told me ivanka trump could be a senator because she's so poised and graceful and classy. classy. how do you think the society pages in corporate social responsibility thinks about
people who violate charitable trusts? (♪) i'm a four-year-old ring bearer with a bad habit of swallowing stuff. still won't eat my broccoli, though. and if you don't have the right overage, you could be paying for that pricey love band yourself. so get an allstate agent, and be better protected from mayhem. like me. can a ring bearer get a snack around here? and i recently had hi, ia heart attack. it changed my life. but i'm a survivor. after my heart attack, my doctor prescribed brilinta. it's for people who have been hospitalized for a heart attack. brilinta is taken with a low-dose aspirin. no more than 100 milligrams as it affects how well brilinta works. brilinta helps keep platelets from sticking together and forming a clot. in a clinical study, brilinta worked better than plavix. brilinta reduced the chance of having another heart attack... ...or dying from one. don't stop taking brilinta without talking to your doctor,
since stopping it too soon increases your risk of clots in your stent, heart attack, stroke, and even death. brilinta may cause bruising or bleeding more easily, or serious, sometimes fatal bleeding. don't take brilinta if you have bleeding, like stomach ulcers, a history of bleeding in the brain, or severe liver problems. slow heart rhythm has been reported. tell your doctor about bleeding new or unexpected shortness of breath any planned surgery, and all medicines you take. if you recently had a heart attack, ask your doctor if brilinta is right for you. my heart is worth brilinta. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.
now to yet another legal problem for guess who? president trump. the new york terp general is suing the president had his three eldest children and their charity all of this coming out on the president's birthday alleging the trump foundation, the charitable trust had their own personal piggy bank. the lawsuit claims the president and his children repeatedly misused the foundation to pay off legal debts, to decorate one of his golf clubs, and to promote trump-branded hotels. it also claims the foundation illegally coordinated with trump's 2016 presidential campaign. in response, president trump lashed out on twitter saying he refuses to set will the case. he also attacked former attorney general eric schneiderman who says never had the guts to bring this ridiculous case which lingered in their office for almost two years. we get to a strong woman today, the trump foundation called it, quote, politics at its very worst. i bring in msnbc chief legal correspondent, stiffny carter
and michael steele. . at the very least it's massively embarrassing but how strong is this case? i'm sure we'll get what about hillary, what about the clinton foundation. that's neither here nor there. what about the trump foundation. how legit is this? >> it's legit in the sense that this case, as you say, is embarrassing becau embarrassing donald trump talks about being rich, he acts like he's break. that's nan would have gone ton veterans and other beneficiaries but instead is, under this allegation, a type of self-dealing. that looks bad. ultimately the courts will decide whether there are campaign violations here. >> account president say i just won't settle, i'm not going to pay the money? >> well, he said he wouldn't settle in one of the big cases brought by this office, previously trump university, which was famously a business that offered business advice
that went out of business. and he did settle that case for 25 mill. at the end of the day, stephanie, you and i look for different ways to make sense of what's happening in this wild wo world of 2018. this case say classic opp case, other people's property. a lot of this wasn't donald trump's money to begin with. they raised money like we saw famously on the campaign trail for veterans thaentd saltion th -- and then the altion is that maybe he used it to purchase personal items and most alarmingly to use it for campaign and political activities. all of that will be litigated what did he do with the opp? >> well, i'm not down with the opp. all right, michael this this alleges that the foundation -- >> you too. >> please -- it's just not the case. >> you know what they call you, stephanie? >> what? >> i don't know if you know that, they call you cardi s.
sometimes. >> i certainly like that name. okay. michael. they allege that the foundation raised nearly 3 million bucks at an event in iowa that trump hosted after he refused to participate in the presidential debate. it claims the campaign director, guess who tell the, he himself he was directing where the money should go. can you really say oh, gosh darn it, this was just poor judgment? >> no, you can't. that's the interesting twist here because foundation law, charitable laws, particularly in states like new york, are very, very tightly written and very, very carefully monitored. when you start mixing in the things that ari put out there for your own personal use and now you throw in a campaign piece, you've elevated this. you have campaigns get in trouble for overspending campaign funds. when you mix in charitable donations, then you've got a
whole other world of hurt in the is serious. this is serious in a twha, like a lot of other things the president may want to shroff it off and sort of bedpan it. this is going to have a real long term impact. it's not just the campaign finance piece that they may get caught newspape caught up in, but the consequences of violating new york charitable laws could be very, very profound and not just hit the wallet, but that comes with jail time. >> stephanie, can you speak to that? we can talk about how at the least it's completely cheesy to pay your boy scout $7 fee from your charitable trust making you wonder does ivanka buy her girl scout cookies from their trust. but what does this mean for them opt tickally, the three eldest children, eric junior and his work, ivanka and donald junior, it was sort of his whole brand. >> i think it makes everything suspect from here on out in terms of how they operate.
it was -- but i didn't want to -- i feel like i'm saying the same thing over and over. when i saw this suit get filed i'm like well of course did i, this is how they ran their business, this is how they're running the government. of course this is how they ran their foundation. >> yeah. >> but one other important point, the new york attorney general, not other the new york laws very strict but she referred this to the irs and the sec. referring it to the irs is a serious consequence for them. whether or not they will take up this case, they'll have to do an investigation and i think just another shoe to drop in terms of what an investigation on the trump family will find. >> ari, speak to that, the new york ag referring this to the is irs. because when we talk about the conflicts of interest, the emulements clause, they kind of smile through and said, sorry, we're going to take the money and run, you can't get us you're not allowed to.
is that going to be the case here because urs, it soundsy. >> it sounds like something you and many reporters have hit on, if you're so proud of your health why do you hide it? if you're so proud of your policy why do you claim it was a democrats idea? if the charity was run so well, why are you even suggesting that there's anything to settle? why won't the facts exonerate you period pointblank, that's how you win a case, it's not about settling. which is something i've mentioned he has problem with the very same new york ag's office before. there's a lot of circumstantial evidence. it doesn't mean we know what's in the taxes. doesn't mean we know to ms. cutter's point exactly how all of these organizations ran but rather they were flun reaso an opaque way. so what's news today as people follow all these legal avenues is the ag saying they looked at this for years, they think they have a case and they think that the tax and other issues create legal foundation dos it.
on the flip side, i've said this before and i'll repeat it, the donald trump folks do have a point when they say well if all this was so bad back in the day, why weren't we caught and prosecuted for it back in the day? it's also a product of an environment where he has more political opponents and scrutiny. that's not a legal defense but it is an argument for them to make if people feel like everything's getting thrown at him now that he's in the political arena. >> but hold on a second. that's why a lot of people say they don't want to run for office because they know they've got a little bit of a sneaky background. >> it's also why at the very beginning you create chinese walls as a political candidate. you separate your personal wealth, your money, and your means from your political activity because then you don't have this problem. >> well there you go. all right. i got a feeling you're going to talk about a lot of this tonight at 6:00 people on msnbc. it's going to be a hot night on the beat. thank you so much for being here. i didn't realize that was the morning we were going to have.
it's friday. that's how things go. well, former chairman of the hillary clinton campaign john podesta, he's going to be on with the one and only andrea mitchelled it at noon. i'm going to watch that. you can expect he's going to have a thing or two to stay about the ig report and today's news. before we go, you know how i like to end the show because no matter what there's always good news somewhere. here's how we can handle all this. there's always good news somewhere and we're going to celebrate it. the photographer megan is offering veterans free head shots to apply for new positions. this veteran served 2 back to back duties in iraq. he said he was thrilled for the opportunity. he owns a veteran contracting business and he said these head shots will help him with professional development. thank you, megan, for helping out these guys in your community. that wraps us up this hour and for the week. i'm stephanie ruhle. i will see you all day long on
twitter. i won't see you at 11:00 with my partner apply velshi but he will be here with a good show. i'll hand off now to chris jansen. >> there are a few things to talk about. good friday morning, everyone, from new york. i'm once again in for hallie jackson. and as we come on the air at the top of the hour, the president just blew up the news cycle. trump unplugged diverting attention away from his former campaign manager who at this hour is in federal court and may be headed to jail. the president's efforts to discredit the russia investigation and distract from bad headlines are in overdrive this morning. check out the scene. less than an hour ago his extraordinary stroll on to the north lawn, something by the way no other president has done, speaking to reporters for almost an hour. using new ammunition he believes is found in that new ig report. in short, he coopted the news cycle creating a diversion taking awa