tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC June 29, 2018 5:00pm-6:00pm PDT
i've grown in my respect as they appear and share reporting on "hardball." i know when it comes to reporting i live in the chain of custody from them to the viewer, the reporter, not the comment e commentat commentator, is the hero. that's "hardball" for now, thanks for being with us. "all in" with chris hayes starts right now. >> tonight on "all in". >> say hello to your boy. special guy. >> reporter: the president unveils a timeline for the supreme court pick as the democratic push to delay intensifies. >> this judge could end up having to preside over cases relevant to this criminal position. >> are you going to ask your nominees beforehand how they might vote. >> that's a big one and probably not. they're all saying don't do that, you shouldn't do that. >> plus, a preview of tomorrow's big protests against family
separations. and why the white house is scrambling to explain how a prank caller got through to air force one. >> your call is connected. >> hi, bob. >> hey, how are you? >> "all in starts now." >> thank you, bob, i'll talk to you soon. >> all right, baba booey to you. good evening from new york, i'm ali velshi in for chris hayes. tonight, democrats are increasingly concerned the president could try to use his new supreme court pick to shield him from the mueller investigation. days after justice anthony kennedy announced his retirement, the white house and senate republicans are fast tracking kennedy's replacement. the president telling reporters on air force one today he's planning to announce his nominee in just over a week. >> so i'll be announcing it the monday after july 4. is that the 11th? i'm going to announce it on the
11th. >> that it would be 9th. >> what is the monday after july 4? >> the ninth. >> i'll be announcing it on the ninth. >> have you spoken to any of your candidates yet? >> no. i start that process on monday. >> not this weekend? >> we have it set up for monday. i may have two of them like the old days with bedminster. >> according to mitch mcconnell, senate republicans stand ready to plow ahead as soon as the president makes his choice. >> we expect to get a nomination from the president rather soon and we should be able to work our way through the confirmation process some sometime before early fall, hopefully in time for the new justice to begin the fall term of the supreme court which as an old supreme court reporter you know is the first monday in october. >> meanwhile, special counsel robert mueller is widely expected to take his next big
steps before the midterm elections get into full swing. that could mean more indictments, or a presidential subpoena for testimony. could even mean a final report on whether the president of the united states obstructed justice. today we learned new information about a key event in that matter -- the firing of former fbi director james comey. the "new york times" reporting a shaken rod rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, felt used by the white house in comey's firing. rosenstein wrote the memo that was used to justify the move which the president said he planned to do "regardless of recommendation" citing the russia probe. the president's lawyers already argued the president cannot obstruct justice in a federal investigation and if that issue or any other question of executive authority ends up before the supreme court, it could fall to the president's own nominee to cast the deciding vote and that is raising concerns about the legitimacy of
the court and rule of law. constitutional scholar laurence tribe summed up the issue as follows -- a president under active criminal investigation of whether he won legitimately and whether he has obstructed that very investigation should not be permitted by a mere senate majority to designate the justice whose votes could prove pivotal to the fate of his presidency. now, senate democrats are beginning to sound the alarm. >> a president who can hear the hoof beats of an investigation that is bearing down on him. they will be the swing vote of a court that will determine of whether any investigation goes forward. >> we know a subpoena case is likely involving donald trump to go to the united states supreme
court and i will ask a nominee to commit him or herself that they will recuse themselves from sitting on that decision. >> if we are not going to discuss what it means to have a president with this ongoing investigation happening who is going to be able to interview supreme court justices and continue with this tradition of doing litmus tests, loyalty tests for that person we could participate in a process that could undermine a criminal investigation. >> to break down what's at stake in the president's next supreme court pick, i'm joined by ted lieu, a member of the house judiciary committee and msnbc justice correspondent matt miller, former spokesperson for the justice department under barack obama. congressman lieu, let's start with you. the idea that the president
isn't going to ask roe v. wade is secondary that he couldn't hold back from asking people about loyalty to the investigation. is he going to in his interviews ask them about the investigation into him and if he does, does that compromise a candidate? >> thank you ali for your question. if he asks the question i believe it compromises the candidate i'll equity during the merrick garland association mitch mcconnell said the american people should have a voice. he they would vacancy open for eight months. we have elections in less than five months. we should wait until after november before looking at the issue. >> matt miller, i want to remind people of james comey's testimony before the senate
intel hearing on june 8 of 2017. >> my common sense told me what was going on is either he concluded or someone told him that you've already asked comey to stay and you didn't get anything for it and that the dinner was an effort to build a relationship, in fact, he asked specifically of loyalty in the context of asking me to stay. >> asking for loyalty in the context of asking james comey to stay on as director of the fbi. matt, arguably a supreme court justice is much more influential and for a longer time than the head of the fbi so if the president was prepared to break with protocol and do things people would think are at best unorthodox and unconventional and at worst obstruction of justice and ask the head of the
fbi for loyalty there is some concern about what he will do when interviewing a perspective supreme court justice. >> there is and you would think the staff would be smart enough to make sure there are people in the room with him. the dinner with comey was one on one. but that doesn't mean that outside of asking the direct question that he wouldn't try other ways to ingratiate himself with this potential justice. i think the principle that is so key here is that in our system of justice, no person is above the law and that means no one picks the prosecutor that investigates them and no one picks the judge that hears their case. that's important because of the number of questions that could make it to the supreme court. i don't think the question of whether the president will be indicted will make it there because i don't think doj will try to move forward with that but should the president be forced to submit to a subpoena, does he have the right to pardon himself? all of those things could make it to the supreme court and you
have to remember what he's under investigation for is obstruction of justice, for using his office to block the investigation into himself. that's why it's important to be sure he can't use his office here to thwart the investigat n investigation. >> and the supreme court is the ultimate arbiter of this so congressman lieu, matt brings up an interesting point. the president never has to say anything about this to a supreme court justice for that supreme justice possibly on any question of the investigation to be compromised and that is what senator blumenthal said that he's going to ask these potential nominees or whomever the nominee is whether they will recuse themselves if facing a question of the president's -- >> they should recuse themselves and why is it that we have these interesting constitutional issues under donald trump? because of his behavior. we're looking at issues of can the president pardon himself,
can the president indicted? why are we asking these questions? because donald trump is engaged in behavior that is out of bounds for what a president should be doing and he should not be nominating the supreme court justice and no supreme court justice should be confirmed until at least a new congress has been seated? >> probably most americans have seen this exchange yesterday with the house judiciary hearing with rod rosenstein. in your opinion that hearing. rod rosenstein was frustrated with pressure from your republican colleagues on him. but what do you make of the reporting that rosenstein is frustrated that the media and the white house have portrayed him in the pivotal firing of james comey. >> the president told the whole world that's why he did it. instead, he had rod rosenstein
write a memo and he used that memo as a fake cover story. he was using rod rosenstein and i can certainly understand why rod rosenstein was angry about that. >> guys, thanks very much for joining me this evening. congressman ted lieu and matt miller. >> thank you, ali. for more on whether the president should be able to nominate a supreme court justice while he's under investigation, i'm joined by former democratic senator barbara boxer of california who now hosts the podcast "fight back" and former republican congressman mickey edwards of oklahoma. welcome to both of you. thank you for being here, i want to pick up where we left off. mickey edwards, this is, as congressman lieu said, just a weird conversation that we are having but it has been had before during president nixon's term and the watergate investigation. he appointed four justices before the burglary and justice rehnquist recused himself for having worked in the nixon administration even though there was no accusation of anything
else there so tell me with this context how you feel about this discussion? >> first of all i think not only whoever he nominates now and is elevated to the supreme court should recuse himself and any question about this information and whether or not the president is guilty of obstruction and collusion but also i think justice gorsuch should, too. he was also appointed by this president and i think ordinarily you would say that that is not cause for them to recuse themselves but in this case where it's an investigation of the president directly, i think they should. >> so this is an interesting intellectual political and legislative conversation but in the end republican leadership in the senate, your former colleagues, aren't interested in having this discussion. they're not discussing whether or not they think roe v. wade should be challenged or overturned or a different case like the one in iowa brought up to have that discussion.
they're not discussing justices recusing themselves because of the investigation into the investigation of donald trump. so what are they doing? >> there's no surprise at the way they're acting, whether these republicans -- and i say to my friend mickey how i long for republicans like him because he was an independent voice. but we have these lap dogs, they're all lap dogs for this president, they're scared to death of him because he's so popular with an increasingly right-wing base so that's why they don't want to talk and the reality that faces the american people. ali, here's the thing. the supreme court is the last stop on the american justice train. there is nothing more important than this kind of appointment. it ought to be somebody who can pull more than 51 votes, it ought to be someone that can garner the respect of all sides because every issue that america
cares about, whether it's health care for their families, human rights, civil rights, who they can love and marry, whether it's a woman's right to choose, does she have that respect, she has it now, will she lose it? these are critical questions, but my republican friends are hypocritical because as we know mcconnell said clearly let's weight 11 months and not allow barack obama to have his appo t appointment but is silent on that issue when it comes to trump. we'll rush it through, ram it through and trump get to pick a juror on his trial. wrong. >> mickey, there may be no legislative or political avenue in congress for democrats to do something about this but there are marches, there is public opinion. we saw the influence public opinion had during obamacare. it was close but it worked. what can happen? because to barbara's point, the president is more popular than
most republican members of congress or the senate and as a result unlike in nixon's era, unlike in watergate, they didn't see the president as -- they don't see the president as an albatross. >> but this is not just about donald trump. the constituents of these senators did not taken a oath to support the constitution, the senator did, so the burden is on the republicans. i totally agree with what barbara said about the behavior of the republican senators to this point and what we need now is -- marches help and demonstrations help but we need people showing up at the offices of republican senators, their con stip wents saying here is where you show why you should or should not be a member of the united states senate. this is not about the president. this is about whether the united states senate will fulfill its constitutional obligations to
really vet a nominee who is sworn to look impartially at the law and not do the bidding of whoever appointed him or her. >> barbara boxer, when you were in the senate women senators were white rare. there are a lot of references to women republican senators being called upon to take a tough position to guarantee the rights of women as it pertains to roe v. wade. do you think that's a fair burden and a necessary one? >> it should be a burden on every senator, female or male because roe v. wade protected women's lives and through the liberty cause of the constitution said we women have the right to privacy. . if our religion says no abortion, fine.
if you don't practice religion, fine, that's what a woman's right to choose is and roe v. wade gave us that choice so i see this as a civil rights issue and as an issue that touches every single family and this senate and both sides of the aisle, all of them are responsible and i do believe because i did have ed markey on my podcast, thanks for mentioning it, he said he was going to use every tool in the tool box to stop it and slow it and drag it out and buck sure right now there are closed-door meetings looking at the rule book and how we can slow this thing down until the american people get engaged? >> barbara boxer, great to talk to you. >> can i add one more thing. >> real quick. >> very quickly. roe v. wade is a big issue here but when you look at the travel ban, tariffs, this is a -- this
supreme court nomination is very important. very important. >> donald trump himself said it. this is maybe the next 40 or 45 years of our future. he's right. thanks barbara boxer and mickey edwards, great conversation. >> thank you. up next, republicans are running away from questions about the future of roe v. wade that we were talking about. senator kirsten gillibrand says now is the time to fight harder than ever. that interview in n two minutes. ke welcome to holiday inn! thank you! ♪ ♪ wait, i have something for you! every stay is a special stay at holiday inn.
. >> what i'm asking you, sir, is do you want to see the court overturned. you said you want to see the court protect the second amendment. do you want to see the court overturn roe v. wade. >> well, if we put another two or three justices on that will happen. and that will happen automatically, in my opinion, because i am putting pro-life justices on the court. i will say this, it will go back to the states and the states will make a determination. >> that was october, 2016, less than a month before the election. donald trump was clear about
whether he planned to appoint justices who would overturn roe v. wade. today, however, in a taped interview for fox news, trump sounded like he didn't know where he was on women's health. >> will you ask your nominees how they might vote okn roe v. wade. >> that's a big one. they're all saying don't do that, you shouldn't do that. but i'm putting conservative people on. >> now republican lawmakers want to play coy and dance around the issue of overturning roe v. wade. >> senator, once in a generation opportunity to appoint a judge that will overturn roe v. wade. are you excited about that? >> i'm looking forward to finish senate business. >> are you excited to confirm a judge that willor turn roe v. wade. >> there's no way to guess that. >> it's really not knowing who's
going to come forward. it's premature to get through these things. >> once in a lifetime opportunity, is it one you're looking forward to taking? . are you happy? >> no comment. >> we can finally do it, overturn roe v. wade with the right justice. is it something you're looking forward to? >> i'm an exist so i'm looking into all the stuff right now. >> looks like you guys have a shot of overturning roe v. wade. >> is it going to rain? >> congressman -- >> you hai have a meeting, sorr >> i'll run with you. are you optimistic aboutover turning the supreme court. >> i have a meeting. >> earlier chris hayes spoke with kirsten gillibrand. >> some of your remember colleagues who are clear about their views of abortion and roe v. wade have gotten silent about this issue. why is that? >> because they know that what this is about is about overturning roe v. wade because president trump was clear. he said they would automatically
overturn roe v. wade with the next justice as soon as he got two. he gave us a list of 25 and said all of them are being listed because they will overturn roe v. wade so this is really a question of do you value women in this country, do you want to protect women in this country? do you believe women should have the right to make their own reproductive choices and health care decisions? it's a basic human right at issue right now. a human right, a civil right of all women in america. >> i want to play you -- leonard leo, a lot of people don't know who that is but he is basically the person in charge of selecting judicial nominees for the president, vetting them, a very powerful individual. he was on cbs "this morning" and this is what he said about the roe v. wade issue. >> roe v. wade has been a scare tactic that's gone back 36 years. all the way back to justice sandra o'connor's nomination to the court. nothing happened to roe in that period of time and for me it's not about roe v. wade.
for constitutional conservatives it's about interpreting the constitution as it's written and interpreting the limits on government power because that's the way to preserve human dignity. >> i hear you but should we be worried about it going away? >> i don't think people should be worried about roe v. wade or any other place. >> do you buy that? >> no and who care what is he thinks anyway. it's what president trump thinks. president trump told the american people i intend to overturn roe v. wade so whatever he thinks, he's not the one choosing the justice and president trump put together his list specifically to find someone to overturn reproductive choices. didn't president trump say during the campaign we have to punish them somehow. he doesn't value women so every woman and man in america who cares about women's reproductive freedom and the ability of women to make their own judgments about their own body should speak out and defeat whoever the next nominee is.
my view is, chris, we should not have a vote until after the election, that was mitch mcconnell's standard and he should live by the standard he set. >> here's the question. i think there's two minds of this, someone that mitch mcconnell is so ruthless, republicans are so united on the supreme court, they have in the their grasp and the other is, no, they have a one-vote majority as of now in terms of people able to vote and they've lost nominees before. >> yes, they have. >> which do you think it is? >> they lost nominees before because america haas stood up and spoken out so i would urge your viewers now is the time to mobilize, marge, use access to social media, traditional media to be heard on this issue, call your senators. elevate your voice in any way you can, it's about america and whether we value women and whether women should have equal rights, equal freedoms, equal liberty. it's an issue of life and death for a lot of women. if you can't protect a girl who has been raped by a family
member, you can't protect a woman who if she takes a child to term will die in delivery, it's unconscionable what we are saying about not having equality for women in this country. >> do you think your colleagues are persuadable on this issue? collins and murkowski voted for justice alito and roberts. what is your read of the persuadability or getability of republican members of the senate? >> it matters how much people protest and speak out. if every senator hears from their constituents loudly clearly with personal stories and outrage and concern they might change their minds. that's how democracy works. that's what democracy looks like. >> do you feel that way. you're a sitting senator, does it matter when people are calling you. >> it does. it matters so much. in fact during a lot of these nomination battles for cabinet members i read constituent
letters from the senate floor because they were so heart felt. so all people in america us specially women, tell your stories, speak out. talk about why this civil right is so important and why it would be a degradation to tell women how many children they can have and whether they can have access to basic reproductive rights. it's unconscionable what this president is trying to do and i don't think this is fair and right and i think people should fight more than they've fought before. >> senator kirsten gillibrand of new york, thank you. >> thank you. the senator says stand up and speak out. coming up next across the country, massive protests are planned tomorrow opposing the president's immigration policies. how organizers expect to translate turnout into change after this. tore thousands of immigrant children away from their parents.
we the people challenged him in court and in the streets. then trump was forced to admit that his policy was wrong. and he caved. the court just ruled that trump must reunite every family he broke apart. (clock ticking rapidly) time is ticking. these children must see their parents again, and they're counting on us to act quickly. these children must see their parents again, ♪ tired of wrestling with seemingly impossible cleaning tasks? sprays in the bathroom can be ineffective. try mr. clean magic eraser with durafoam. simply add water, to remove soap scum. try mr. clean magic eraser with durafoam.
the trump presidency ushered in an era of mass mobilization. from the women's march the day after his inauguration which drew enormous crowds to ongoing protests to save obamacare to the march for our lives in favor of gun control after a series of mass shootings that have left so many americans dead and now tomorrow protesters plan literally hundreds of events around the country against the government's separation of immigrant families at the border. anna galand is one of the organizers of tomorrow's events. i guess the question we have here coming off of kirsten
gillibrand's comments about stand up and speak out, how do you translate the remarkable energy that has been with us since the election of donald trump and has probably only grown into change? i know there are voter registrations but the clock is ticking now with the supreme court vacancy it's become more urgent. >> first i would say showing up is one of the most important things we can do. it's necessary but not sufficient to end the political crisis we are caught in. tomorrow it will be an incredible day. we pulled it together in 13 days and we have 750 events in every corner of the country. not just tens of thousands of people expected in the biggest cities although yes that but also there are events in lubb k lubbock, texas, and wichita, kansas and lanes breaorrow, minnesota. they're starting off on a local baseball field. i want to emphasize this moment
for people. you underestimate it at your peril. how do we get to with we need to go? show up. next week is a congressional recess so where do you stand on caging zmirn where do you stand on indefinite family internment camps? where do you stand on this so-called zero tolerance policy which is a prosecute everyone who is seeking refuge at our borders policy. so we'll get people on the reco record. we're going ask for corporations like wells fargo and others profiting from the detention of families to understand that there will be a significant amount of consumer blowback and then we will march to the polls and change the tide, we will turn it back and we're going to get out of this crisis. i keep saying to people sending me these messages of despair and
outrage, i keep saying look which there is no way out of this crisis but through. we are going to organize our way out of it and it starts tomorrow. >> and it's important to remind people there is no fioffense in seeking asylum, crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor crime for which you would never round people up or separate them. nobody in these camps has committed a crime. but it's visceral to see children separated from their parents. it's visceral to understand that people can't come here because of a ban because of their religion. it's visceral to understand that being gay is not -- does not afford you the same rights as everyone else. it's visceral to understand abortion rights. it's not as visceral to discuss the appointment of a supreme court justice but it's way more important than all of these topics. >> i mean, it's critically
important and what i'm seeing right now is that the explosive grass-roots energy that we are seeing, that we have seen in the last few weeks which has been sustained in various forms since trump's election, we have enough grass-roots energy to fight on these various fronts. we have to work hard but we can defeat the supreme court justice nominee. we can get out there and defend abortion rights in this country, defend people's right to marry the person they love. we can win that battle if we fight hard and put our values and stories front and center and can we end the separation of children from their parents by this administration? absolutely. and it will come down to whether we show up in the numbers that we have because we are the majority in this country. the majority of americans are desperately shocked and outraged and appalled and heartbroken by what this administration is doing to our fundamental values and it's important to show up not just to send that message to
decision makers but it's important for us to come out and see each other, folks might remember that feeling from the women's marched when you looked around and thought oh, my god, i'm not alone. >> anna, thanks so much for joining me. anna galland, thank you. still to come, how a comedian tried to prank call the white house and got a call back from the president who was on air force one. we'll play you the recordings and talk about how that happened ahead. plus, reigning thing 1 thing 2 champion scott pruitt is next. or its sign of intelligence? in crossing harsh terrain... or breaking new ground? this is the time to get an exceptional offer on the mercedes of your midsummer dreams at the mercedes-benz summer event, going on now. receive up to a $1,250 summer event bonus on select suvs. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing.
thing 1 tonight, scott pruitt still has a job as head of the epa despite an ever-growing slew of scandals like one of our recent favorites involving an old trump hotel mattress. as you may recall, scott pruitt asked a top aide in charge of his scheduling, a government employee paid with public money, with helping him secure a used trump branded mattress from the president's washington, d.c. hotel. the trump home luxury plush euro top, to be specific. it wasn't enough for scott pruitt that the woman resigned after it came out. that wasn't enough. he wanted venn vens. that's thing two.
we learned about scott pruitt's desire for an old trump mattress thanks to one of his former top aides who resigned shortly after her testimony about the incident went public. sources tell the daily beast that pruitt was livid over hupp's testimony which he felt had been humiliating and he proceeded to mount a campaign to blacklist her in the conservative movement, a move that former senior epa officials have described as -- and this is a direct quote -- rat effing. pruitt personally reached out to allies to insist she had lied about or at least misunderstood the request for a used trump mattress. he also stressed that hupp could not be trusted. the implication being that she should not be hired at their institutions. apparently that kind of vindictive behavior is par for the course with pruitt who reportedly demands loyalty among those in his inner circle but doesn't reciprocate it to his aides. well, that sounds familiar. i guess you can't blame him for
(male friend) thanks for the invite! (anna) front row? nobody puts baby in a corner. yippee ki yay movielovers. (vo) download the atom app and get $5 off your first ticket. welcome to holiday inn! thank you! ♪ ♪ wait, i have something for you! every stay is a special stay at holiday inn. save up to 15% when you book early at hollidayinn.com save up to 15% (sighs) i hate missing out early missing out after hours. not anymore, td ameritrade lets you trade select securities 24 hours a day, five days a week. that's amazing. it's a pretty big deal. so i can trade all night long? ♪ ♪ all night long... is that lionel richie? let's reopen the market. mr. richie, would you ring the 24/5 bell? sure can, jim. ♪ trade 24/5, with td ameritrade. ♪
>> so this is it, stuttering john from the bowels of chatsworth, california, gets -- makes three phone calls and gets to talk to the president. >> all right, nbc news has not independently verified the story i'm about to tell you but if it's real -- and the white house isn't saying it isn't -- wow. for content for his podcast the comedian john melendez, a former
howard stern sidekick, decided to call the white house and pretend he was an aide to democratic senator bob menendez of new jersey whom he claimed wanted to talk to trump. it was, frankly, not a very convincing performance. melendez the comedian gave the white house his own unblocked cell phone number and he spoke with what can charitably be called a truly horrible british accent. listen to the exchange when a white house operator called him back to verify the phone number. >> hello? >> yeah, sean moore, this is the white house operator? >> yes, how are you? >> i'm fine, i just lad to verify your phone number. i noticed it's a california area code. >> yes. >> is that a cell phone, because we don't that listed under the senator's information. >> well, it's only because we're on vacation, i -- >> oh, you're on vacation, okay, great. i just needed to clarify that. >> after that, melendez got a
call from someone who very much sounds like trump who says he's calling from aboard air force one. the white house, as i said, isn't commenting but it isn't denying it, either. the conversation kicks off with what sounds like trump congratulating the man who he thinks is senator menendez for avoiding jail time in a federal corruption trial. >> hi, bob. >> how are you? >> how are you? congratulations on everything. congratulations, great job. you went through a tough, tough situation and i don't think a very fair situation but congratulations. >> thank you so much. >> when we come back, there are that amazing phone call and what it says about the dysfunction in the white house when a former howard stern sidekick can apparently get the president on the phone without much effort at all. stay with us. sleep and get up on time. then i found aleve pm. the only one to combine a safe sleep aid, plus the 12 hour pain relieving strength of aleve.
i'm back. aleve pm for a better am. i never thought i'd say this... ...but i found bladder leak underwear... ...that's actually pretty. always discreet boutique. hidden inside... ...is a super absorbent core that quickly turns liquid to gel. [snap!] so i feel protected... ...and pretty. always discreet boutique. this one's below market price and has bluetooth. same here, but this one has leather seats! use the cars.com app to compare price, features and value.
with pg&e in the sierras. and i'm an arborist since the onset of the drought, more than 129 million trees have died in california. pg&e prunes and removes over a million trees every year to ensure that hazardous trees can't impact power lines. and since the onset of the drought we've doubled our efforts. i grew up in the forests out in this area and honestly it's heartbreaking to see all these trees dying. what guides me is ensuring that the public is going to be safer and that these forests can be sustained and enjoyed by the community in the future. the white house tonight is not commenting on what appears to be a successful prank call from a former howard stern
sidekick who while pretending to be democratic senator bob menendez apparently got through to president trump on the phone. now, this hasn't been confirmed by nbc news, but here's more from the conversation we brought you before the break beginning with the fake bob menendez explaining why he supposedly cares about immigration. >> i am hispanic, so i have to, you know, i have to, you know, i have to -- i'm sure you understand. >> oh, i understand. >> you know, so i have -- you know, i have to look good to my -- you know, i have to look good to my people as well. you understand. >> i agree. i agree. so bob, here's what -- let me do this. i'm on air force one. i'm just coming back. we had an amazing rally in north dakota actually. >> yeah, i saw the speech. i saw the speech. >> you know, it's a tough race. say it again? >> i saw the speech. and i thought it was -- i thought it was a great speech. >> sounds like the president. the fake menendez then asks about the supreme court pick and then signs off on a call with
what seems to actually be the president of the united states with a howard stern catchphrase. >> good luck on your trip and thank you so much for taking my call. >> you take care. i will speak to you soon, bob. take care of yourself. >> all right, thanks, thanks, mr. president. >> thank you, bob. i'll talk to you soon. bye. >> all right all right. baba booey to you. >> joining me to discuss this incident potentially and what it says about the white house, michelle goldberg, columnist at the nrkts, in. chris lu, former white house cabinet secretary and assistant to president obama and aswa aswanaswang aswang subsang at the daily best. swin, let's start with you. you've got some reporting on this? >> yes, from senior officials i've been talking to in trump's west wing, they're still last i spoke to them earlier tonight trying to figure out exactly what happened here. but the best that they believe that happened was the comedian called in multiple times to the white house switchboard and was
turned away, then he started impersonating someone supposedly on bob menendez's staff and they managed to get all the way to the white house legislative affairs office, which found it fishy enough to shoot down the idea of connecting him to the president. they still somehow managed to get a hold of jared kushner, the president's son-in-law and senior adviser, who ended up patching the call to the president of the united states on air force one. now, this is what they're not publicly acknowledging but what they believe had happened. so there is a good amount of throwing jared under the bus right now. in trump's west wing. >> right. so what they haven't said is that the reporting of this call, the playing of this call, that's not the president's voice, he didn't call. this is interesting to me because it's several hours in and the white house hasn't said anything about this. michelle goldberg and annie carney, by the way, tweeted about this earlier. "more on the sloppy protocol,
legislative affairs was notified of the call, checked with mendened ez-of staff who said he was not trying to reach the president of the united states. legislative affairs said kill the call. it was patched through, however, reportedly by kushner." michelle, the issue here is it's funny, it's a joke, this is what the howard stern people do. but it's actually kind of serious. the world is a tinder box. there are all sorts of very serious things going on. >> i think we should assume that at some point hostile intelligence services -- >> they could hack our system, call the president. >> if they haven't done it already they're certainly going to do it now. it just shows the unbelievable sloppiness with security that you see throughout this administration. you see it in the way donald trump uses his cell phone. you see in the use of private e-mail accounts, which is the reason purportedly that we have this catastrophic presidency in the first place. it's so blindingly obvious that these -- every day these people
are in charge of the american government we are all in serious per sxl that's going to get worse and worse and worse as more and more and more people who are at least semi-competent head for the exits. >> this is an interesting point, chris lu. that there is danger to this. we often talk about the white house drama and a lot of people say i don't care about the white house drama it's got nothing to do with me. this is not the office of a ceo of a public company. this is much more important. a white house in this sort of disarray faces some serious threats in this day and age. >> absolutely. i'm a howard stern fan, so at some point i found this funny. but it is an important point. it's not unreasonable to think this has already been done at another instance, possibly by a foreign agent and it leads to you wonder what other information the president has unwittingly disclosed. beyond that, we know that there are multiple security breaches within this administration. it's not only the president using a cell phone that doesn't have the latest security precautions on it. the fact he disclosed classified
information to a russian foreign minister. that he disclosed information about a syrian operation to dofrnors. people like rob porter had access to classified information for long periods of time without security claerngs clearances. this is an administration that doesn't take security seriously. >> swin, let's talk about this for a while. we were talking about the potential departure of john kelly. we're talking about the fact that maybe the president won't even replace the chief of staff. he doesn't really listen to his chief of staff. maybe there will be a communications director. who knows? but the fact is this is where the problem comes in. these poor chief of staffs of old who never got any recognition, people are now starting to take it seriously to say there need to be some rules around the president. whether you like him or not. and this sort of underscores the problem we've all been talking about. he didn't listen to senior advisers. as michelle says, they're all heading for the exits. the white house held a job fair the other day to try and find people. is there any sense of discipline one day coming back to the white house under this administration? >> well, it's certainly not a
day that ends in the letter y unless there's an exacerbating level of dysfunction permeating trump world. and that's just standard operating procedure in the trump era. but i think i'd be remiss to not point out that with all of the maddening mayhem infecting the trump white house right now look at how much the president has managed to get done when it comes to things like hardline draconian immigration policy. he's about to appoint his second supreme court justice. so i want your viewers to imagine just for a moment what trumpland could get accomplished if we didn't have this -- >> if it was orderly. >> exactly. and michelle, to that point the border stuff is sloppy. like the muslim ban. it was sloppy. anyone can get something through the supreme court if you get that many chances to do a redo. but the supreme court stuff's not sloppy. for whatever reason the trump administration has decided they're not apoingt donald trump buddies and friends and cronies and personal lawyers to the
supreme court. they're going through the federalist society. and the heritage foundation. and getting quite possibly confirmable nominees. so it is interesting. the weird chaotic white house has some success -- >> that shouldn't be mistaken for savvy. right? that's just luck that anthony kennedy is 81 years old and decided to yooinresign. most of their successes have come from their willingness to destroy things without regard for the consequences. this border policy wasn't well executed but the fact is they don't care which is why they're able to get away with it. nevertheless, we have these kind of nihilist tic people who do not care at all what becomes of the rest of us who are become to make a decision that's not going to affect just my lives, my children's lives, my grandchildren's lives if i ever have them. and i feel like because they are completely beholden to this small minority of the country that elected trump and still believes in him. >> thanks to all of you,
michelle goldberg, asawi subs. subsaeng and chris lu. that's "all in" for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" starts now. >> geeng. thank you my friend and have a good weekend. >> you too. >> thank you for joining you at home. happy friday. it's going to be a big newsy weekend. i have to let you know. we are expecting large-scale demonstrations and a lot of them all over the country. there's going to be at least one demonstration in every state in the country tomorrow. most states are going to have multiple demonstrations. we're expecting a particularly large one in washington, d.c. all of those coordinated demonstrations. we think there will be more than 700 of them. all in opposition to the trump administration's policy of separating kids from their parents. there have been a whole bunch of developments on the story of the trump administration separating kids from their parents just in today's news. including a big scoop on that subject from nbc news and a whole bunch of officials who actually work at i.c.e. who are currently employed at