tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC July 3, 2018 12:00am-1:00am PDT
should donald trump be? >> the substance of what he told abc if it's true should cause the president sleepless nights. >> plus as the president meet plus, as the president meets with potential nominees -- >> would the president like to see roe v. wade overturned? >> why republicans keep hiding from the abortion question. and in the wake of massive protests -- new reporting on the indefinite detention plan for migrants. when "all in" starts right now. >> no family detention! good evening from chicago. i'm chris hayes. michael cohen sure sounds like a man who is about to flip on the president of the united states. silting down with abc's george stephanopoulos over the weekend in his first interview since being raided by the fbi two
months ago cohen publicly insided himself from the president declaring "my wife, my daughter and my son have my first loyalty and always will. i put family and country first." now, that sounds reasonable. but it is a major about-face for a man who has pleefsly sworn undying loyalty to the president and his family. a man who said he would take a bullet for donald trump and has defended him through the ugliest moments of his political career. >> how do you explain that there's no evidence, no video evidence for what mr. trump claims he saw on television? how do you explain that? >> i'm not so sure that's true. and i've worked for mr. trump now for a long time, and i do -- and i can tell you that mr. trump's memory is fantastic and i've never come across a situation where mr. trump has said something that's not accurate. >> there are -- seriously? >> yeah, seriously. >> abc news also reports that cohen's joint defense agreement with the president that allows their legal teams to share documents and information, that agreement is coming to an end as
a new lawyer takes over cohen's case. and that is exactly what michael flynn did last fall. his attorneys also cutting off communication with the president's attorneys. one week after "the new york times" broke that story flynn pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate with the special counsel. if abc's report is true, it does look like very bad news for the president, for whom michael cohen has done all kinds of let's say dubious work over the years. we know he brokered the president's hush money payment to stormy daniels right before the election. he was spearheading efforts to build a trump tower in moscow throughout the campaign. and after election day he courted russian oligarch viktor vekselberg whose u.s. subsidiary went on to give cohen a million-dollar consulting contract, one that was hidden in a delaware llc we didn't know about till recently. cohen could have a lot of information to share with investigators, which might explain why the president had a bit of a public meltdown after
the fbi raided cohen's office. >> so i just heard that they broke into the office of one of my personal attorneys, good man, and it's a disgraceful situation. it's a total witch hunt. i've been saying it for a long time. it's an attack on our country in a true sense. it's an attack on what we all stand for. so when i saw this and when i heard it i heard it like you did. i said that is really now in a whole new level of unfairness. >> the president later tweeted, "most people will flip if the government lets them out of trouble, even if it means lying or making up stories. sorry, i don't see michael doing that." cohen's public break with his former os comes just as the federal probe into his business dealings enters a new phase. today the judge that was assigned to review all the materials that were seized in
that fbi raid, known as the special master, turned over to federal prosecutors everything found not to be protected by attorney-client privilege. that's the vast majority of the materials found. the grand total, 1.3 million items now in prosecutors' hands. among those materials according to an earlier court filing were over a dozen pages of shredded documents which investigators had to fit back together piece by piece. and now buzzfeed news has obtained what it says are those recovered documents. i'm joined now by one of the reporters who managed to get those documents, jason leopold, senior investigative reporter for buzzfeed news. i guess i'm not going to ask you how you got them, although that is a question i'd love to note answer to -- >> i'm not telling you, chris. >> that's good of you to do that. what have we learned from them? >> well, you know, when michael cohen was raided back in april, shortly thereafter, they recovered documents from his shredder in his office. and they pieced these documents back together. there was lots of speculation at the time that perhaps there was a smoking gun in the documents that he shredded.
what we found is basically that some of the speculation was somewhat overblown. there is a copy of a wire transfer -- excuse me. that was made to an account at first republic bank that was controlled by michael cohen which had previously been reported. this kind of fits in with some of the payments that was made to cohen by elliott broidy, the republican fund-raiser. this was back in march. and another document appears to be an insurance payment of some sort or insurance documents. there's also a invitation to a dinner reception in qatar -- excuse me, in miami. miami, florida. to celebrate the qatar business community. and then finally, there is a number of pages from a woman who -- a california woman quho
claims that she was harassed and black s. mailed by donald trump. court papers, when we did some research on her, described her as a vexatious litigant who has been bombarding the federal courts with a number of different filings and lawsuits. so right now it's kind of difficult to tell if this is -- if this will be of any help, or what prosecutors are interested in at this point. >> so two things. one, just to be clear, the $62,500 that was a wire transfer, we think that comes from broidy in to cohen as payment to cohen or as part of the arrangement for him to then transfer it to shir beshar, the woman who allegedly broidy had an affair with? >> yeah, the latter would be correct. and that's essentially what we think. we haven't been able to get an
answer to that question of course but it does seem to fit in with that narrative that's been floating out there. >> we should note, these are 13 documents taken out of the shredder on the day that he was raided and reconstituted. there's 1.3 million documents that have been turned over. the vast majority, i think it's 99.9%, when there was this privilege claim made by both the president and michael cohen, the special master said no, this stuff isn't privileged. federal investigators and their prosecutors got their hands on a huge trove of documents today. >> this is just a sliver of obviously what they have their hands on. these documents, the ones that were in the shredder, there was a lot of discussion revolving around it as to what did michael cohen shred. when we took a look at this last week and started reporting on it, what we found was some of it
was previously reported on. that one document, the wire transfer to first republic bank, that specific document has not been revealed before. i haven't seen that out there. although it's been reported, it's confirmation of sorts. obviously, there's a lot more out there. i think this, however, is not the smoking gun perhaps that people were -- >> you did not find the i did crimes post-it that was run through a shredder. >> and to be clear there's nothing in here that mentions putin or collusion or anything of that sort pf. >> jason leopold, great to have you. for more -- >> i appreciate it. >> -- on the cohen probe i'm joined by nbc news investigative reporter tom winter. tom, one of the sort of precipitating incidents that appears in terms of the timing
of all this, the end of the joint defense agreement-s a new lawyer, guy petrillo. he's someone who actually worked in the southern district of new york, right? >> yeah, absolutely, chris. he's a very well-respected attorney, well known in the southern district, somebody who has a significant experience and background both white-collar crime and just overall crime in general. he's somebody who comes from a little bit of a smaller firm but is somebody who's very respected. i just want to briefly touch on that report that you were referring to with abc. this was something that was ordered by the judge. so the judge actually put the sides together, put cohen's attorneys, the trump organization and trump together on this. and the reason why this is ending is because the special master review of all the material seized in that search warrant is ending. it's not an agreement they had amongst themselves. it was an agreement the judge ordered at the time. that's why you're seeing this dissolve. >> you're saying the agreement between trump's attorneys and michael cohen's attorneys.
>> that's exactly correct. this was something that was put together, the judge, judge kemba wood who's overseeing the materials said michael cohen's team you've got to go through all this stuff and assert what's attorney client privilege and then pass that material on to the president's attorneys as well as the trump organization attorneys and then they can see if they have anything they want to add as far as material that may be attorney-client privilege and then the special master will review it. this was kind of a shotgun wed field goal you will that was put together by a judge, not necessarily a formalized agreement between the three parties although their interests to some degree are quite aligned and certainly the president's interests and the trump organization's interests are probably pretty much one and the same. >> what is your sense of -- i mean, so we've now sort of reached the end of what was this kind of judicial review, the special master going through. there's nothing right now in terms of what the fbi has or the sdny and michael cohen to further do. they just take the documents and they've going to sit with those and figure out. and michael cohen waits by the phone or his lawyer reaches out?
>> i think the document review is just a portion of this. in told it's 4 million pieces of evidence or items that they've been able to look at so far. sought prosecutors are going to look at this, they're going to look at all the various cell phone records, see if those match to meetings, see if those match to documents. they're going to have text messages they'll have access to. they're using the cell bright software in this which means that even if you try to delete a message on your phone tlez going to be a report of that. they're going to have a record of that and be able to look at photographs, pictures. there's well over a dozen pieces of media here. they're going to review that. in addition to that they're going to be able to start to ask questions based on those pieces of evidence and those items they've goent out of this search warrant. they're going to want to talk to people. at some point presumably they're going to want to talk to people in front of a grand jury to memorialize that testimony, to be able to get tonight record so they can start to build out and sketch out a possible indictment. we don't know to sure he's going to be inieted but that would be the next step. it's like building a house, chris. basically these prosecutors and
the fbi agents, they're the architects and builders. they're going to weigh the various materials that they have, concrete, roofing materials, timber, and look at this and say okay, what do we actually have here and what can we actually build? and if michael cohen, you were talking about it before, you were talk about it before with respect to cooperation, if michael cohen comes in sxaz i can help you build my house and i can help you build a couple other houses to bring in o'people to this, they're going to evaluate what he's bringing to the table. so they have to look at okay, michael, what do you have to offer us? what do you have to say? and then try to corroborate any information he may bring forward, chris. it's going to be a bit of a challenge. >> nbc's tom winter. thank you. >> thanks. >> to help figure out what to make of michael cohen's video i'm joined by nick akerman, former federal prosecutor and joyce vance, former u.s. attorney.
joyce, will he met start with you as somebody who prosecuted cases, a former federal prosecutor, i find cohen's behavior strange. and i'm not sure what to make of it. it seems like a lot of dangles for the president. i want to read one section of the interview which was not on camera. he said, "i will not be a punching bag as far as anyone's defense strategy he said emphatically. i'm not a villain of this story and i will not allow others to try to depict me that way." what do you make of cohen's behavior here? >> entire interview done publicly on national television after announcing it on twitter is a little bit unusual of a tactic for a potential criminal defendant. if i were a defense lawyer which i've never been, i don't think i'd advise any of my clients to do that. prosecutors don't like to negotiate plea agreements in public. so cohen's got guy petrillo, this sort of storied sdny prosecutor, coming on board. and one assumes if cohen wants
to talk to prosecutors and sdny about it, a deal, petrillo can just pick up the phone and do that. it seems far more likely that cohen is talking to that proverbial audience of one we hear so much about, the president. and he let the president know exactly when he could turn on his tv and tune in to hear what cohen had to say. and it looks like that last drowning man gasp, the last time your head goes above walt sxwrir say please throw me a lifeline, mr. president so, i don't have to flip and testify against you. >> michael avenatti, who of course represents stormy daniels in the lawsuit against michael cohen, that was sort of his theory. i want to play what he had to say and nick get your reaction. take a listen. >> i have to tell you, i think this interview this morning in a big way was a big nothing burger. this is michael cohen trying to send a message to the president that he wants the president to pay his legal bills or he's
going to flip. he's playing games with the american people. if he has information that's damaging to this president, and i know for a fact that he does, then he should come forward and sfatd it and disclose it now. >> what do you think, nick? >> it's not so clear to me that he's trying to get trump to pay his legal bills. it's also very possible that he's being harassed, he's being pressured by all the various trump surrogates to keep his mouth shut. and maybe this is his way of saying to the president i'm my own person, i'm going to do what i want and what's best for me. it may be a way for him to get everybody off his back. but i agree with joyce. there is no reason for michael cohen to do this in public or to even be saying this. i am a defense lawyer. i would never allow any client to do this on national tv. i really don't see what the upside is here at all. >> you know, i feel the same way. this whole thing has been such a strange excruciating story in the last few months. just excruciating in terms of
watching it unfold and watching it unfold so publicly, joyce. i mean, it's a hard thing to think of a reference for because it's played out so publicly and it involves -- you know, it involves the sitting president of the united states. i've just never seen anything like this unfold in the public eye before. >> i just don't think that we have. and the really bizarre nature of cohen's relationship with trump, this asymmetric relationship where he calls the president mr. trump and trump speaks about him as well, you know, just one of my attorneys. you almost -- there's a little bit of pathos to cohen's position. >> yes. >> i think that we're about to see him become the next coffee boy in the trump administration. but the problem will be those 1.3 million documents now if the hands of sdny prosecutors. >> and also, nick, as i follow this story and i know you follow it very closely, there's a bunch of factual questions i'd love
the answers to, which it seems the prosecutors have the answers to. did he go to prague or did he not? he said he didn't go. the dossier alleged he did. what's the deal with the peace deal he put into the hands or delivered into the white house or for michael flynn when he was still the national security adviser on behalf of a russian-aligned ukrainian politician? how much did they talk about the trump tower moscow through the campaign? all this stuff presumably there are answers to and it would be nice to know them. >> yeah. and i think that's why these documents are so important. there are also these documents could make michael cohen an extremely valuable witness. the question with each of these cooperating witnesses is to the jury are they telling the truth? ? you've got two of the witnesses who have clearly lied, michael flynn and manafort's deputy, they both have lied to the fbi. so the question isn't going to
be did they lie before but are they telling the truth to the jury now. >> right. >> so the way that they can do it with michael cohen is these million-plus documents. is there information in there, are there tapes, are this documents that corroborate what michael cohen can say against various people who may very well be indicted? and that's kind of the challenge that mueller's got right now with all of these witnesses trying to put together a case where he can argue to the jury you don't necessarily have to believe any one of these witnesses because you've got all of this other corroboration. >> that is a great point. nick akerman and joyce vance, thank you both for joining me. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> next, one of just three people that michael cohen claimed to have given legal advice to in the last year. that would be gop fund-raiser elliott broidy. is now ending hush money payments to a former "playboy" model. the bizarre, always bizarre details of that story in two minutes.
performer has just gotten even weirder. no, it's not the one you're thinking of. back in april the "wall street journal" reported that this guy, elliott broidy, who was at the time the deputy finance chair of the rnc, had agreed in late 2017 to pay $1.6 million, not a small amount of money, to a former "playboy" playmate named shera bechard. in a statement broidy said, "i acknowledge i had a consensual relationship way playboy playmate. at the end of our relationship this woman shared with me she was pregnant. she alone decided that she did not want to continue with the pregnancy and i offered her financial help during this difficult period." more on that stage stramt in a moment. broidy stepped down from his post at the rnc. the story did not go way in large part because there are some striking similarities between the story of elliott broidy the hush money agreement with the playboy playmate in his own words and donald trump's agreement with the former adult actress stormy daniels. especially because they were both negotiated by the trump lawyer michael cohen who get this even used the exact same
template in both agreements. also, both women happen to have been represented by the same lawyer, akeith davidson, which is also extremely weird. similarities prompted investigation of what's going on here. now there's a new twist. the "wall street journal" reported yesterday that broidy has decided to stop the hush money payments after only two of a promised eight installments of $200,000 each. joining me now to explain what is going on with broidy is the co-author of that story, "wall street journal" investigative reporter michael rothfeld. all right, michael, why is elliott broidy stopping his payments to shera bechard? >> well, basically, because the agreement has become public and he believes that someone on her side breached the agreement. he's said that keith davidson, who represented her in the deal you just alluded to told michael avenatti, the lawyer -- current lawyer for stormy daniels about this deal. avenatti tweeted an allusion to the agreement the night before
we reported in april. and broidy now says he has information that davidson breached it, which davidson denies, but he's saying since someone breached ti don't have to pay anymore. he's paid $400,000 so far out of the 1.6 million, but he did not make the payment that was due yesterday. >> so presumably this will now go to court, right? >> it remains to be seen. it's possible that they could try to work something out. she has new attorneys and so she could theoretically sue broidy. she could try to sue keith davidson if she believes he breached it. so you know, it should be interesting because if she does sue him we will presumably learn more about what happened, how this all went down and, you know, i guess if we want to about their relationship. >> so i should say that davidson, i spokesman for davidson said the lawyer hasn't breached any agreement, any accusation to the contrary is false and defamatory, said his spokesperson. let me ask you this. how confident are you that elliott broidy had a sexual relationship with the woman in question, shera bechard?
>> well, i'm very confident that they have an agreement. if you're asking me if donald trump hay sexual relationship with shera bechard, i'm quite confident that did not happen. and i believe that the agreement was between broidy and her and that they were the ones who had the alleged relationship. or not having been there, i obviously can't say what happened in their bed. but you know, there's absolutely no facts to suggest otherwise. we've reported it from all sides. there's no one, not one bit of information that we've found that would suggest that anyone other than elliott broidy was involved in this relationship. >> do you have a good theory for michael cohen's involvement in this? i guess were they just -- knew each other from both being deputy finance chairs of the rnc and he's like hey, i i have a playboy playmate situation i need your help with? >> davidson and cohen had worked together on the stormy daniels
agreement. they also dealt with each other on the karen mcdougal agreement. she was the playmate who had a $150,000 hush payment from the parent of the "national enquirer" that was both in 2016. so when bechard came to davidson, he called cohen because he knew cohen might know broidy and cohen was like yeah, i know him. and as we reported, cohen called up broidy and said hey, it's your lucky day, you have a big problem, there's a former playmate who says got her pregnant and i can help you fix it. that's how it went down. cohen was paid $250,000. and you were asking an earlier guest about the $62,500 payment. that was a quarter of cohen's fee that went to him. the $200,000 payment were eight installments that were paid to bechard. >> so he's now cutting off smera bechard has gotten a new lawyer. keith davidson has been sued by one of his former clients in stormy daniels for his representation.
presumably -- maybe shera bechard will just walk away from $1.2 million but that seems unlikely. it seems likely we're going to see this and also ending up in court very soon. >> unless they say they negotiated some kind of a settlement and if they doesn't think she has a good chase maybe she and broidy could settle for half of it, $600,000. just pure speculation. but it's quite likely this will end up in court. >> i will say you mentioned stormy daniels and karen mcdougal, two other people who had ndas negotiated, in part at least by michael cohen. shera bechard is someone a lot of people want to talk to on the record. she is locked under an nda. but presumably if broidy's walking away from that she would be able to tell her story. >> yeah, that's true. i don't know what legal advice her lawyers will give her bup she certainly may have a lot more information she could talk about relating to elliott broidy and their relationship and could also settle some of the speculation that you might be talking about, that you were talking about earlier. >> i just want to know the truth. that's all. michael rothfeld, thanks for being with me tonight. >> thanks for having me.
from the very beginning ... it was always our singular focus, a distinct determination. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. specialists focused on treating cancer. using advanced technologies. and more precise treatments than before. working as hard as we can- doing all that we can- for everyone who walks through our doors. this is cancer treatment centers of america. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. treating cancer isn't one thing we do. it's the only thing we do. expert medicine works here.
a candidate for this important position who would overturn roe v. wade would not be acceptable to me because that would indicate an activist agenda that i don't want to see a judge have. >> republican senator susan collins, possibly a key swing vote in the upcoming supreme court justice battle, gave two different answers yesterday when
asked about supporting president trump's nominee. one answer as you just heard drew a fairly clear line or appeared to on roe v. wade. the other didn't. >> don't you think just as an academic matter neil gorsuch, nor whom you voted, don't you think he's probably going to vote to overturn roe versus wade if given a chance? >> i actually don't. i had a very long discussion with justice gorsuch in my office, and he pointed out to me that he is the co-author of a whole book on precedent. >> since collins and her republican colleague senator lisa murkowski are both supporters of abortion rights, at least they say they are, pro choice advocates say they're hoping the two senators will prevent a judicial attack on the 1973 decision that legalized
abortion nationwide, found to be a constitutionally protected right. but right now both women aren't saying much to put abortion rides advocates at ease. "ms. murkowski has said she will consider a nominee's views on the abortion rights views but that it alone would not be a litmus test for her choice." joining me now is journalist erin carmone, co-author of the notorious rbg. she's got a piece in the "washington post" sayinger, conservatives will try overturn roe versus wade. and leon wolfe, managing editor 69 blaze. leon, let me start with you. i've been following with interest your reaction to this court opening. the republican party is an anti-abortion party almost entirely, that's a sort of consensus view. the legal stars of the conservative movement in the republican party are opposed to abortion. many think that roe was terribly decided and sloppy. and then awful a sudden everyone gets bizarrely quiet when the opportunity is up for a supreme court justice who would presumably provided fifth vote to overturn roe. and i don't quite get it. is it just politics? is it fear of the politics of it? >> well, look, chris, i'm in my
early 40s, and i remember the robert bork confirmation hearings. anybody who's my age or older which includes everybody in the united states senate right now is not going to go through that right now. they're just not. i think the precedent was set that you know, a judge's ideology can be enough to torpedo them. so i think that's the lesson that the gop took away for probably two or three generations when it comes to this fight. and you know, it is kind of a sad and unfortunate effect of the way that roe versus wade i think poisons our national politics. i know a lot of people are confused as to how anybody could vote for donald trump. i didn't vote for him but i understand why people did. it's because te feel democratically shut oust having a voice in the abortion issue until it goes way in terms of the scotus. that's where we are. >> what do you think of that? >> well, where do i start? don't ask don't tell is alive and well. there is an enormous amount of gaslighting happening right now where the reason donald trump became president was based in part on his explicit promises,
and these were unprecedented promises, to appoint justices that would in his words automatically overturn roe v. wade. the kind of innocence we're seeing this week where people are claiming ha it's scare-mongering to fear that i justice appointed by trump to replace kennedy would in any way have anything to do with roe v. wade, this is a political transaction that took place in the open. the head of the season they said don't vote for trump we can't rely on him when it comes to voe v. wade only to then co-head his pro-life council on the basis he promised her to apoint quote pro life judges. the idea these activists who faithfully turned out for trump who so far he has delivered on his promises for are not going to get what they want, now, what we're going to see is more of a kind of stealth language. we're not going to see people who have been as explicit as bork or perhaps as explicit as ruth bader ginsburg when this comes to their ideas about
reproductive freedom but there is absolutely no question that gorsuch, roberts, and anyone who is appointed to replace kennedy if trump appoints someone and they're confirmed for this senate, they are gunning to roe. it's only a question of how explicit will they be, how long will they take to get there, what legal theory they'll use but this is something the right has been working on for 45 years and has finally gotten herr chance. >> i will note leon's last point about feeling democratically shut out and that's roe poisoning the system that way and people mobilizing is not at all inconsistent with what you're saying, irin is exactly the point. the anti-abortion movement in this country is incredibly strong tore precisely the reason they want to see abortion banned. that is why -- >> ruth bader ginsburg agrees with leon. he had would have preferred it was left to the states. but we also have 45 years of precedent and people who have organized their lives around legal abortion and we also have conservatives on the supreme court who have voted to uphold federal bans.
so the notion that this is about states' rights is pretty disingenuous when you have republicans introducing a nationwide 20-week ban just this year. >> nancy, you're a former federal jurnlgs you're a district court judge, and i wonder how you think about this. there seems like this crazy ball hiding with every sort of judicial confirmation battle where extremely smart sophisticated people who've spent lots of time thinking about issue pretend that none of it's ever occurred to them and they're all blank slates and it drives me insane. >> well, i think it's a complicated -- it's a more complicated situation. first of all, it didn't begin with bork. louis brandeis was seriously attacked way back when. bork was almost recent memory of that. but there have been political battles for a long time. maybe one way to look at it, i was confirmed by the senate as well. one way to look at it is there's a range of reasonable positions that a judge can take and there's no question that when a president is elected he will pick his range.
and then there are as we argued about bork people outside the range, people whose positions are not within the main vaem, people who are sort of willy nilly going to overturn precedent. and i think within the range you're right, it's hide the ball. it's a kabuki ritual. you don't want to talk about it. but the people outside the range, those are the ones we have to be talking about. what makes this -- what makes trump different is that i have never heard of a president who had a slate. it's like treating the bench, treating the judiciary like you would who's going to be my vice president. i have a slate of candidates. that's never been done before. >> yeah, both the sort of explicit promise and the slate of candidates, which to leon i think leon helped him with conservatives. these are the five that sayering a on the short list now. thomas hardman, raymond keth lej, amy coney barrett and bret cavanaugh who people have been talking about forever. you have david suter, sandra day
o'connor, anthony kennedy, all three appointed by republicans, all three voting to uphold the core holding roe. if that happened, if donald trump were to appoint a justice who would uphold the holding of roe work conservatives feel angry and betrayed? >> i think you only have to look back to 1992. i think that was one of the key elements that led to george h.w. bush being defeated, that and the tax hike. i think those are the to things that as a republican president you cannot do, which is number one raise taxes and number two appoint a liberal justice to the supreme court. in previous years yeah but it's become such a people on both sides of this great ditch throwing lava at each other that any more i don't think that that's going to happen. p and i would say it's not just republicans who are concerned -- >> just to -- hold on a second. when you say not going to happen, what do you mean won't happen? >> well, i mean, i just think if he does it i do think that he runs the risk of maybe somebody like john kasich getting traction as a third-party
candidate, kind of what napped 1992, some independent coming up and taking 10% and throwing it to the democrats. i don't think he'll lose in the republican primary but i do think it will hurt his chances. >> nancy, what did you want to say? and i want to back off for a moment. we are talking about a right that the court has been picking at and undermining and limiting for the longest time. so what's really in the winds here is are we going to make abortion criminal again? that's what roe v. wade now stands for. because to some degree it is the least protected right in the lexicon at this point. so i also suggest that we're not -- it's really more than roe v. wade although that's what this discussion is about. the next supreme court is going to have to deal with issues of presidential power. if the mueller investigation winds up challenging the president, there's going to be issues of presidential power in addition to affirmative action, et cetera. so it is a complicated -- it's a much more complicated discussion. >> yeah. irin cameraon, nancy gertner, and leon wolfe, thank you very
much for joining us. appreciate. >> thanks, chris. >> coming up, the resistance shows no signs of slowing down as the as the trump administration replaces family separation with indefinite detention. new reporting ahead. plus, "all in" book club in tonight's thing 1, thing 2. next. ds are my time. i need an insulin that fits my schedule. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ (announcer) tresiba® is used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. don't use tresiba® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. don't share needles or insulin pens. don't reuse needles. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause dizziness, sweating, confusion, and headache. check your blood sugar. low blood sugar can be serious and may be life-threatening. injection site reactions may occur. tell your prescriber about all medicines you take and all your medical conditions. taking tzds with insulins, like tresiba®, may cause serious side effects like heart failure. your insulin dose shouldn't be changed without asking your prescriber. get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing, fast heartbeat, extreme drowsiness, swelling of your face, tongue or throat, dizziness, or confusion.
ask your health care provider if you're tresiba® ready. covered by most insurance and medicare plans. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ heif you're between trage 50 and 85,iz for you. it's important for you to know the truth, so please listen closely. i'm alex trebek, and all of the answers are false. so what is true? you can get coverage, regardless of your health, with the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program.
whether you're in the best of health or you have high blood pressure or other health problems, you can get coverage, with no health questions and no medical exam. you can't be turned down for any medical reason. you don't pay a higher rate because of your age. and coverage options start at just $9.95 a month, less than 35 cents a day, and will never increase. permanent coverage with a permanent rate lock. call to get your free information. you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. use this valuable guide to record your important information and your final wishes. it's yours free, just for calling. so call now.
thing 1 tonight, donald trump fancies himself a great salesman. he slapped his name on everything from food and beverages like trump steaks, trump wine, trump vodka and trump water, to a whole slew of now defunct goods including trump cologne, trump mattresses and the trump clothing line. one of his few successes was of course in books, with his best-seller "the art of the deal." but true sales power is demonstrated by the plugging of someone else's book, which trump did over the weekend. "a friend of mine, a man who has truly seen politics and life as few others will ever will, sean
spicer, has written a great new book, the briefing, politics, the press and the president. it is a story told with both heart and knowledge. really good. go get it." and if you look at this sales chart, you can see the bump that happened when the president plugged that book. but if you look a little closer at that chart, you'll see something else. and that's thing 2 in 60 seconds.
president trump might not be much for book reading but he's happy to plug books by people who have remained loyal and haven't spilled anything juicy about their six-month stint at the white house. so new author sean spicer guite plug by trump on twitter for his new book coming up later this month. if you take a look at data from novel rank a site that smaits amazon book sales you'll see a big jump on saturday the day truch tweeted about the book. more than a 130% increase in fact. except the grand total was, drum roll, please, 14 copies sold. now, that is up from 6. the day before. now, to be fair, that does not include e-book sales and spicer did rack up nine of those on saturday and then another eight on sunday. it is not immediately known whether the president was one of those preorders.
a historic victory in mexico. leftist candidate andres manuel lopez obrador winning that country's presidential election on sunday. amlo, as lopez obrador is known, has tried for the mexican presidency twice before, in 2006 and 2012. he fell short both times but this week a specific mix of factors led him to a resounding
victory. the rising violence that saw mexico's most violent year on record to endemmic poverty, gaping inequality gap, to entrenched corruption. all of which lopez obrador promised to combat. unsurprisingly he is also a harsh critic of president trump. the book is called oye trump. traps-related into listen trump. >> i just spoke with the president-elect of mexico. we had a great conversation about a half-hour long. we talked about border security, nafta, a separate deal. just mexico, the united states. we had a lot of good conversations. i think the relationship would be a very good one. i think he's going to try to do very hard. i think he'll try to help us with the border. >> it is unclear where the president gets optimism from considering that lopez obrador has blasted the border wall.
the trump administration is now planning to detain immigrant families indefinitely for days, weeks, even months, in direct violation of a 2015 court order. the department of justice arguing in a new filing friday night they can legally keep kids together with their parents behind bars, or maybe in tent camps on military bases, as long as they want because of a new court order banning family separation and ordering the families to be reunited. that court filing came just one day before hundreds of events across the country protesting family separation and the administration's immigration policies. big cities like los angeles, el paso, texas, to cities and towns all across the country. i bring this two report here's
have been doing vital work on immigration policies. dara, let me start with you. this is something you've been writing about a lot. you said from the beginning the end game here was always indefinite family detention and i thought it was interesting. they bur i had this on a friday night. they said, look, you want us to unify families. wave court order. so we'll unify them and hold them as long as we want and you'll to have deal with it. >> right. instead of saying the court order that came out last week and the 2015 court order that co-exists in peace, the administration says that because each of those court rulings only banned one thing, the more recent court ruling essentially trumps. they do get to keep families in
detention as long as they're detaining them together. >> and this is the choice from the beginning. the entire argument has been, we either have to separate families and prosecute everyone or hold them in indefinite detention. no one is making them hold people. in fact they're explicitly prohibited from doing so by the flores court consent decree, right? >> right. there are multiple alternatives to detention that the administration had done before this or using in small degrees while they try detain as many as possible. the only reason they'll stop people there coming to the u.s. or absconding without showing up for their court dates is to keep them in detention as long as possible and deport them as quickly as possible. >> we have more on how hard it has been for the administration to unite them. as the deadline looms, trump frls struggling to reunite migrant families.
they're now working under a clock. do we have a sense of what the numbers are? they seem lying they've gone dark in terms of reporting what the status of things are. >> they went dark. the numbers we were using a lot when the separation policy was really gearing up in full swing was about 2,300. there are 2,300 children who were made unaccompanied minors because of this administration and about 11,200 in total in hhs custody. some of those have been separated before and some of those crossed without parents altogether. but we know that about 300 to 500 were easily reunited. that doesn't mean they reached in and they were able to do some sort of systematic reuniting. those were children we believe who had just recently crossed the border. they were still in the custody of customs and border protection. it is much easier before you send them out to 17 states across the country. they're close by to the federal detention centers to quickly put
them together. now they are far flung and there doesn't seem to be a systematic way to do this. and something that derrek touched on that i want to go back to, about the forced choice that is really not a forced choice, that the obama administration was in the same position in 2015. they didn't need a court order to tell them not to separate parents and children. they thought that was a humanitarian nonstarter. but they were also operating punld flores agreement that was reinstated in 2015 to say the applied to children with their parents and they decided to go on ankle monitors. so the fact that is not in the discussion now really has a lot of people scratching their heads. how can they come forward and make a legal argument they have no other choice when the obama administration was in the same place and found another solution. >> it seems there is a real practical, and legal humanitarian issue, are they going to do this? are they going to come my with the federal court order?
and reunite these families and these parents and kids? that is an open question at the moment. >> see, the administration might not have been in this position had they not maintained that they knew where all the parents and children were and could reunite them whenever they wanted and were choosing only to do so when parents were going to be deported. it is not clear that was actually true. if that were the case, why aren't they doing it now? so simultaneously they're coming up against this deadline for how long they can keep families in detention. and this deadline for how long before they have to reunite everyone. >> they need to be publicly reporting this. the amount of outright deception from the beginning has been completely, completely unacceptable. thank you very much. before we go, a reminder. there's a new else of our podcast. why is this happening? out tomorrow. a humanizing look at what happens when fracking comes to
your town. that's "all in" for this evening. tonight, former trump attorney michael cohen says his family and his country come first, with someone close to cohen telling "vanity fair" tonight this was about getting his voice heard before it's too late. plus, the reality show president teases he had a very, very interesting morning. the latest reporting tonight on his supreme court pick, one week ahead of the announcement. and the secretary of state plans another trip to north korea, but it seems kim jong-un isn't living up to his bargain with trump. "the 11th hour" on a monday night begins now. >> good evening once again from our nbc news headquarters here in new york. i'm ali velshi in for brian williams. day 529 of the trump