tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC March 14, 2019 12:00am-1:00am PDT
defiance of u.s. requests is the latest sign of the world's growing distrust of the united states on aviation safety issues. they cite as evidence the u.s. regulators who were insisting through today that these jets didn't need to be grounded, even as possible evidence to the contrary was starting to come in. well, that is our broadcast on this wednesday night. we thank you so much for being here with us. good night from nbc news headquarters here in new york. tonight on "all in." >> i have not even give fn a thought as of this moment. it's not something right now on my mind. i do feel bad for paul manafort. >> the campaign manager gets another three and a half years in prison and an indictment in new york that would thwart any potential pardon. >> pardoning manafort would be seen as a political disaster for the president. >> tonight new evidence of
pardon dangling bewith hind the scenes. >> two courts have ruled no evidence of any collusion with russians. >> then new suggestion that trump might have tried to interfere in a case that directly implicates hum. >> mr. whitaker did not deny that he called to discuss the michael cohen case and personnel decisions in the southern district. >> plus the efforts to rain in the president on yemen and the border and a look at some of the less covered hearings on capitol hill when "all in" starts right now. >> good evening from new york. the president's campaign manager who pasds polling data to a manhattan cigar bar at the height of the presidential race just got another thirty-two and a half years added to his sentence.
and another 16 state charges slapped on top of that. paul manafort was back uncourt in washington d.c. to be instanced for the second time in a week, this time for two counts conspiracy in which he pleaded guilty to fraud. judge amy jackson instanced manafort to another three and a half years in prison, brunging his total sentence to seven and a half years. unlike his virginia judge calling his otherwise blameless life, she rebuked judge manafort for his lies and parent lack of are morse, sawing i'm sorry i got caught is not an inspiring plea for leniency. she also called out manafort's legal team for are peatedly hammering on the same or relevant message. quote the refrain is -- it's simply a nonsiccialer and it's
not accurate because the investigation is still ongoing. in fact the proceedings in judge jackson's court have brought frds of collusion including the meeting in the height of the campaign where manafort carved time out to give polling data. why? to constantine kilimni kurks. even after the judge's rebuke, map fort's lawyer went outside to make a statement for an audience of one. >> judge jackson conceded that there was absolutely no evidence of any russian collusion in this case. so that mocks two courts, two courts have ruled no evidence of any collusion with any russians. part number two, very sad dash >> the hecklers have it rugt. he is lying right there in front
of the camera. she explicitly said that's not what eshe was saying before downing went out to tell that lie on camera. but if manafort's lawyer thought that might help get his client a pardon, it was we've already too late because right after the judge handed down her sentence in the d.c. federal court, before the lawyers got to exit the court house to talk to the audience of one, the manhattan district attorney announced thaw had indicted manafort related to an alleged mortgage fraud scheme. manafort is found guilty, he -- >> i have not even giveten a thought as of this moment. it's not something that's right now on my mind. i do feel badly for paul manafort. >> filed state charges against him which would seem to be a way to get around the pardon.
>> i haven't heard that. i'll take a look at it. sglrsz i'm joined by msnbc news investigative reporter, john winter and reporter unnew york who i should note brock the story of manafort's puzzling real statuses that have bun at the center of some of these charges. so we got the sentencing. what was the timing? the sentencing happens and then vance makes his move. >> it is 29 minutes between we got the note from one of our reporters sawing the judge announced the sentence for paul manafort and 29 minutes later we are sooved a notice that indictment had been unsealed in manhattan district court. less than hoff 1/2 hour afterwards it became public there was an indictment on paul manafort.
>> the charges here -- there was a note that the manhattan district attorney charges investigation starts right after you publish a piece about what? >> so i and my co reporter had been interested in the real state purchases. we realize he owned apartment in trump tower. we found this unit in lower manhattan and brooklyn. he had an unusual pattern of boouing through two shell companies and transferring it to his name and taking out large loans bigger than amount of the property. we talked to experts who said yeah, could be money laundering and ran with that story and low and behold it has taken us to this daw. >> one of the stories is he was doing everything out in the open for a long time. you didn't have a tip from anyone? >> no.
>> this was just in the public record of what his purchases were. >> you have to know how to search city data bases but it's not rocket science. what was puzzling was when it didn't make sense and wewe heard rich people they just do things differently from the rest of us. maybe it's legal. that wasn't really sats fewing. it turns out he had fallen on hard times and was trueing to extract value from the property that he brought with ill gotten gains from ukrain. >> not only was he trueing to do it but at the same time he was renting out an address in sojo. and realized somebody was going to call him on it and it was a residence. so he told his son in law you need to stay there and by the way somebody's going to come by. make sure to tell them that you live there. and that's what he's charged with today.
a lot of what is in this, the facts within today's indictment, the state indumt unmanhattan, who'sallred a admitted guilt to in his federal cases brought by the special counsel's office. and he's convicted of the over arching ofenls, 18 to 25 years in jail in manhattan. if the president twur right now tweet and put out a note sawing paul manafort is pardoned. he should gt out of jail this moment, as we're told by legal experts say at that point an arrest warrant would be issued and he would be taken into custody and proceed forward with a state trial just like anybody else would be. >> he goes to eastern district where he's convicted on a bunch of counts, not all of them. he cops to the stuff that -- in the first trial. so cops to all of it.
and what you're saying is all of that is admissible? >> tolt a admissible frrpgs there is no way dash i mean this is a dream for a prosecutor. you've said this guy has already admitted to the entire fact pattern before i bring him to court. all of this is -- if you knew new york sit a real state data bases, we took it a step further and lookedality his longuleened properties. this was a banker, a potential quid pro quo there. all of this was just out in the open. and there were no good answers that we received as far as whew this was the way it was and they pleaded gulty to all of it. >> and this is a difference from the otherwise blameless life. judge jackson basically saying you've sort of been a scam artist. >> clearly it's all laid out right here. it's a good read.
it's clear that this guy worked for an autocrat in eastern europe. found a way to bring money in through shell companies. and by the him to autocrat was deposed un2014 and he didn't have a job, he didn't have any money left or way to access that money. and what's faszinating is this is unfolding during 2016. immediately before and after the campaign. some of it during the campaign. man leading the campaign is a desperate man. >> who as soon as he gets this job he sends an email to kilimnik how do we use to get whole? >> i mean this is a guy who had debt issues to a russianole gark that you talked about. he started one of his llcs.
within days after he left the trump campaign. there was already an llc being formed. it was real ea an amazing fact pattern. when you look at the manhattan district attorney, it was sitting there for the taking. thaw took the opportunity for it and appears there's going to boo a trial coming up. >> thank you both. >> thank you. >> for more on where things stand for manafort today, the definitive profile of manafort last year and jill wine banks, former watergate prosecutor. there was a lot of surprise and consternation about the radical downward departure in the sentencing guidelines. this seems more squarely in the center of the bull's eye. your reaction? >> i think dud make as lot more sentence. she acted properly in not holding the defendant accountable for what the judge did in the other case.
she had a sentence for what he's charged with in her court. and she did that in the range of what is normal for that kind of a crime. and she made it partly consecutive and partly concurrent. she actually sentenced thum 73 months but 30 of it was to be concurrent with his other incidence. so it seemed like a fair deal. but rich people do things differently and this certainly does show erich people get sentenced differently it was a really bad daw for rich people. the parents of all those kids, the rich people, that was bad. >> it's been a krauz ea news cycle on that front. white collar krum unamerica. so we're at this strange situation. this guy now has a bizarre legal strategy throughout. he seems to have been banking on
a pardon as a last stitch effort. the president never uctas it off the table and boom, he has charges unmanhattan. as someone who studied, what do you think is going through his mind right now? one is he's always thought of his himself as a great strategist. and the waw who's interacting with the president himself. and i think he looks at the sit waugz and says rationally my best hope of getting off this thing is probably to play for a parteden. and i think it's also important to remember it's mud 8s. he's a desperate man. his whole life has been engaged in this one long downward spiral beginning with the collapse of ukrainian president in twnt 14 and the collapse of his main
client. his finances were a paunzy scheme. i think youicationally see him acting like a desperate man. there's one other interesting biographical fact, which is his father was arrested for perjury un1981 and he was able to get off by sort of wading out the system. in manafort's mind he has one example he's aubl to draw on o, which is his father was involved unall sorts of daunly things. and he was just able to boot the rap >> that is the first time -- is that in your profile? >> yes. >> so i read that and knew it but had forgotten it. that is a remarkable north star as you're trueing to make sense of what would otherwise be a nonsensical flailing. when you think about the president and the issue of pardons which lurks over all of this.
when muccal cohen says he talks in code and the president sawing hasn't crossed my mind but i feel sorry for the guy. >> the code started with his first pardon in office, sheriff joe arpaio in contempt of court. don't worry, i'll take care of you. i'll take care of you. that was a clear message and so was today a clear message. he's dangling pardons and he doesn't have the power to give pardons to protect himself. we can saw he has unlimeds pardon power but not if there's corrupt intent. and i'd say hootz rr demonstrated corrupt initant. >> is this theened of a story for paul manafort in this? is there another chapter given there's the manhattan d.a. and whatever might come next? >> it might be the end oof the story for paul manafort who's going to be residing in prison for a spell now.
if we go back and look at those unsealed hearing transcripts, it's clear the robert mueller prosecutor was zero oing in on that meeting you mngzed on august 2nd in the cigar club and the harnding over of poll data, the discussion of the ukrain peace plan and tds this goes straight to the heart of what year investigating. i think it's odd there's nothing in his smagz, nothing in amy berman jackson's incidence sentencing that delved into the deeper narrative. and she actually probably knows the mueller investigation probably better than anybody outside of mueller's team because she's read all these redacted material. she probably knows more about this than anyone. >> that's a great point. i keep wanting it to be the case that we just get that information.
i just want to know the facts. maybe thaw were running a conjob on deripaska and printing things off the gallop website and being like, olog, he says we got a chance. you want to know what was the nexess of what was happening? >> absolutely. that's why i've been calling for public hearings. they need to know one way or another what's going on. for his lawyer today have stood outside the court hews and say no collusion. which it had nothing to do with. but knowing the facts we know, how could his lawyer do that? it's so unethical. i can't believe it. >> not only does he come out and say no collusion -- so you can saw that. you can say fine. he says the judge ruled there was no collusion and what made
it mara dagss is the judge said don't you dare say i'm ruling there is no collusion. that's not what i'm ruling. there is not sufficient evidence. >> if he's going for the audience of one and knowing how trump consumed information, it looks luke he's going through the processing fulters to get himself that one talking point despite everything else unreality. >> judge jackson also has roger stone tomorrow. judgeals was a strange character throughout the entirety of the virginia case. not just in the sentencing. jackson's been pret ey frustrated with roger stone, though she's given him a second chance. if your arroger stone, having seen this today, what's going through your head? >> roger stone is not thinking like you or i would think so it's hard to predict what he would do.
she's been balanced unhow she's handled everything about this case. and you're right about judge ellis. he attacked the prosecutors. he attacked their witness withes. he said to gates how couldia say that he knows everything. if he knew everything, he would know how much money you stole from him. talk about trying to influence the jury. >> truly bizarre. next. did the president attempt to interfereen the michael cohen investigation? on what former acting attorn aygeneral said behind closed doors. so with xfinity mobile
i can customize each line for each family member? yup. and since it comes with your internet, you can switch wireless carriers, and save hundreds of dollars a year. are you pullin' my leg? nope. you sure you're not pullin' my leg? i think it's your dog. oh it's him. good call. get the data options you need, and still save hundreds of dollars. do you guys sell other dogs? now that's simple, easy, awesome. customize each line by paying for data by the gig or get unlimited. and now get $250 back when you buy a new samsung galaxy. click, call, or visit a store today. 16 additional felony charges. conversations he had regarding the sulgtern district of new york.
>> i think there are three main take aways that we take away from today. one with, unlike in the hearing room, mr. whitaker -- to discuss the michael cohen case and personnel decisions in the southern district. two, while he was acting attorney general, mr. whitaker was directly involved in conversations about whether to fire one or more u.s. attorneys. three, while he was attorney general, acting attorneygeneral, mr. whitaker was involved unconversations about the scope of the southern district of new york berman's recusal and whether the southern district went too far in pursuing the campaign finance case in which the president was listed as individual number one.
>> chuck rosenberg, a former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of virginia and southern district of texas. and served under jaums comey. there was a closed meeting. one of the republicans has said that nadler is muscharacterizing what happened there. i want tasay there are other people in the room who say differently. that being what the chair sinks up to public reporting. >> let's assume nadler had it right or petty close to right. the notion that the president could get the acting attorney general to get the u.s. attorney in the southern district of new york to unrecuse himself strikes me a little bit craze a. i understand what the prefix kuwait un"means. when you recuse yourself, it's
because you have a conflict or the appearance of a confluct. you don't just unrecuse. i can madge an benign version of that conversation and a nefarious version of the conversation and that second thing, the nefarious version would be deeply troubling. >> we've had reporting there have been conversations. and matthew whitaker apoored to sort of deny that under oath. i want to play hitds testimony because there does seem to be tngz between what he said under oath and what public reporting has indicated and what he reportedly said today. >> at no time has the white house asked for, nor have i provided any promises or commitments concerning the special counsel'sings have or any other investigation. since becoming acting attorneygeneral i have run the department of justice with fedealt to the law and the constitution. >> did you communicate to the president, any soonier white
house advisors related to the trump? >> i was very explicit in my opening staumt as to that not only about my communications regarding the special counsel's office and i said other investigations in the southern district of new york would be included in other investigations. >> chuck, you're a lawyer and a very good one obviously. he says the white house hasn't provided any promises or commitments, which is pretty a specific language. >> and those are exact lathe words i have keyed in on, chris. and he arefers congress back to his opening statements that seems to hinge on promises or commitments. it seems like there were conversations between the president and whitaker, not just about recusal but about the scope of the investigation and whether it had gone too far.
what we would need at some point is a public hearing ear public deposition of matt whitaker to know precisely what he was ask to do and what he did. i don't doubt mr. nadler. it's hard to hear it second hand and understand the conversations that took place between the president and his acting attorneygeneral. >> let me try to offer a version of this and see what you think of it. leltsz rr saw the president did call over and said what's going on in the southern district of michael cohen case? it may be far field of what they should do. are you sure the bosses are on top of things? how proper to improper would a conversation from the president about an investigation into -- that he has been nomed in be? >> so that's sort of the benign version. i real a luke this berman guy and i trust him and i'm wondering why he arecused. to the extent you'd help me understand that, i'd appreciate it.
to the nefaurious, which is i need berman unplace to protect me and cull this cases. if you're talking bot the second one, very troubling. the men and women of the southern district of new york, the career prosecutors are not going to bend to the will of a corrupt president. that ain't going to happen. so even if that was the president's intent, he's not going to get what he wants. he's not going to gt the career folks in the southern district of new york to drop cases because he's said pretty please. >> as always illuminating. still to come michael cohen turns over emalls that sure do seem like trump world was dangling or intertoning or being dangled to a pardon to the president's former attorney. the back channel emails next.
in the ongoing saga of whether president trump ever dangled a pardon before michael cohen, prosecutors have requested emails that appear to show a back channel between michael cohen and team trump. cohen has given congress emails and in those emails arex changes between cohen and a lawyer acting as a conduit to team trump. it's costello and he emalled him after speaking to trump lawyer rudy giuliani. he's tlr go between. one emaileneded with a message quote sleep well with tonight. you have friends unhigh places. and costello reportedly wrote rudy was thrilled and said this could not be a better sit waugz for the president or you. thank you for opening the back channel of communication. he claimed a different contact saying cohen raised the possible pardon himself.
according to the "times" federal prosecutors protect the emails and according to the copy of the request that sited possible violations of criminal law. i'm joined by contributing columnist for the "washington post" and staff writer of "the atlantic." and op-ed columnist for the "new york times." so we learn sthung from this. i thought was this person representing himself as a go between just a scammer? was he actually the go between? that's part of the story was correct. there was this guy who was an intermediary between cohen and giuliani. >> it shows thaw were trueing to keep these individual threads at arm's length. that's how trump has always operated. but i think it's really
important not to lose sight of the main fact which is right after michael cohen's office and home was rodded by the fbi, they were having kanszs about a potential pardon. the president whether directly or through whoever was sngsally telling michael cohen you're on our team, don't cooperate and you have friends in high places. i will fix this for you. that's significant because that could be criminal. that's part of what congress and federal prosecutors, apparently in the southern district of new york are investigating. whether the president can be eindicted is another question. but this raises questions about who else he has potentially dangled pardons for. paul manafort is a good kags study for this. why has his lawyers taken such great risks in his case throughout this entire process if they didn't think the president wasn't going to help him out?
it doesn't mock any unless you go to the obvious explanation, which is he was accepting a pardon. >> and thank you for this back channel, which sounds sketchy too, put in writing. >> i don't know what you're being so spugss about though. rudy jewel yawn ea explains it was a reference to the garth brooks song "friends in low places. >> cost eloo said that i thunk. he was trueing to keep a suicidal cohen with his chin up. >> it's circumstantial evidence of the crime and just to explain what's sododgy about this dangling idea. the president has this power to provide pardons but it's a political check where you think of the pardon by president clinton. people can protest. you say it on the qt.
no one ever know the idea is a quid pro quo. down the line. and it is a potential obstruction of justice if that's in his mind. doesn't matter howmany lawyers are in the link. the crime, fraud exception would kick in. this would be part of a conspiracy to obstruct and costello and giuliani are going to have to answer undepositions about the exact nature of the communication. >> this is also from the "times." last april mr. costello said in an interview that he, ecohen asked if there was a pardon on the table. who's making the offer first, even though they're clearly sniffb each other out? >> i think there's been a lot of a attention to this question. even if michael cohen made the first move responding by dangling it out, it's still not okay.
the bar with these people keeps getting lower and lower. maybe rudy giuliani will be the skd one of donald trump's personal lawyers to be indicted. because we have a lot of dus cushion about whether the president can be indicted there's no question rudy giuliani can be indicted. >> in this whole kaungz about pardons for the president, even the perspective inducement is so much more powerful than the retroactive granting thereof. like, sorry, buddy. donald trump screwed over so men a other counter part as but the idea in the future you might get it is an important thing to keep in the mund of everything. >> because he doesn't want them flipping. it's bribery 1 with 01. it's very obvious what the intention was and are mains with these people by keeping the pardon on the table.
that has been refrauned throughout this entire ordeal is we're not discussing this now but year not taking it off the table. that's nothing short of a wink and a nod to all these peepm that signal liabilities to the president. behave and i can hp you out in the future. going into twnt 20 the president might not want this huge back lash that comes with pardoning manafort that was convicted for very serious tax and financial crimes that didn't have anything drktly to do with the investigation and hootz rr going to go to jail with a lot of secrets about the russia probe. mueller will probably reveal a lot of those secrets in the final report or so we're hoping. but i don't do see president trump getting an immediate been if the. he's thinking of how they can help him and thebust thing he can give them is lessening their jail sentence.
>> it's so striking the way they operate like wannabe mobsters. friends in high places. sleep tight. and how stupid do they think we are that oh, i was quoting garth brooks. rarltsz weird way to communicate and to operate, not the least of which for the president and his lawyer to operate. >> no kidding. people often draw the analogy to the mob and "goodfellas." but it's more like "mare head to mob." s to the are a bunch off nickel and diming kind of shooisers would boo the formal legal word. and it's at time as -- there's no dug nuty in presidential anymore it seems. >> i was thinking oof a mobster saying your honor, when my client said sleep with the fishes, he meant should be booked a hotel roomnix that to
aquarium. everyone understands. and ultimately when you're looking for a smoking gun, everyone has been saying everything in front of our faces. that's their perverse dulog. >> russia f you're listening, manafort's a good guy. >> lurltsout out in the open, which means if you can see it, you can't believe everyone's hair isn't on 2350ir about it. as trump always says so what? yeah, i wanted to build it. >> but here's a really quick point. you got to go to a costelloo. giuliani wouldn't do it direct. you want to go to someone who has something to lose and has pressure to tell the truth and won't do it. that's the first stop for
12 hours? 20 dogs? where's your belly rubs? after a day of chasing dogs you shouldn't have to chase down payments. (vo) send invoices and accept payments to get paid twice as fast. (danny) it's time to get yours! (vo) quickbooks. backing you. you don't think about how much you need it until you need it. he's not going to be okay. from emergencies, to just regular life, having the right plan for you can mean all the difference in the care you get and how much you pay. don't worry sweetheart, it's going to get better. (silence) that's why i love health markets, your insurance marketplace. they guarantee you won't find a lower price anywhere for the plans they offer. they search thousands of plans from over 200 leading companies, both on the exchange and off, to find the plan that saves you money. you may even qualify for free health insurance with no monthly premiums. you can enroll today. so call health markets now for free help.
hi, i'm doctor thomas stackhouse. too often i see patients paying more than they have to because they don't know what they're entitled to. new health plans are now available that can let you keep your doctor, get better coverage, and save money. don't go it alone, call health markets. one call to health markets and they do it all, evaluate your needs, offer objective solutions, and even handle the enrollment process for you. you can enroll today, but you must act now or you may risk paying thousands more than you have to. having helped enroll people in millions of policies with an a+ customer satisfaction rating, you can trust health markets. don't get stuck using the government exchange either. health markets can find you the right health plan and make sure you get all the subsidies you deserve, without all the hassle. they even have new alternative options most don't even know about that can save you thousands. they work to help you, and do it all for free. let health markets take the confusion away.
call now to take advantage of this free service. now is the time to update your coverage or enroll for the first time. call health markets now. call the number on your screen call this number now. thing one tonight. freshman democratic congresswoman who has been literally schooling witness withes from the house services committee. last week she read from a textbook she herself wrote while questioning the educator about predatory lenders.
she grilledic wufax which is facing a class action lawsuit for exposing the personal data in tens of millions of americans. >> my question for you is whether you would be willing to share today your social security, your birth date and your address at this public hearing. >> i would be a bit uncomfortable doing that, congresswoman? >> yeah, no kidding so if e posing personal data is bad. >> why are you lawyers arguing unfederal court that there is no injury and no harm created by your data breach? >> congresswoman, it's hard for me to comment on what our lawyers are doing. >> you do employ those lawyers and they do operate at your direction. >> just yesterday porter came face to face with the ceo of wells fargo who's repeatedly insisting he's working to are store customer's trust.
>> then whew, mr. sloan, if you don't mind my asking, mr. sloan, are your lawyers in federal court arguing that those exact statements that i read are quote paraidgmatc examples of nonactionable corporate puffery that no one can deny. >> yikes. but has she considered props? and that's thing two un60 skds. directly to petmeds.com.
because it's the easiest way to save 30% on all the medications we carry. so skip the search and go directly to petmeds.com now. democratic congressman wanted to make a comment about seismic air gun blasting, so he did what we all dream of doing in a congressional hearing. >> was that disruptive, mr. oliver?
>> sir, it was irritating but i didn't find it particularly disruptive? >> real a a, uritating but not disruptive? the trump administration allows them to blast seismic guns under water while looking for oil deposits and his job is literally to protect mammals, down played that. cunningham made clear how
absurd that stance was. >> was that disruptive, mr. oliver? >> sir, it was irritating but i didn't find it particularly disruptive. >> how much louder do you think seismic air gun blasting sounds than this horn you just heard? >> i honestly dont know. >> take a guess. what if i were to tell you it's 16,000 times louder than what you just heard here?
we're going to be issuing an emergency order of prohibition to ground all flights of the 737 max 8 and the 737 max 9 and planes associated with that line. >> after several days in which the u.s. was increasingly isolated in allowing boeing 737 max aircraft to fly, the trump administration today finally acceded to growing international consensus and ordered the planes grounded. this comes after two deadly crashes and as reported yesterday, complaints to the federal government from pilots who found the plane's nose suddenly tipping down dangerously after engaging the autopilot. so why was the u.s. the international laggard on this issue of air safety when it has for so long been an international leader? it's hard to say, but what we do
know is boeing gave the president's inaugural committee $1 million, and an inaugural committee now under investigation from the southern district of new york. the company's ceo has also travelled to the president's private for profit club to schmooze, a place that is basically a petri dish of improper influence. with eknow that the ceo spoke with the president on the phone yesterday. when it comes to decision-making process, both to keep the planes in the air and to ground them, life and death matters to be sure, it would be nice to have faith the decision was made on the merits. but part of what's so insidious and toxic about the ubiquitous corruption of this administration is that of course we can have no such faith. we do not know if donald trump's decisions are made because of improper influence or expert recommendation or some cockamamy idea implanted in his brain while kibitzing at the mar-a-lago omelette bar. members of congress generally welcomed the president's decision to ground the planes, though senator richard blumenthal tweeted this step is
right though unexpectedly overdue. our nation should be leading, not lagging in air safety. senator blumenthal from connecticut joins me now. you were quite outspoken about this. why was this a point of focus for you? >> it's a point of focus because it is part of the dysfunctional washington so impacted by special interests and influence, it's part of the trump m.o., modus operandi which reacts to potentially those kinds of special interests. all the facts that you've just described are highly suspect, and add to it the fact that this decision was apparently based on facts still undisclosed to the american people, because they say they have new evidence. well, the rest of the world grounded these airplanes based on evidence well-known before now. and among the most chilling of those facts, and rachel maddow
did such a great job last night of describing them are the pilots' reports. today i asked the nasa head, jim bridenstine to provide all of those pilot reports which are in the possession of nasa to me, and he agreed to do so, because the indications as far back as november of this problem are disconcerting, to say the least. >> there's a question about what this does to the american air system and the general sort of oversight of the trump administration on air safety. there's been a dramatic drop in enforcement fines for major u.s. airlines in the last two years, 88% drop which is pretty remarkable. are you dmft the faa with overseeing airline safety at this moment? >> i am entirely unconfident in the faa, which is why i've
called for hearings before congress, bringing the faa to testify, but also boeing executives and secretary chau, who has supervisory authority over the faa. at the end of the day, it was secretary chau recommending to president trump that they ground these airplanes. but everyone involved in designing, constructing, approving for flight and continuing in flight has really some accountability to provide. and we need to know who knew what when and why they failed to act. >> since i have you here, senator, there is two pieces of senate business i'd like to talk to you than are in motion. today something historic happened in the united states senate. the senate voted to pass a war powers resolution ordering the u.s. to end its involvement in the saudi war in yemen. the u.s. has been providing all kinds of support to that war, refueling for planes particularly as well as support
in training for saudi fighters. this was a big deal. what does it mean now? >> it means first of all that congress is taking back some of its war powers power, which is to the good. it means practically speaking that there should be an end to the equipping and training of saudi war crimes. very simply, the saudi bombing of civilians, many of them children, and the saudi interference with humanity aid is causing famine in that country and death and disease. and it means that the united states will no longer be complicit in those war crimes. now it still has to be approved by the house, but this is a profoundly important first step. >> the other big question before your body is the vote that's happening tomorrow. this is on the president's declaration national emergency, a one-page resolution ending said national emergency was
passed out of the house. it now comes to the senate. it looks like the yeas, the people who want to vote for the resolution have the votes from republicans. there has been tremendous pressure put on them by the white house. mike pence has been over there. what is your sense of where things stand right now? >> despite the really overwhelming squeeze exerted by the white house, very transparently so, the votes seem to be holding firm among that handful of republicans who are necessary to overturn this emergency declaration. remember, never before in our history, never has a president clearly usurped congress' powers. this measure should be bipartisan. the power to spend and appropriate funds is in the constitution, given only to congress. never before has the president spent money after congress has refused to give him the
authority to do so, not just neglected, but refused. so this kind of vote i think is a challenge to the institution, and my republican colleagues are deeply worried more than may vote the right way tomorrow about the precedent that is set here for the president seizing power from the congress. and eventually, i believe the courts will overturn it, regardless of what the congress does tomorrow. >> yeah, that seems likely there has been some talk about negotiating some kind of one-time mulligan where this emergency stands, but then they put up some vote, some show vote, which is essentially a show vote to change the emergency act going forward. you seem confident the republican votes are holding. we'll see tomorrow whether that bears out. i'm not sure whether i would place my bet. senator blumenthal, thank you so much for taking the time. >> thank you. all right. we have more details on a very exciting event that's coming up on "all in."
in just five day, he will be hosting msnbc's first town hall of the election season. we're going to be talking with 2020 hopeful kirsten gillibrand. we're going to meet in the all important state of michigan, where she'll make her case to be the democratic nominee for president. and here is the thing. you can be part of this special event. we're taping in auburn hills, michigan, on monday afternoon. there are full details on how to register for the town hall on our website, allin.msnbc.com. it's going to be a great time. i'd love to see you and meet you, so please, please, please come join us. that is "all in" for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. good evening, rachel. >> good evening, chris. thanks, my friend. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. man, this day! this day was only one day, even though it feels like it was ten, ten, ten days in one. but, you know, only one way to get through it is to just start getting through it. let's just jump in.
all right? here we go. this is how it started when the judge came back from recess. before the recess she had heard arguments from the prosecutors from the special counsel's office. she had had quite a lot of back and forth with the defense counsel. she had heard an apology from the defendant, who spoke from his wheelchair, and then she took a break. so deep breath. everybody collect yourself, and then when she comes back from that recess, it's time for everybody to see how the cookie crumbles. all rise. the courtroom deputy says, quote, your honor, recalling criminal case number 17-201-1, the united states of america versus paul j. manafort jr. and then the judge begins. quote, the sentencing briefing, and to a lesser extent the argument in this case has been marked bay great deal of passion and a fair amount of hyperbole and overstatement on b