registered sex offender, jeffery epstein is in a new york city courthouse facing multiple charges involving sex trafficking of dozens of young girls. u.s. attorney asked to deny bails and calling epstein a flight risk. he sexually abused dozens of my n minor girls in his home and palm beach florida and more occasions. >> epstein paid between 200 and $1,000 to the girls for sex and recruitment of other girls. epstein was aware of his victims' ages. he faced federal allegations of sex with multiple minors in

florida. his attorney back then reached a deal securing a non prosecution agreement with alex acosta who's now president trump's labor executo secretary. >> epstein pled guilty. he registered as a sex offender and serving 13 months. his time in jail was significantly different than most. this is unbelievable. he was allowed to leave the facility six days a week to conduct work at his office. >> think about that. who is this guy jeffery epstein? >> he began his professional life teaching math and physics. he moved onto become an option trader at bear stearns. in 1981 he left the firm and found his own business.

he ultimatecultivated relationsh some of the most powerful people including our current president trump and bill clinton and great brita britain's prince andrews. donald trump told this about epstein, i have known jeff for 15 years, terrific guy. he's a lot of fun to be with. it is even said that he liked beautiful women as much as i do and many of them are on the younger side. no doubt about it. jeffery enjoys his social life. >> think about that. the president in a tongue and cheap way saying some of them on the younger side. joining us now stephanie gauss and -- go through what we are learning to me tch. it is stunning for me to read that quote from president trump

well, especially he likes the younger ones. knowing on saturday, it has been reported on extraordinary numbers of nude photographs of under age women are taken to his house. >> a lot of this ese instances over a decade ago. a lot of people wondering why there were not charges like this over a decade ago. back to what was announced, epstein together with his employees and some of his own victims created a ring of victims. what the u.s. attorney describes today as a web of victims that self sustained itself over years. these are under age girls who would be lured to epstein's property either in florida or new york city to perform massages in exchange of money. what alleged is those massages quickly escalated to demands for sexual acts.

>> it is vile but what's twisted is it is not new news. how is this not double jeopardy? >> the fact that there is a non prosecution agreement in florida that is only enforceable in that jurisdiction. they can start a new just as they have in new york with their own prosecution and it is not double jeopardy. it is not prosecuted for the same offense, twice. >> how does that work? >> and why? >> and they called it the deal of the century. he had the work release and 12 or 13 months when he's facing 45 years now. there were 36 victims that went stake which was more leenient. a prosecutor can grant immunity only within their jurisdiction. this is far different. >> what would the rational be?

take us back then, why would alex acosta. we know the prosecutors prepared a 53-page indictment, he stepped in and met privately with attorneys and we see in epstein's non prosecution agreement, yes, she serhe serve3 months. why would the u.s. government be willing to offer immunity to cospc coconspirator? >> secrets at the time violated victims' rights laws and victims were not informed of that agreement. they are entitled to be informed. we don't know. why was this sweetheart deal was reached? why as a rich and powerful connective man allowed such

leniency. >> alex acosta was asked the same question during the confirmation hearing. >> yes, during that process, he was asked that specific question. why cut this deal? what he said at the time was he got jail time. he got 13 months and he registered as a sex offendser and he had to come to settle agreements through civil proceedings with his victims essentially saying that's a good deal for the government as well because it guaranteed those steps would be taken. >> why would the coconspirator gets immunity. >> he's going to pay off these women and he's going to jail. who were they protecting and why? >> i know you don't know the answer to that. did alex acosta give a reasoning? >> he was not asked that question. we have reached out to him a number of times. he had not gotten back to us. that's a question to be answered. >> the defendant and others

known and knowingly combined conspire and agree together and with each other to commit sex trafficking of minors. >> we can't charge any inferences. there are a number of employees, three of them unnamed in this indictment who appeared to be cooperating with federal investigators out lining the steps they took in addition to some of these victims who started off as victims and then became this kind of coordinators to get more victims. >> and the southern district, this is kind of interesting question that i think the district attorney was asked and didn't have an answer for or would not provide one. why is it the public corruption unit voinvolved as opposed to special victim? >> bingo. >> maybe there will be. right now you are dealing with the tips of the iceberg with the sex crimes of this individual

that i really think all stems from me too and an examination of somebody that was basically speared any kinds of prosecutions of one of the most serious trafficking case of our country. >> we know the u.s. attorney is now the secretary of labor. that department works in partnership on sex trafficking efforts. given alex acosta's current position, can he have any influence over what's happening with jeffery epstein today? >> probably a congressional inquiry on that. he should not but he didn't. >> can he today? given his job is today and what epstein is facing, can acosta influence what's happening? >> absolutely. absolutely, i am sorry, i paused for a minute. yes, he can.

that's the ultimate irony, it is kind of like bookends for this case from the beginning to the end. he did, will he in the future? he can. >> thank you stephanie gauss and anne bremer, we'll continue to follow this story. a lot of details continue to come out. joe biden apologizing for remarks he made about working with segregationists in the senate. why now and will it change anything for him when it comes to black voters? we'll talk about that next. you are watching "velshi & ruhle" live on msnbc. e" live on! i want a bucket of chicken! i want....." "it's the easiest, because it's the cheesiest" kraft. for the win win.

if you have moderate little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. ♪

but we're also a cancer fighting, hiv controlling, joint replacing, and depression relieving company. from the day you're born we never stop taking care of you. from themno kidding.rd.n but moving your internet and tv? that's easy. easy?! easy? easy. because now xfinity lets you transfer your service online in just about a minute with a few simple steps. really? really. that was easy. yup. plus, with two-hour appointment windows, it's all on your schedule. awesome. now all you have to do is move...that thing. [ sigh ] introducing an easier way to move with xfinity. it's just another way we're working to make your life simple, easy, awesome. go to xfinity.com/moving to get started.

i felt completely helpless. trashed online. my entire career and business were in jeopardy. i called reputation defender. they were able to restore my good name. if you are under attack, i recommend calling reputation defender. vo: there's more negativity online than ever. reputation defender ensures that when people check you out, they'll find more of the truth, not trash. if you have search results that are wrong or unfair, visit reputationdefender.com or call 1-877-866-8555.

welcome back to "velshi & ruhle." joe biden defending his record again about his remarks highlighting his preevious work with segregationists in the senate. the democratic front runner issued an apology this weekend. >> folks, now was i wrong a few weeks ago to give the impression of people that i was praising those men who i successfully opposed time and time again. yes, i was. i regret it. >> joining us now, our washington post reporter, eugene scott. what is the significance now about biden apologizing in south carolina? well, i think biden understands what some of the recent polls have shown. he's taking a hit with some

black voters because of his past stances on some legislative issues, his civil rights. he went to south carolina because that's the state that he's counting onto do well so we can move forward. we know the democratic primary voters are african-americans. he's appealing directly to those voters hoping they'll keep him in the lead and for given him since he announced this campaign. >> joe biden made the argument in the past, things were different than and 2019 lens is different from say a 1992 lens. is his history, is his entire political career going to be something he's forced to defend over the next 16 months or is it going to be a positive forum? >> i think he'll have to defend his political history with some younger voters. i have spoken with baby boomers

and voters who are into politics around the time joe biden made some of the decisions and comments he made that he's now having to answer for and they. >> reporteare sympathetic. millennial voters will be heading to the polls. it does not matter to them to the degree that biden may want it to. he's going to have to appeal to the diversity of black voters and speak to them in areas they need to hear him from. >> he still has a significant lead according to new polling among black voters. south carolina, the majority of african-americans who'll vote in that primaries are going to be -- they're over. they're not the millennials in that particular instance. this is an interesting road for joe biden to walk. it does not hurt him with the older voters who are more

familiar with him and don't hold his history against him. if he apologizes, it does not cost him with that group. >> it certainly does not. elizabeth warren and kamala harris are making up grounds, he does not have the room and the time that he perhaps had in the past to continue to wait this long to apologize and answer debate stages as unprepared as he did. he's going to have to convince younger voters that he actually can be the best president to carry on from the obama legacy as he continues to point to after this trump's presidency. eugene, good to see you as always. thank you. ali, once we get to the general, we saw a lot of young voters in the last election, simply not excited enough to go out and vote for hillary clinton. if we face the same situation with joe biden, will we not turn out due to lack of enthusiasm or

because of enthusiasm that they do not want to elect president trump. >> sometimes you need to get you out to the polls. >> so this is certainly something joe biden is going to have to contend with. it will be different if they were in third place or fourth place and you can ride it off. he's the front runner. once we get to the general, it is a whole different ball game. >> senator kamala harris is also campaigning in south carolina. she's surging ing in the polls g democratic candidates. she released her funding. she's behind pete buttigieg and biden and bernie sanders with a total of $12 million matching her first quarter donations. 2 million of those dollars came in after her performance in the democratic presidential debate last month. the issue is whether she can keep the momentum going. >> our vaughan hillyards is

joining us live. misha miss harris and miss warren has broken through, drawing in for big ideas and ground breaking female leadership. the two senators have functioned squeezing mr. biden and sanders from the left and the relative center and endangering any hope of an easy march to victory for either men. tell us about senator harris's stop in south carolina and what her messaging is. as she surged, we heard her categorizing further to the left than her policies actually are. what is she saying on the trail? >> reporter: when we talk a couple of weeks ago when kamala harris was last, there were many voters were not familiar with kamala harris or whether she

stood in the middle or the left. the debate allowed her to introduce herself. we constantly hearing folks wanted somebody of a democratic no, ma'minee who can take on do trump. taking on her democratic opponent, that would be joe biden. in new orleans, she introduced a new form of policy saying the federal government should invest $100 billion into communities and communities back from the '30s all the way back to the '70s, either would not make home loans available or make them very expensive, particularly for black communities. she's here in south carolina reiterating that. >> vaughan hillyards for us in myrtle beach, south carolina. >> thank you, vaughan. it is unclear how warren's p performan performance may have had an impact on her fund raising

numbers. shst ma she's making stops in new hampshire to ramp up support before the next presidential debate. >> our road warrior, garret haake is joining us now in new hampshire. any new information when we'll see her actual fund raising numbers? she raises in a different way than other candidates. >> she does. >> reporter: the candidate has to report those numbers by the end of the week. we'll see her a lot sooner. elizabeth only raised $6 million in the first quarter. that number was not on par with her other competitors and certainly not those in the top tier. there are under lining numbers there that gives warren supporters a lot of optimism. she has for gone the traditional fund raising circuits. she's not going to dinners and

meet or greets. it is something that she brags about on the stunt. it also means much of bernie sanders of last cycle and this cycle. if you see somebody starting to catch on fire, you can see a lot of those grass root donations coming in. that's what warren supporters are hoping for when those fund raising totals are released. even before the debate, we were starting to talk quite a bit of the momentum she was picking up in the early stage and national polling. when we do see those numbers, the warrior campaign wants to hit in that sweet spot above of what kamala harris did and they're not going to hit that pete buttigieg or joe biden level, folks leaning into the fund raising circle, that's what we are looking on so far. >> does she capitalize on the fact that she does not lean into the fund raising circle. that's a new concept that we are talking about. how much big donor activities going in?

>> it is bernie sanders' jam. >> he made a lot of money from a lot of people. does she lean the other way and leaning into that. that's where i am getting momentum. >> reporter: she does, bernie sanders sort of started this in a major way in 2016. i saw beto o'rourke do this in the senate race of 2018. frankly i was surprised when i got down to texas for those last few weeks, how much voters do care about this. the idea that you are not being bought and paid for and you are not having those big corporate donors. warren talks about this all the time. her supporters often times wore t-shirts the best candidate that money can't buy. it is a complete reversal even from the latest 2012 when you have every candidate and in both major parties going around with a fortin cup tryitin cup trying

dollars. >> president trump posted about it. >> garret, good to see you. thank you. coming up at 2:00 p.m., presidential candidate senator kirsten gillibrand is going to be live here on msnbc with kasie hunt. a new warning from iran. in the back and forth, it seems they may be looking to take new action. >> we'll be right back. you are watching msnbc. at hilton.com, i can choose from all their different hotel brands... like a doubletree for my cousins.

a homewood suites for my uncle. a hampton for my sister and her kids. and the waldorf astoria beverly hills for me. can i get a..? thank you. book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee. (gasp) (singsong) budget meeting! sweet. if you compare last quarter to this quarter... various: mmm. it's no wonder everything seems a little better with the creamy taste of philly, made with fresh milk and real cream.

with the creamy taste of philly, and i recently had hi, ia heart attack. it changed my life. but i'm a survivor. after my heart attack, my doctor prescribed brilinta. it's for people who have been hospitalized for a heart attack. brilinta is taken with a low-dose aspirin. no more than 100 milligrams as it affects how well brilinta works. brilinta helps keep platelets from sticking together and forming a clot. in a clinical study, brilinta worked better than plavix. brilinta reduced the chance of having another heart attack... ...or dying from one. don't stop taking brilinta without talking to your doctor, since stopping it too soon increases your risk of clots in your stent, heart attack, stroke, and even death. brilinta may cause bruising or bleeding more easily, or serious, sometimes fatal bleeding. don't take brilinta if you have bleeding, like stomach ulcers, a history of bleeding in the brain, or severe liver problems. slow heart rhythm has been reported. tell your doctor about bleeding new or unexpected shortness of breath any planned surgery, and all medicines you take.

if you recently had a heart attack, ask your doctor if brilinta is right for you. my heart is worth brilinta. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. the latest charter school scandals are piling up. leaders of one san diego charter network? indicted for conspiracy and grand theft. thankfully, the governor's charter school policy task force just made important recommendations for reform: more accountability on charter school spending. and giving local school districts more control over the authorization of charter schools. reforms we need to pass now. so call your state senator. ask them to support ab 1505 and ab 1507.

welcome back to "velshi & ruhle." johnny de jeffery epstein is in court right now. we got full coverage of this. stephanie, the question i think there are several questions about this that regular people have. how did this happen? they have known this for a long time. how did he cut the deal that he did with miami u.s. attorney? >> that's the question. why would the u.s. attorney in miami currently labor secretary then u.s. attorney, alex acosta cut this deal? we know acosta was questioned

about this during his last confirmation and he was confirmed. you heard it from the prosecutor, it was reporting from "the miami harold," epstein's accusers have their own private investigators. these young women did not realize that the deal had been cut. >> regardless of where this goes, everything about of what's happening right now has been a massive failure on everybody's part except for "miami harold," a guy that's well known of his activities were and he gets charged and cuts a deal in which he goes to jail and gets out six days a week to go to work. >> he went to jail. >> had a private wing. >> he was staying in a private wing, his own private driver was allowed to pick him up six days

a week and he went to his private office. yes, registered as a sex offender but not the jail experience one would assume from a sex offender. when it came up to alex acosta's confirmation hearing, a lot of people wondering, then and now, this is stuff happening is this okay. hey, that was not the best work of the justice system ever done. do you just let it go? >> at the time, the prosecutor had a 53-page indictment and it was acosta stepped in and worked on his deal. we learned epstein has officially pleaded not guilty in court. let me paint a picture for you. right now as he sits in court, he's wearing a blue jump suit and he looked into the juror box and he also saw some members of the press and he made eye contact, he briefly smiled with one of his defense attorneys, he has a total of three.

>> i am going to bring in danny cevalos to talk about this. the deal that epstein got is the deal of the century. you can't imagine getting such a good deal. >> it is surprisingly of any sex offenders would ever get the deal of the century. >> a defense attorney and one of the things it shocked me and i have looked at a lot of the documents back in 2011 is the amazing deference shown to epstein's attorney. that's not my brothers and sisters' experience. the doj largely appearing the capitulate or to defer to the defense attorneys or give them a

voice and listen to them and in a way adhere to their orders. you can characterize it differently depending on -- >> is it power money influenced? how did it happen? >> it is really disturbing to me because i always believe that when you deal as a defense attorney with the government that they give you the same intention whether you are a solo predicti practitioner or at one of the leading law firms of the country. i still believe that. i still believe the vast majority of u.s. attorneys and usa do that. they treat defense attorneys equally in that sense. that's why this jumped out at many me. you see this reoccurring deference to the defense team. they lay out in an argument of a 24-page letter here are all the reasons why your case is lousy and what you want it to appear

is the government listens. >> kind of interesting. >> this is a man who started as a mathematics teacher. who then made his way into some of the most powerful and influential circles in the world. >> can you explain this to us from the bail memo, this was written to prosecutors. epstein tried to harass or tamp with witnesses and hired private investigators who have forced off the road, the father of the individual relevant in the investigation and an alarming incident. >> that's significance for bail. generally speaking defendants should get bailed. a rebuttal presumption arises that no set of factors will ensure this defendant will appear at trial when certain things happen. one is he's charged with this offense. that creates a presumption that the defendant has to over come. one of these is interfering with

witnesses. that can also add to the government's case for detention for johnny deeffery epstein andk of flight. >> they cited the risk of fligh flights. >> defense attorneys will take those exact same facts and make them in favor of his clients. he's well-known and where is he going to go? he's a member of the community and able to pay for his own care and make sure he's not going to run off. in reality, the government has a strong case for detention here. they start out with the preassumption that he'll be detained with the crimes he's charged and other factors of age and a serious sentence will be a life sentence. that's a strong motivation to at least not to show up. if you are sentenced, you are sentenced essentially for life. >> one of the reasons who i am sure we'll find out more about

this. one of the reasons he got the deal in miami, he dug up information about his alleged victims. d demograting them. >> these are women who are vulnerable. >> how does the prosecution, how does the government make sure that does not happen again? there has been implications including what the u.s. attorneys said today. implications he's been involved in either witness intimidation or interference. >> to some degree, the government can't do that. here is why. to the extent that his defense team investigates the credibility of witnesses against him, there is nothing wrong with it. that's in fact our sworn duty as to defend our client with the rules of ethics. that's the key. there is a fine line between sending your investigators out

and digging up say criminal records or other -- >> running their father off road. >> that clearly crosses the line into what is allowed or what is not allowed. we must be clear that if every defendant, if they had the resources, would employee investigators dig up facts of the credibility of witnesses. that's such a critical piece of information in defending the case but they have to be very mindful they don't cross the line or interfere with. >> we had this discussion of paul manafort right now. kelly o'donell is there. this is now putting a lot of attention on the labor secretary, alex acosta. the white house response to that? >> no, we have not had a response from the white house. that's notable. the administration is aware of the high profile blair on the labor secretary right now. the white house referring matter to the department of justice and the labor department is

referring things to the department of justice and they are declining comments. what stands out here is there is silence and that's notable. the president has had some kind of social relationships from time to time with the defendant in this case. jeffery epstein, his comments in the past, the president has certainly praised alex acosta, the labor secretary who was previously in that miami role of working out the legal deal that epstein had back several years ago. the president has praised acosta for his work presently. the work he's done in this capacity and it is not talking about this controversy. at what point this will bubble up will the administration feel compel to speak out on this, we don't yet know. it was a very long time ago. this puts pressure on the administration to have something more to say and certainly

secretary acosta himself. >> we don't have a white house's daily press briefings. if we did then stephanie grisham will be on the podium will be faced those questions, why does acosta still has his job. they're in a position where they can just avoid it and have no comment. >> they can avoid it for a pree period of time. it is our practice to try to put questions to the president when ever we are in his space and you see the drive way gaggles as we now call them. the variation of the daily briefings or everyone frank lyanne off camera briefing where they'll take these questions, we would be able to get that and bring it to you right away. the absence of that buys the

president time. he finds a way to get himself on camera or dial into one of his favorite programs. if there is a will, there is a way. >> well, he would get to respond in the way he chooses, that's for sure. >> we'll press that question. part of the reason we are sharing with you of the no comments we are getting because we are going through those normal steps trying to get some sort of reaction and so far we have not yet gotten it. pressure builds over a period of time and a statement comes out. we'll have to see if that's the response of this administration given these facts. >> kelly o'donell at the white house. dan danny cevallos is here with us. the iran stuff is getting interesting. until last week. ir iran had been in compliance of the nuclear deal. it gives them a high ground when discussing with the trump administration. iran breached its agreement

which really increases the stakes on this. we'll talk about it in some details when we get back. you are watching "velshi & ruhle." ♪ limu emu & doug

what do all these people have in common, limu? [ paper rustling ] exactly, nothing. they're completely different people, that's why they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual. they'll only pay for what they need! [ gargling ] [ coins hitting the desk ] yes, and they could save a ton. you've done it again, limu. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

we run right into these crises, and we do not leave until normalcy is restored. we'd been working for days on a site in a storm devastated area. a family pulled up. it was a mom and her kids. everything they had had been washed away. the only thing that brought any kind of solace was the ability to hand her a device so she could call her family and let them know that she was okay. (vo) there for you when it matters most. join us and get up to $650 when you switch. that's verizon. iran eannounced it reached its purity unit of uranium. this comes after a week after exceeding the limits of volume

of enriched uranium it could produce. the raw is processed to extract u-235. one of the most efficient ways to do that is using central fuses, spinning at a high speed, allowing the u-235 to separate out. this separated material is called enriched ruranium. it is used. what you can do depending on the level of enrichment. this is used for nuclear power which is largely what iran has said it wants it for. enriching uranium between 20 or 93% allowing it to use for

research reactor. once it is enriched to 90% or more, it is suitable to use in nuclear weapons. nuclear deal, the joint comprehensive plant of action required iran to sphip all of is enriched ruranium out of the country. it was limited to 660 pounds or less. the top enrichment level, the country was allowed was set at 3.67% purities. at that purity, you can't do anything except to generate energy. the agency says inspector would check if iran exceeded this enrichment. the reasons those limits are important, it takes about 550 pounds or 250 kilos of 20% enriched ruranium.

the nuclear deal restricted iran to just 5,060 to enrich its raw uranium. iran is warning it is going to enrich 20% if sanctions are not reached. joining me now is physicist for science and international security. david albrite. i don't know if i completely botched that but i am trying to explain to people why these numbers are relevant. >> you did quite well and it is a complicated subject and i congrats you doing an excellent job. the limits trying to keep iran far away from being able to have

weapon grade uranium of u-235 for having enough of that to make nuclear weapon. it would take them a full year. to get there, it may be as little as seven months. seven months is still a long time. the deal of iran's nuclear program considerably and greatly increased the break-out timeline which is the principle goal of the deal. >> let's talk about when you are talking about iran says it is going to get to 20% or once it gets to 20%, does that mean that they're heading towards a nuclear weapon or what we are supposed to infer so for people to say hey let's take iran seriously. >> it is hard to know what they are up to right now. iran had many minor violations of the deal in the past they walking back. this time we are not sure. they still are relatively minor

violations of the limits. they did not go very far on the limit of volume of enriched uranium or high on the enriched level of 3.67%. so i mean we don't know where this is headed. the difference now is that they are implying they are potentially walking away from this deal which they have the right to do. what iran is risking though that the party to the deal can snap back sanctions. iran is risking and making each situation much worse. >> why would they do this? >> it is suffering enormous enormously -- >> why would they do this? >> why would they do this? i think -- most people commenting iran thinks it can increase pressure on europe to step into limit u.s. sanctions, it could try to create a better

negotiation platform if it is going to sit down with the united states. iran has reasons to do this but i think unfortunately if iran is not willing to negotiate with the united states, it is probably headed towards to snap back sanctions by the eu and it continues down this path. it does not mean it will be military action. i don't think this is about military action at all. i don't think iran is risking it. it is risking much greater sanctions if it continues down this path. >> how much capabilities does iran has to get to nuclear weapon. can they do it with the stuff they got? >> yes, unfortunately, another chi chilling fact that emerged recently in teheran. they seized it in early 2018 and my institute studies significant

portions of those documents over the last year and iran has a much more advance nuclear weapon program that was known at the time it was negotiated and it can reconstitute that effort and maintaining that carchive. the united states can argue that the iran is violating jpoa. it means that iran can build nuclear weapons and it knows how to enrich uranium. it will be quite a credible program if iran does decide to do that. >> thank you for bringing us your insight. david albright. these are really difficult topics but that's where we are now. you got the foreign minister of iran or somebody tweeting out we'll enrich to this particular percentage and people are looking at what does that 3.67

means. >> walking and difficult is majorly important. >> now trying a new tactic in a fight to get citizenship question on the census we thought they have given up last many have said is absolutely unprecedented or at least very strange, how changing lawyers could affect the case. plus, new details from the courthouse in the case against accused child sex trafficker jeffrey epstein. just a few minutes. utes "fine. no one leaves the table until you're finished."

"fine! we'll sleep here." "it's the easiest, because it's the cheesiest" kraft. for the win win.

...was another around the corner? or could it turn out differently? my doctor recommended eliquis. eliquis is proven to treat and help prevent another dvt or pe blood clot... almost 98% of patients on eliquis didn't experience another. ...and eliquis has significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. what's around the corner could be surprising. ask your doctor about eliquis.

velshi and ruhle." president trump is hoping to move forward with the citizenship question on the 2020 census, this after the supreme court ruled against his administration last month. now the justice department is enlisting new lawyers to pursue changes in the case. the acting director of citizenship and immigration services says on fox news he thinks there will be a citizenship question on the upcoming census. >> i think the president has expressed determination, he noted that the supreme court didn't say this can't be asked. they said that they didn't appreciate the process by which it came forward the first time. so the president is determined to fix that and have it roll

forward in the 2020 census. >> joining us now, former u.s. attorney and msnbc attorney joyce vance. explain this, how does the administration argue we have legitimate reason for the citizenship question but we're change our legal team and not telling you why and not telling you the new rational for why we need to have the citizenship question. >> it really is a mess, stephanie, just like you point out. the administration is entitled to take certain actions and one of those might be an effort to add a new question to the census, but they can't do it for an improper motive. and so the pinnacle that they left themselves in is that they have been representing the courts throughout this process that the issue had to be decided by the end of june, that after that the census had to go to the printers and they wouldn't be able to change anything. now here we are into july with the government trying to come up with a new reason. and so the process begins to

look more and more pretext chul that the president is trying to add his desire to add this question even though there's no legitimate reason and in the presence of developing evidence there in fact improper motives, it's an effort to die lute the votes of hispanics and other non-white citizens. >> but let's say it doesn't have a chance of moving forward, does it end up being -- i guess i turn to you on this, ali, is it a political win for the president. the president across the board whether you're talking immigration or a number of other issues makes the argument i have stayed true to my voters. i have fought. it's the system i'm fighting against. he could make the argument here, i didn't make headway, but it's them not me. >> you and i have talked many times to a lot of people about why census and accurate counting is important, right? this goes back to the bible. it's actually in the bible. this has been for a long time, the idea you need an accurate count of who is there. i wonder, joyce, does the

rational argument about not affecting the response rates on the census, which would occur if you put the citizenship question in according to lotsd of people, does that move the courts or is this whether the administration has the right to put it on if they have the right argument for it? >> sure. you know the constitution itself says that the census should count people who are present. it doesn't say citizens. there has been a citizenship question. there was one, i think, back in the 1950s, hasn't been around in more modern times because the goal of the citizen -- of the census rather is to count people who are present for services purposes so we know whose living inside of our borders for a number of different reasons. and the problem that trump faces is the absence of any legitimate rational for asking the citizenship question. sure it might be a political win, but more and more it takes on this bad look of a president

who's unwilling to follow the highest court in the country once it's ruled. that may even make in roads into his own voters and certainly into elected republicans. >> that's interesting you say that. i wonder if there's a base that sort of says, good on you. you're not even listening to the supreme court. you're sticking to your guns. >> yeah, exactly. why is -- >> i think that's the risk. >> why exactly does the administration have another bite at this apple? >> the krou the supreme court makes a ruling, why do they get to go back? >> the court gave the administration an opportunity to come back with a nondiscriminatory reason for adding the question but the administration has always been butting up right against its own self-imposed goal the end of june. every lawyer who has been in court from the solicitor general to the supreme court on down has told the court system this question had to finally be decided by the end of june. and now the government seems to be saying, oh wait a second, we

weren't being truthful when we said that. we have a little bit more time in reality. courts don't like it when lawyers aren't candid with them. in fact, lawyers have an obligation to be candid. so we begin to get into very dangerous ethical terrain for the lawyers that are involved in this case. >> because the courts took that seriously. the government said they needed an answer by june 30th so the court gave them an answer by june 30th. so now to go back and say, well, that wasn't really a real deadline is problematic. >> the court relied on that very heavily. you'll recall the new york case used this almost unheard of process where after the plaintiffs were successful in trial in the southern district of northern, that case jumped straight to the supreme court. it didn't go through the court of appeal that the case would have normally gone through because the government was so insistent saying we've got to have this quick timeline. now the government is saying, oh, we were just kidding. we don't need to be that quick afterall. it won't sit well with the courts. it shouldn't sit well with people. >> joyce, always good to see

you. thank you. >> thank you so much. and thank you for watching today's velshi and ruhle. >> we got big news. >> i'll be back at 3:00 p.m. eastern. steph will be back tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. >> indeed. check us out on social media and connect with our show. right now we hand off to kasie hunt who picks up coverage and she's about to interview kirsten gillibrand. >> thanks, guys. steph, welcome back. ali, i'll see you at 3. >> it's 11:00 a.m. out west and 2:00 p.m. in new york where we are following breaking news. billionaire businessman and registered sex offender jeffrey epstein just pleaded not guilty in a federal courtroom in manhattan. epstein faces charges of sex trafficking of minors in conspiracy accused of creating and maintaining a network that allowed him to sexually abuse girls as young as 14. according to a unsealed indictment epstein