Updated
Summary
Special master calls on Trump`s lawyers to prove Trump classified documents. Interview with White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. Ukrainian combat medic describes life on the front lines of war with Russia.
Transcript
CHRIS HAYES, MSBNC HOST, “ALL IN”: That is “ALL IN” on this Tuesday night.
ALEX WAGNER TONIGHT starts right now.
Good evening, Alex.
ALEX WAGNER, MSNBC HOST: Good evening, Chris.
Sickness, maternal leave, all the things we should have. Protections, time.
HAYES: It`s amazing how rare they are in American life, but I do think actually the last two years with the kind of militancy we`ve seen, the unionization, changes happening all kinds of places, you are seeing more of that. I hope it continues.
WAGNER: Yeah, attitude toward labor has changed a lot even in this decade. And that is reason to hope.
Thanks, Chris, s always.
And thanks to you at home for being here.
As we all know very well, one of Trump`s loudest defenses following the FBI in search of his Florida beach club last month has been a chest pounding declaration that he had declassified all the sensitive government documents. So it doesn`t matter that they wound up there. He said that, quote, everything was declassified.
But so far, that argument has been noticeably absent from any declaration by Trump`s lawyers in court. This morning, in a legal filing, Trump`s attorneys once again failed to say that Trump declassified any documents. Furthermore, they are insisting that actually these documents might not in fact be classified to begin with. Essentially, Trump`s team is saying don`t trust the DOJ because who knows if these papers are really classified.
Over and over again, in their 40-page filing, the 100 classified documents identified by the DOJ, the Justice Department are referred to by Trump`s legal team as, quote, purportedly classified. Yes, that is classified in quotes.
A little over two hours after that sharply worded filing, Trump`s attorneys and the Justice Department appeared in federal court in Brooklyn this afternoon for their first conference with the newly appointed Trump-picked special master, Judge Raymond Dearie. Dearie is a senior judge in the Eastern District of New York. So Brooklyn is his turf.
Two hours after Trump`s team cast out on the government`s assertion that these documents are classified, again purportedly classified with air quotes, yes, like those very clearly marked documents you see right now on your screen purportedly classified, the special master again hand-picked by Trump essentially he said, I`m inclined to think that they are indeed classified.
Before I read this quote, quick law school lesson here, you should know that prima facie evidence means on the face of it. Now, here is Judge Dearie on those classified documents speaking to Trump`s attorneys this afternoon.
The government, of course, wants the classified documents off the table for the moment at least, and I understand that. We`re dealing with presumably highly sensitive information. If I`m going to verify the classification, what am I looking at? Is there a claim that the document is classified that should not have been classified? Is that in play before me as a special master? Is there a claim that something was labeled purposely classified that isn`t? What exactly is the nature of it?
The reason I ask is, if the government essentially gives me prima facie evidence that these are classified documents and you, Team Trump, decide for whatever reason not to advance any claims of classification, which I understand is your prerogative, I`m left with the prima facie case of classified documents. And as far as I`m concerned, that`s the end of it.
To be clear, Judge Dearie, the special master who Trump`s side advocated for, basically told Trump`s attorneys the government has said these documents are classified and unless you somehow prove otherwise, quote, that is it. Or in other words, layman`s terms, put up or shut up.
Even threw this zinger at team Trump later during the roughly 45-minute conference, quote: I guess my view of it is you can`t have your cake and eat it. Trump`s attorney Jim Trusty responded, quote, sure, understood. Obviously, the court is going to want evidence, not just pure argument. Well, yeah, you could say that again.
Trump`s attorney then pressed the judge on obtaining the proper security clearance, so team Trump can view these purportedly or pretty decidedly classified documents. Let us say that did not go so well.
Here is Trump attorney Jim Trusty again. Quote: We would just appreciate some help from the court, kind of pushing that along where we might be able to get people cleared in a way where it doesn`t slow anything down and doesn`t unnecessarily hamstring us if we review these documents. Special master Dearie responded, quote, let`s not belittle the fact that we are dealing with at least potentially legitimately classified information.
Dearie continued, the government has a very strong obligation as all of us to see to it that that information doesn`t get in the wrong hands. It`s not just a matter it seems to me of being cleared, it`s a matter of need to know. And if you need to know, you will know. That`s the way I see it. If you need to know, you will know.
[21:05:02]
The subtext there seems to be, I`m not really sure Team Trump needs to know right now.
Special master Dearie also made an interesting announcement toward the end of the conference concerning those classified documents. He said, quote, if I can make my judgments without, I don`t want to see the material. It`s presumably sensitive material. if I can make my recommendation to Judge Cannon, right or wrong, without exposing myself or you to that material, I will do it.
Special master Dearie today went out of his way here to say that he does not want to see the classified material and will do his best to make his recommendations without viewing it.
At another point in the hearing, Dearie asked the Justice Department lawyers what they would do if their motion in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals fails. The DOJ attorney replied that the department would consider its appellate options or in other words, take it to the Supreme Court.
Joining us now is Josh Gerstein, senior legal affairs reporter at “Politico” who was in the courtroom today.
Josh, thanks for being here today.
JOSH GERSTEIN, SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER, POLITICO: Hey. Alex, nice to be with you again.
WAGNER: What was it like in that courtroom? I mean, I read the reporting. Some limited transcription of what came to pass. Did it feel like Judge Dearie was issuing a brush back to the Trump legal team? It sounds like that in the sort of written version of this. But what was the mood like in the courtroom?
GERSTEIN: Well, it was very cordial. I mean, he`s not a judge who raises his voice, you know, a great deal. But from the very outset, like the first few minutes of this 40-minute hearing, it was pretty clear that the judge was trying to send the Trump team a message, as you say a real heater or brush back pitch by saying, you know, if you guys want to pursue some litigation strategy here, that`s fine. But I`m not going to allow it to delay this proceeding.
And it was that kind of tone that we heard from him again and again, he let the Trump lawyers have their say and then he`d come back with some kind of rejoinder most of those episodes that you`ve just is covered. So there was no question that there was a bit of tension and dancing around there. It seemed like the Trump lawyers and the judge, I wouldn`t say it was oil and water, but they were not fully in sync. They weren`t on the same wavelength.
WAGNER: Well, clearly not, right, because he keeps offering them this opportunity to say what was — what was declassified? And they keep saying, oh, we can`t put that cart before the horse. We`re going to deal with that later after we`ve had a chance to review all these documents.
GERSTEIN: Well, that`s in keeping with a sort of standard defense attorney strategy, right, which is that you look for opportunities to delay because you don`t want your client to face the music right away, and you look for opportunities to keep your options open, and that`s really the issue. I mean, Trump`s already gone on Twitter and said this was all declassified, and he can do that as much as he wants, right? But the moment he signs a declaration under oath saying it was declassified, if somebody steps forward and say — says something he said there isn`t true, he`s just handed DOJ yet another charge they could file against him.
So the judge was saying here to Trump`s lawyers, look, if that`s your strategy, that`s fine. But we`re not going to allow that to derail this proceeding. They`re not going to be able to get, it sounds like, even access to the classified information —
WAGNER: Yeah.
GERSTEIN: — unless Trump comes forward or someone else, maybe one of Trump`s aides like Kash Patel or someone like that, wants to sign a sworn declaration saying that in his presence, Trump said that these documents were declassified. How he would know that they`re the same as the hundred documents down in Mar-a-Lago, I don`t know how anybody outside the DOJ could know that.
WAGNER: Well, it sounds like Trump`s team does not know what the classified documents are, right? They`ve said repeatedly in the courtroom today, we don`t have an index of what was in those boxes, we`re not sure, which is why we need to review them. But that`s also telling because in order to have declassified anything, you would need to know what was that – – you would need to know what the documents were, right?
GERSTEIN: Well, you would think so, although Trump is putting forward this very, very broad argument, right, that there`s some implicit declassification that he was, if you will, so cavalier and careless in the way he handled documents in the White House and perhaps even down at Mar-a- Lago that he took things up to the Lincoln bedroom, he left them strewn around the East Wing of the White House, he took them down to Mar-a-Lago and left them strewn around there, and those were somehow implicitly declassified. I think that`s the broadest Trump argument, and maybe they think they can level that somewhere and get some traction for it.
But the judge said in this proceeding, it`s not a crime criminal case where the government has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden is on Trump`s lawyers to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that this stuff wasn`t classified, if that is indeed a critical you know issue that`s in contention in this case.
And until and unless they do that, he`s going to presume that they are classified. I mean, I thought it was really interesting, A, he`s not going to let them have access to the documents as they desperately want, and be he himself doesn`t want to look at the documents, right? That`s how seriously he`s treating the government`s claims of classification.
GERSTEIN: He seems to be leaving open the possibility that if Trump`s side doesn`t come forward with something concrete, beyond some tweets, in the course of the next few weeks, that he may say I`m going to take the government`s word for it and I`m just going to assume whatever they say about these classified documents is true.
I think there are other arguments still the Trump team can put forward and they started to put forward today that maybe some of the documents are classified, but personal, sort of bizarre arguments like that, and they started talking about those things and court that they could do without contesting the classification issue right now. And you know, the question is, do they want to close down Trump`s options if he is charged. Eventually, like I said, by having him sign something or even having his defense team commit to a strategy of saying these number of documents were declassified.
WAGNER: Well, the strategy seems muddled at best right now. One thing that you highlight is the fact that delay seems to be a sort of foundational principle here, and what I noticed in the reporting on what happened in the courtroom is at every turn, whether it`s the time frame in which the documents can be scanned by a third party vendor or choosing the third party vendor, every stage of this, Trump`s team is asking for more time. They say we want to take baby steps in all of this.
GERSTEIN: Right, right. And even the request to get clearance to look at the classified documents, that, too, consumes time. They have to get permission from different agencies. It sounds like only one member of Trump`s team has a top secret clearance right now, and they would need additional clearances. So the more this gets jumbled together, that too extends the time. The judges — the judge down in Florida has already said that she wants this process completed by the end of November, but realistically then, issues will be raised with her, anything Dearie decides can be appealed to the judge down in Florida and we already have issues pending at the 11th Circuit.
So the notion that this is going to be resolved anytime in the next couple months I think is kind of a fantasy and it does seem like the Trump team, even though they`re saying they`re not seeking delay as you say in each instance, they`re requesting a somewhat longer time frame than the government for the exact same stuff.
WAGNER: Yeah, it`s piecemeal bargaining, right? We`re talking about days, weeks. But it all adds.
GERSTEIN: And they won, to be fair, they won one of those arguments with the judge today about picking the vendor. They said, oh, he said you can have until the end of the week. He initially wanted them to do it by tomorrow.
WAGNER: Yes.
GERSTEIN: So he gave the Trump people — he threw them a few bones, if you will. It wasn`t all conflict and I don`t think he wanted to draw a bright line in front of them and say, you know, this is where I`m coming down.
WAGNER: Okay, so there is this investigation. There are multiple levels to all of this, and we also have some breaking news tonight that Letitia James, the New York attorney general, is announcing that she will have a — it`s pre-announcing —
GERSTEIN: Right.
WAGNER: — a major announcement tomorrow at 10:30.
Now, we know that this is the civil investigation into the Trump organization and whether or not they inflated or deflated their assets basically to hoodwink loan assessors and the like.
Do you have a sense of what might be coming down the pike? I know this is all supposition and prognostication.
GERSTEIN: I mean, it does sound like what she`s been promising in that department now for a year or two, which is some kind of a massive civil case on behalf of the state of New York, perhaps on behalf of the city or other entities in New York that may have been shorted in the view — in her view, real estate taxes, perhaps subject to some kind of insurance fraud, and she`s going to file some kind of case. It sounds like we know Trump was deposed, you may remember, after his ex-wife passed away. It was delayed and then back in August, he was finally deposed in this case, and I think he invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 400 times.
WAGNER: Yes.
GERSTEIN: He fought tooth and nail to not give that deposition, where he didn`t end up saying anything anyway. So, obviously, just didn`t want the optics of having to invoke the Fifth Amendment as many times as he did, but it sounds like this is where Letitia James is headed. She doesn`t have a lot of criminal jurisdiction. So, it sounds most likely like the this is the long advertised massive civil suit over tax fraud, insurance fraud, and similar issues that she`s been advertising for some time.
WAGNER: Sounds like being the operative phrase there, we do not know that for sure. This is going to be an announcement about Trump, but certainly, the fact that her office rejected a settlement deal in recent weeks, that the wheels of justice have been spinning with greater ferocity in recent months, perhaps it is this a much awaited conclusion to a high profile investigation or a lawsuit as it were.
Josh Gerstein, senior legal affairs reporter at “Politico”, great to see you, Josh. Thanks for your time.
GERSTEIN: Thanks, Alex. Good to see you.
WAGNER: We have much more ahead this hour. President Biden is in New York City tonight and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre is going to join me right here on set in just a few minutes.
But next, Trump`s legal team cited a 2012 federal court ruling to argue that documents seized in the FBI`s search of Mar-a-Lago should be deemed personal items. That 2012 case involved audio recordings kept in former President Clinton`s sock drawer. No really, former President Clinton`s sock drawer. That`s coming up next.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:19:42]
WAGNER: In the legal filing today from Donald Trump`s legal team, the one in which they continue to try and block the Justice Department from even looking at the classified documents they see from Trump`s beach club, even though those records are the U.S. government`s own documents, in that filing today, Trump`s team keeps referencing a case from the year 2012, the kind of premise their entire defense on it.
[21:20:04]
They keep saying that this case from 2012 proves that all those documents the FBI seized at Mar-a-Lago were totally Trump`s personal property and they never should have been taken from him in the first place. That 2012 case is called Judicial Watch versus the National Archives and Records Administration, NARA.
And if you`re thinking Judicial Watch, haven`t I heard of them? Oh, boy, have you. Judicial Watch is a right-wing legal organization best known for flooding Democratic administrations with ridiculous lawsuits. They filed 20 lawsuits over Hillary Clinton`s emails. They filed lawsuits against government climate scientists, accusing them of fraud science they have pushed every pro-Trump voter fraud conspiracy you can`t imagine.
Their founder just had his law license suspended in Washington, D.C. But according to reporting from CNN, it was Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton who convinced Trump that he should keep all these classified documents, that they were Trump`s personal property, all based on this court case that Judicial Watch fought back in 2012. And that case concerned, I am not kidding here, Bill Clinton`s sock drawer.
When Bill Clinton was president, he periodically invited his old friend the historian Taylor Branch to the White House where they made recordings of Clinton reflecting on his presidency. The idea was that after Clinton left office, he would use the tapes for an autobiography.
Now, here`s Taylor Branch talking about it in 2009, when he published his own book based on those tapes.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
TAYLOR BRANCH, HISTORIAN: He consulted me, an old friend, who had worked a lot in presidential libraries out of the blue. He called — asked me, what can I do to make sure that the records 50 years from now will really reflect what`s going on in the administration? And we lit upon this idea of doing a secret diary. From the very beginning, it was a secret and only in the second administration did he trust me enough to say you put him away, and I put he had hid them in his sock drawer, in the closet, in the bedroom.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
WAGNER: Well, when Judicial Watch found out about these tapes, they filed a lawsuit to get them. They said these are official presidential records and we should have access to them like any other presidential record. The National Archives and Records Administration, NARA, countered that former President Clinton had decided these tapes were his personal property. They were a personal record he made for himself and apparently kept in his sock drawer and the archives weren`t going to demand that he hand them over.
Judicial Watch lost that case. The court ruled that Bill Clinton was within his rights to decide that his sock drawer tapes were personal records. And based on that ruling, Donald Trump is claiming that he has the right to declare that all these classified documents he squirreled away at his beach club are his personal records because he says so.
Now, I am not a lawyer, but I would say there are a number of problems here. Chief among them, there would seem to be some obvious differences between some tape recordings you made of yourself for your own personal use kept in your sock drawer, and say classified details on another country`s nuclear program, as well as top secret human intelligence sources. You simply cannot just decide that another country`s nuclear secrets are your own personal property. That is not how any of this works.
And even if Trump wants to claim he`s decided that that stuff is all personal records, rather than presidential records, let us not lose sight of the fact that lots of these documents might never have even been presidential records. To the extent those classified documents are really federal agencies records, they are explicitly excluded by law from the definition of presidential records. These documents didn`t belong to Trump when he was president and they certainly do not now that he is a private citizen.
Joining us now is NBC News presidential historian Michael Beschloss.
Michael, thank you for being here.
MICHAEL BESCHLOSS, NBC NEWS PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: My pleasure. Great to see you, Alex.
WAGNER: You, too.
So, Michael, take us in a time machine back to the 1990s. Bill Clinton and his buddy Taylor Branch are sitting in the West Wing, making tapes to be used in some forthcoming autobiography of some sort. Can you contrast that with what Trump is alleging regarding these classified documents he had squirreled away at Mar-a-Lago?
BESCHLOSS: Sure, I`ve even talked to Bill Clinton and Taylor Branch about those tapes and they specifically, Bill Clinton said these are private records, setting it aside. If you`ve got a president for instance who sends love letters to his wife, aren`t those protected or you know can Judicial Watch subpoena those and publish them in the newspapers while a president is serving? Of course, not.
And in the same way, Donald Trump has absolutely no right to say that highly classified documents with let`s say nuclear secrets, if that`s what these are, or lists of friends of CIA agents in foreign countries, or other things that can be used to harm Americans and make them vulnerable to terrorists, if he just says you know those are my private documents, I can do what I feel like with them.
[21:25:07]
It`s ridiculous. This will not make the — this will not survive the test in court.
WAGNER: It is amazing how many times if you read these transcripts, if you read these filings, how many times Trump`s attorneys cite this sock drawer case. But I mean, we — talk about presidential records as if it`s like scrapbook keeping or at least in this — in this scenario, Trump`s team has wanted us to believe that this is just kind of — these are souvenirs.
But presidential records and the Presidential Records Act came about after a very specific chapter in American history. Can you talk about why the PRA, the Presidential Records Act, is important, and what it signifies in a post-Nixon era?
BESCHLOSS: Okay, I`ll take my time machine now from the `90s back to the 1970s —
WAGNER: Please do.
BESCHLOSS: — when Richard Nixon was leaving office, driven out of office. He had a lot of embarrassing documents. People who visited the West Wing at the time he was leaving noticed that there were a lot of fireplaces working overtime and the accurate smell of documents being burned, plus Nixon had arranged to have military planes, illicitly take some of these documents out to San Clemente where he was going to his retirement.
Finally, he made a deal with Gerry Ford, the new president, that he never should have made, Ford, which said there`s going to be a vault in California, that sounds like something in a Hitchcock film, vault in California, Nixon`s tapes and papers will go into the vault, there will be two keys. One key to be held by the head of the National Archives the other key to be held by Richard Nixon, with the suggestion that if Nixon decided to use his key and destroy every document that might embarrassing to him — be embarrassing to him, he could do it.
Congress and the American people found out and this act was passed in 1978 and said that most everything that a president produces in terms of documents during his presidency is the property of the American people, and has to be remain within their hands, can`t be sold by a president. And even more so, as you`re saying, Alex, you know, classified documents, especially from — especially from another agency, you know, those are not just souvenirs that Trump can sell to a hostile government or terrorists or show to visitors to Mar-a-Lago those are secrets that can be used by people who hate America to kill our children.
Under the law, they`re supposed to be in a National Archives vault, under heavy guard, not sitting around Mar-a-Lago with people walking around.
WAGNER: It really feels like the parallels between what happened with Nixon, a president intent on destroying records, keeping the things in a vault with only a single or two keys, it — the parallels between that and Mar-a-Lago are stunning and eerie.
Michael Beschloss, NBC News presidential historian, thank you as always for your time and wisdom, Michael.
BESCHLOSS: Pleasure. Love it. Thank you, Alex.
WAGNER: Still ahead on this hour, as soldiers in Ukraine continue the fight to take back their country, I will talk to one of their own, a Ukrainian combat medic who is live here on set.
But next, I`ll be joined live by White House press secretary Karine Jean- Pierre as President Biden prepares to address the first in-person U.N. General Assembly in three years. I have a lot to ask her.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:33:09]
WAGNER: President Biden just arrived here in New York City a few hours ago for the United Nations General Assembly. He is expected to speak to the 193-member body tomorrow, rallying support for Ukraine as that country continues to fight back Russian forces. The White House says Biden will lay out his plan for American foreign policy at the U.N. as he juggles a number of other items on the home front and ongoing immigration situation at the border, rogue Republican governors, looming midterms and the end or the middle of a pandemic.
Joining us now is Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, who is here in New York with President Biden`s U.S. delegation to the U.N. General Assembly.
Karine, welcome to New York. Welcome to the show.
KARINE JEAN-PIERRE, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Thank you for having me. Congratulations on the show.
WAGNER: Thank you and congratulations to you on your job. Congratulations.
I want to talk about the rogue Republican governors first because today, Governor Ron DeSantis in Florida, it was reported, there was some suggestion that he might be flying a plane of migrants to President Biden`s home state of Delaware. That plane landed moments ago, an hour ago, I`m not exactly sure what the time frame is, and it was empty and it would seem to suggest that DeSantis was aware that President Biden had his number, I know you commented on this political ploy earlier.
But the face-off between Republican governors and this administration is pretty pitched, and I guess I wonder internally — not internally — has the president reached out to any of these governors?
JEAN-PIERRE: So, here`s the thing — and I was asked this question earlier today — I don`t know why we would reach out to a governor or governors who are clearly playing a political game, right? It is something that they`re doing not to find a solution but to literally, literally put people`s lives at risk and we`re talking about people who are fleeing communism. We`re talking about folks who are leaving Venezuela, leaving Nicaragua, or leaving Cuba because there are regimes there that are incredibly dangerous.
[21:35:06]
And they`re using these children, these families as political pawns after dealing with the political stress that they`re dealing from another country. So that`s not the solution. That`s a political game that they`re playing.
And so, what we`re doing is we`re calling that out because it`s dangerous. When you believe kids on the side — on the side of the roads of a busy, busy street, that`s dangerous, and we have heard from these families saying that they were worried, that they were scared, that they didn`t know what was happening, what was going on, and it is incredibly shameful.
And the question to Ron DeSantis, Governor DeSantis is, what are you telling to the people in Florida? Your — folks who are from those countries —
WAGNER: Yeah.
JEAN-PIERRE: — that you are using these folks as a political pawn, as a political game.
And look, we are ready, we`ve always been ready. On day one, the president has said, he`s put forward his immigration — his immigration legislation, a comprehensive piece of legislation, and he said, let`s — let`s figure out how do we fix this broken system.
But instead, that`s not what they wanted. That`s not what they want to do. They don`t want to vote for historic amount of funds that would go to DHS to deal with this issue. They don`t want to work on a real solution. So we`re going to call that out, Alex.
WAGNER: Yeah, I mean, I guess, and I understand that. I mean, this is clearly political gamesmanship if you will, and it`s not — it`s not incumbent on the person who`s not playing that game to call them, it`s just that Joe Biden is the kind of president you`d think — I mean, he — this is the kind of president he proposed himself to be as a candidate who could say cut it out.
Now, whether that would make any difference to Governor Abbott and Ron DeSantis is an open question. It might not. But in terms of the crisis on the border, something that directly needs to be addressed, I want to talk about where the White House is at in terms of solutions, right?
We have some reporting from NBC, the DHS officials have presented the White House with some options, including flying migrants to the country`s northern border with Canada to alleviate overcrowding on the U.S.-Mexico border. Under a plan proposed by DHS, migrants would be sent to such cities as Los Angeles where shelters would get an advanced warning to have time to prepare for the influx.
Now, I know, some people are going to say, sending migrants on planes, wait, wait, wait, alarm bells. Tell me how that is meaningfully different than what DeSantis and Abbott are doing?
JEAN-PIERRE: So let me just say a couple of things about what`s happening at the border. The DHS put out a report laying out what kind of a migration situation that we`re dealing with, which is very new. I mentioned Venezuela, I mentioned Nicaragua, I mentioned Cuba, we have seen an increase of about 121 percent from — since last year of what`s going on with these countries that are fleeing communism. So that has gone up.
And if you look at north — the north — Central America in the last three months, we have seen a decrease of about 43 percent. So we are in a different kind of migration component right now, and so we have to deal with where we are.
So the way that we have worked this through is that there`s Title 42, which is a court-ordered order — process that we have to go through. It`s a CDC health authority. It`s not an immigration authority. And so, people are automatically expelled.
And for those that are not, they go through a legal process. And right now, what we have been able to do in the past 19 months, in the past year is we have seen a very much increase of a — historic increase of people that we have been able to expel out of the country. So that is something that we have been able to do.
Look, the system is broken and we know that. It was decimated by the last administration and what we`re trying to do is fix something that has had decades and decades of deterioration when you look at the system. So what we`re asking is we`re asking to really fix it in a in a way that is transformative and to do that, it is really Congress acting and we`re asking Republicans, hey, instead of playing political games, why don`t you join us in trying to fix a real problem that`s happening at the border?
WAGNER: So, these measures title 42, a Trump era holdover, flying migrants to other cities, you see there`s a stopgap measures —
JEAN-PIERRE: Because we have to fix what`s actually broken.
WAGNER: Well, yeah.
JEAN-PIERRE: Right? And if we don`t do that, then we`re not truly a addressing an issue that is affecting all of us. And so, look, the border is not open. We`re doing everything that we can, to make sure that we`re dealing with this issue.
It`s a crisis that has been the decimated, right, the system has been decimated by the last administration. And so, we`re going to do everything that we can. But again, these political games, we`re going to call that them out. They are really inhumane and inappropriate.
WAGNER: Maybe Joe Biden should fly down to Florida and visit Ron — I`m going to stop with the Joe Biden-Ron DeSantis thing.
[21:40:05]
But just one good turn deserves another.
I do want to ask you about COVID.
JEAN-PIERRE: OK.
WAGNER: And how you think of this pandemic in the White House, right? On “60 Minutes”, President Biden says we still have a problem with COVID. We`re still doing a lot of work on it, but the pandemic is over.
Now, does he think the pandemic is over?
JEAN-PIERRE: So let me just put this into context a little bit. So when he was asked this question, he was walking through the Detroit auto show, which had not been open or had not been held, I should say, in three years. And even as we`re talking about UNGA, he`s going to UNGA, and it hasn`t been held in person in three years.
So we are in a different place because of the work that this administration has done, because we are prepared, because there is treatment, because there`s vaccines, because they`re a test. And so when — when you look at where we are today, 90 percent of — we`ve — when we — when he walked in, there were — deaths were about a 3,000 day, which was really awful. That`s what we were seeing.
WAGNER: Yeah.
JEAN-PIERRE: Now, that number has gone down by 90 percent. If you think about schools are now open, businesses are now open, because of the work of what this administration has done. So he is saying it is not disruptive as it was before. We are in a different place and he has been consistent in saying that, but there is still more work to do in order to be able to continue to get these vaccine for the — you know, these next generation if you will —
WAGNER: Yeah.
JEAN-PIERRE: — of vaccines and treatment, we have to continue to do the work, and that`s why we`re asking Congress, hey, we need that funding to continue what we have been doing.
Two hundred and twenty million people are fully vaccinated. Why is that? It`s because of the work that this administration has done. That`s 77 percent of the population.
Again, we are not — it`s not as disruptive as it was before. We are managing this now. We know what works. We have the test. We have the vaccines. We have the treatment.
But again, we have to think about the future.
WAGNER: Yeah, I believe it`s only 34.7 of the country got their second booster. We still have 400 people dying a day, and by the way, 21 percent of Americans who caught COVID have long COVID, which is a whole another wave of this.
So maybe the — I`m trying to glean the essence of this is, it`s not over. We are seeing some kind of light at the end of a tunnel but we`re still in the tunnel. Is that what you want Americans to feel?
JEAN-PIERRE: Yes, we`re seeing — and here`s the thing, Americans are feeling that themselves.
WAGNER: Yeah.
JEAN-PIERRE: That`s why when he was walking through the halls of the Detroit Auto Show, he pointed out how people were not wearing masks and now that — now the auto show is open again. And that matters for folks, right? This is a different time than we were when we walked in January of 2020, and that is because of what we have been able to do, a comprehensive vaccination program that we have been able to put forth because it was so important to manage this the right way in order to turn our economy back on, in order to get our schools open, in order to get smalls — saves of some of these small businesses, get that going again, and that`s what he`s talking about.
It is not disrupting our lives the way that it has been. It`s not controlling our lives the way that it has been. Do we have more work to do? Yes, and he actually said that as you just laid out in his comments.
WAGNER: We are on set, unmasked, you`re going to the general assembly.
JEAN-PIERRE: That`s right.
WAGNER: Things have changed. There is no doubt about that.
Karine Jean-Pierre, thank you for taking some time —
JEAN-PIERRE: Thank you so much, Alex.
WAGENR: — busy New York City schedule to join us on set. Great to see you.
JEAN-PIERRE: Great to see you.
WAGNER: Up next, I will be joined live right here on set by a member of the Ukrainian military. We will hear firsthand what life on the front line is like and how people are feeling as Ukrainian counter attacks recapture territory from Russia.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:48:39]
WAGNER: If history is any guide, Russia may be about to dramatically escalate its war in Ukraine. In the past few days, officials in four of the regions Russia has taken from Ukraine announced plans to hold referendums on whether or not to become officially a part of Russia. The voting starts on Friday and will last for four days.
Holding a, quote/unquote, referendum in a territory that is essentially held at gunpoint will have no real international effect. The White House has already called these referenda a sham and said the U.S. will never recognize Russia`s claims to Ukrainian territory.
But this is part of Russia`s playbook, once they can claim that a territory is Russian, it makes it easier to justify the need to defend it to audiences inside Russia. It makes it easier to drum up nationalist support for the war.
Russia did that in 2014 when Putin annexed Crimea from Ukraine and it seems he`s doing it again now, perhaps out of desperation. The war after all is not going well. Russia has lost tens of thousands of troops and Ukraine`s latest offensive as Russian troops surrendering or retreating in droves.
Today, Russian lawmakers approved a bill that toughens punishments for fighters who desert from the military. It also makes it a crime to voluntarily surrender to Ukrainian forces, a crime punishable by up to 10 years behind bars. And President Putin also ordered Russian arms manufacturers to produce more weapons and to do so faster.
[21:50:04]
Now, Putin was set to make a prime time address to the nation today before abruptly pushing it to tomorrow. We don`t know exactly that he — what he`s planning on telling the nation, but with these new referenda, with these new laws against surrendering and a new major push to increase arms manufacturing, all those signs appear to be pointing toward military escalation. And as much as Ukraine has made incredible advances in the past month, this war is far from over, and it is still very much a story of David versus Goliath.
Ukraine does not independently have the kind of manufacturing ability that Russia does to supply its military.
This is Yaryna Chornoguz. She is a senior corporal, a combat medic and a drone pilot in the Ukrainian military. And this car, this civilian model SUV with a shattered windshield the one you see right there, literally a Mitsubishi wagon, this is what she uses as an ambulance on the front lines of the war.
And this is the drone that she uses to look for Russian troop positions, it is a civilian model as well. You can literally get one of these at Best Buy.
Yaryna has been a member of the Ukrainian military since before this latest war began. At the beginning of the war, she defended the front line and villages north of the port city of Mariupol. More recently, she and her unit have been on the front lines in the Donetsk region.
And now, she is in the U.S. on a military mission to help Americans understand just how much Ukraine needs their support.
Joining us now is Yaryna Chornoguz, senior corporal combat medic and drone pilot in the Ukrainian military.
Yaryna, thank you so much for being with us.
YARYNA CHORNOGUZ, SENIOR CORPORAL, ARMED FORCES OF UKRAINE: It`s good to be here.
WAGNER: So, first, tell me, I know you`re here for a very specific purpose. What are you and the Ukrainian military hoping to get from the U.S.?
CHORNOGUZ: Well, first of all, I want to thank American for all the help that we got.
I can say that the American HIMARS and howitzers, they have changed the character of this war. As I was on the north of the Mariupol, in the beginning of March, you know, we got like a grenade launchers, javelins on our hands, and they attacked us with great — with long tank columns like 40, 50, 100 vehicles, and it was really hard to stop.
Right now, with these weapons, they don`t dare attack us, with such big forces and our artillery works immediately on these like small groups of tanks. They are like Russian, they`re watching for weak place. They stop them really effectively, and we shouldn`t pay, you know, so high casualty rate —
WAGNER: Thanks to some of these the weaponry, whether it`s javelins, whether it`s hummers.
CHORNOGUZ: Yeah, yeah, of course, I will — we need also like armored vehicles because it`s eight — you know, eight, eight months of the war and we`ve ran out like of armor. So we need like heavy armor because have tanks, but they are Soviet and in order to back up with territories, to liberate our territories, we need tanks, because you know, the southwest of Ukraine was basically occupied with tanks, and the best response to a Russian tank is a tank and a tank. And like Abrams or Leopards that, that what we need.
And we also need aircrafts to close our air space because, you know, Russians they hit our cities, our civilian infrastructure with rockets. And we don`t have anything to respond them, and our civilian people are dying every day..
WAGNER: And that is worth mentioning again and again, we saw that picture of your car. It`s a Mitsubishi. It`s a passenger vehicle, you are driving that literally out to the front lines of battle to save lives.
Can you tell me about what you as a medic are seeing and what you need out on the front line of battle?
CHORNOGUZ: Alex, thank you for this question. It`s a good question.
As a combat medic, perhaps I had my hardest experience on the beginning of the March, in the village which were three times attacked with such big tank column of Russians, and we had hard battles, we had lots of wounded soldiers, like every day. And, you know, for me, it`s not difficult to help like soldiers, like me because it was for — I was learned like, I had this —
WAGNER: It`s war.
CHORNOGUZ: It`s (INAUDIBLE), yes. it was — but one day, I had like situation, it was very cold, I remember this same layer of snow, you know, everywhere and it was like great coldness in this village.
[21:55:07]
And I was called by my commander, and he told me that he was reported that there are wounded civilians in the village. And he showed me direction, and I took group and we went with our group to the — that house. First of all, I saw wounded civilian man with a wound and his — you know, shoulder I started tamponade and then I heard screaming from the basement.
I finished my aid and I ran to the basement and I saw like a boy aged 10 screamed because of pain and I started watching — you know, he told me he had a pain in his chest, and I saw that he had shrapnel. It was just after bombing with — you know, this forbidden, cluster munition in this village where Ukrainian civilians lived. You know, that`s what I —
WAGNER: A child, a 10-year-old.
CHORNOGUZ: Yes, I put my hand to his chest and we helped him as well as his mother with a ten-months in her hands.
WAGNER: Wow.
CHORNOGUZ: I just have this picture before my eyes when they sleep together. It`s, you know, I will recall, she is crying and the boy, just in blanket with his chest in great pain, and it was perhaps my hardest experience because as I said to help military, it`s the job, but kids — it was even a very hard experience for me as a medic.
WAGNER: A mother with a ten month old child and her ten year old boy with shrapnel wounds to his chest, the horrors of war just so staggering in this particular conflict where civilians are both fighting and victim in all of this.
Yaryna Chornoguz who is senior combat medic and drone pilot in the Ukrainian military, thank you for everything you are doing to fight for the cause of democracy. We hope that we can support your efforts as you`re here in New York. Thanks for your time.
CHORNOGUZ: Thank you to all Americans.
WAGNER: We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WAGNER: That does it for us tonight. We`ll see again tomorrow.
Now, it`s time for “THE LAST WORD WITH LAWRENCE O`DONNELL”.
Good evening, Lawrence.