tweeted a picture of himself in uniform. there's the picture. his twitter message read. i'm back in the game. once the game started, a special moment scalise recorded the first out and there were hugs all around. >> the entire infield, the entire field goes over to congratulate him and give him a big hug. how about that? >> a great moment for the congressman and everyone there. we're glad he's back. >> time to hand it over to chris cuomo. >> i am chris cuomo. welcome to prime time. kids taken from their mothers at the border. is jeff sessions right that god wants the law enforced this way? the white house is, of course, backing that up, but lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are backing off this harsh practice. the question is will they do something about it? we have jim jordan here. we'll see what the ohio republican has to say about it. i'm also going to bring in another hard liner well known for his immigrant roundups, joe

ar par pay owe. and the ig report on the clinton e-mail investigation is out. all 568 pages of it. cliff notes version, the fbi didn't put in the fix to help hillary or to hurt trump. but partisans are seeing what they want to see. we're going to show you what is justified and not justified by the facts and conclusions. we have clinton's campaign chairman here with his reaction and clinton's. what do you say? let's get after it. >> two big stories tonight. the doj watchdogs report on the fbi's handling of the clinton investigation is in. there's a lot of brain food in there. plenty of blame for jim comey. gossipy and biassed and leaky agents, and some troubling

conclusions. we're going to break down the other findings in a minute. let's lead with our hearts. immigrant families being separated at the border and the trump administration has a new defense saying the bible justifies this. let's bring in jim jordan. congressman, always a pleasure. we'll talk about immigration, talk about the ig report. good for you? >> yeah. and first, congratulations on the new show. good to be with you. >> thank you. good to have you as part of the conversation. appreciate you taking the opportunity. what's going on at the border? do you believe this is the right way to enforce the law? >> what i think is we should enforce the law and do what the american people elected us to do, put the kind of immigration policy forward that was front and center in the campaign, the mandate of the election, which is build the wall end chain migration and reform the acai sum policies we have currently as well as get rid to the sanctuaries and also deal with the daca population.

there's legislation pending in the house that would accomplish that and be consistent with the mandate and what we told the american people we were going to do. >> you were aware lawmakers on both sides said you don't have to enforce it this way. paul ryan said he didn't like this. let's put this on the board for people, what the different elements are in that overhaul legal immigration. boost border security. about $26 billion. it's not what the president wanted but it's something. end family separation. path to citizenship for daca recipients. back to the original question. do you agree with ending family separation? >> well, no one wants to separate families. >> that's not true. the attorney general does. he says god wants him to enforce the law this way. >> i had the folks from ice in my office. i had customs and borders in my office earlier today. everyone knows we need to reform the asylum laws. 80% of the people seeking asylum, 80% aren't legitimate. they told me that.

we got to clean it up. for those who are, we want to keep the families together. and those who are truly being purse cu persecuted, not ones coached to say the right things so they get to the country. those being persecuted, we want to help them. no one disagrees with that. let's do the right things and what we told the american people we were going to do. build the border wall end sanctuary cities -- >> but you never said and we will separate all families that come across the border and the law doesn't make you do it. this is a choice of enforcement. you have two options the way i see it. the big bill that ryan has that you're talking about, while he folded this y in, it's not going to come to a quick conclusion. you can't get agreement with your part of the caucus on your side, let alone the democrats. why not do something right away to stop the separation of the

families, or you could look the administration in the eye and say this is your choice. >> i got a better plan. >> stop enforcing it this way. >> why don't we do what we said? why don't we pass the chairman -- there's a great piece of legislation i've been for for months. >> won't happen fast enough. every day these children are separated if their families is a bad day. >> it never hurts to keep your promise and your word. >> when did you promise i'm going to separate every family that comes across the border and i may lose track of some of the kids but god likes it. >> i campaigned on the same issues president -- >> this -- >> they put republicans in control of the house and the senate. stop the crazy policies but do it in a way that's consistent with helping people who are truly persecuted. >> how is this helping? that's the part i don't get. it seems like it's harsh for harshness sake, we're going to

prosecute every a say. say this is from a dlaw from th democrats. that's bs. >> they started it with the dau ka executive order the president gave that was ruled unconstitutional. >> you wouldn't act on it. you wouldn't get anything done. >> that sent a message for people to come here and some of them are just being coached to say whatever it takes to get in this country. we're trying to sort it out. >> you don't act on it. you can't get the bill through. >> i'm willing to act on it. i want to do it in a way consistent with the election. >> i'm saying i don't see how -- here's the sticking point. you seem to be suggesting if you do something just on this separation of families and kids, kids and parents, rather, that's somehow not keeping a campaign promise. i don't buy that. who did you tell we'll do it in the harshest way possible? >> you know we have to address

the whole thing. >> i don't get it. i don't know -- >> chuck schumer said that lindsey graham who is more moderate on the issue on the senate side than i think republican -- >> not about this issue. >> he said you link what's going on with the border and doing the security measures we need to do to secure the border, interior enforcement, you have to link it. >> that was before this. the shame is we lived through this before. there's a different enforcement tactic being used right now. there's more enforcement being used right now than there was back then, but we lived through this already. >> and less crossings. less illegals across the border under the trump administration. and the american people support that. >> it depends on how you look at the numbers. my quibble is, and it's not a quibble. it's actually outrage, that you don't have to enforce it this way. you say you don't like the families being separated. everybody says it but you won't do anything about it. >> we want to pass a bill that addresses the whole issue. >> you there's too much stuff in

it. >> you don't know that. i would have preferred we passed this legislation sooner. as i just said, 80% of the 100,000 folks -- >> i'd like to see the numbers. i've seen different numbers. it's hard to know what's true and isn't in one sample like that. >> 2000 a week, times 52 weeks. slightly over 10 0,000. i got that information today from ice. >> i'm saying real versus not real. >> they told me 80%. hard working agents on the southern border who are saying we need resources to do this right. >> there's no question you need more resources. all i'm saying is this, you got jeff sessions saying the bible says that this is order and just and fair, and that's great. god loves good process. it's none of those things. it's not an orderly process. it's haphazard. it's not fair because you're taking families coming and presenting themselves for asylum and treating them like fence

jumpers, a phrase you like. and i don't know why you don't fix it. >> if they're truly a family, we want to keep them together. i am with you. >> then why the separation policy? >> i'm with you. we got to fix all this. again -- >> even though you have an emergency. >> we told the american people we were going to do it. >> you think the american people would be upset if you fixed this first? >> i think there should be a common sense approach. you got too do it in a bigger piece of legislation. >> you won't get it done and the families will stay separated. >> maybe this will be the catalyst. >> it's not shaping up like that right now. you want to switch to the ig report? it's a big topic. i don't have that much time. >> of course. >> here's how we broke it down. i'm going to have to change the headings depending on what party i'm talking to between good facts and bad facts. i prepared this just for you. >> i love it. >> the good fact from your perspective which is you wanted to see in this report if the suggestions and allegations

about these agents being up to no good was sub stanch wauated. five biassed. they found it. i don't like he's going to win. don't worry, we'll fx it. that's tantalizing. you're all over it. the bad fact is they conclude that there was no impact. and there was no exercise of that bias on any of the decisions. >> really? >> yeah. >> i mean, well, i mean, chris, come on. they say we do not have confidence that the decision was free from bias. so his bias did impact his decision. they say it. i've looked at a lot more of these in respect general reports when they targeted conservatives. >> let's stick on this one. >> this is some of the harvdest language i've seen. snow was not free from bias that impacted his decision. >> no. they say it impacted his decision of prioritizing --

>> the russia investigation over the clinton investigation. >> but in terms of the decisions that were made, and the conclusions that were drawn, they say there was no impact. you can't run away from that. >> i mean, chris, five biassed people. they happen to be the top people at the fbi who ran the clinton investigation and by the way, went to the russia investigation and oh, by the way, three of those five were put on mueller's team. >> and -- >> it shows how biassed they were. >> no. it shows there was accountability. >> the inspector general saying we do not have confidence. in other words, they had no decision that the decision was free from bias. he was trying to say get focussed on russia. >> they also say there were no conclusions. >> because we have to stop trump. that's his words, not mine, the guy who ran the clinton investigation. >> he didn't do anything to do that, including, and i think this is the toughest thing for you to handle in terms of your perspective on this, if struck

page, attorney two and all the people in this group of five and maybe 50. let's exaggerate it for the sake of this point. if they wanted to compromise point, they didn't do the easiest thing that would have been the hardest to trace to follow up on their supposed bias which is leak about the trump probe during the election. comey decided not to talk about it. only talk about the clinton one. but if these people wanted to get trump so much, why didn't they leak they were looking at him? >> because they were all convinced clinton was going to win. >> no. that doesn't follow logically. if you wanted to get trump, you would have done that. let me get to the other points. >> they opened the investigation on july 31st. eight days later, stop trump. six days later, insurance policy. if that don't show bias -- >> but he didn't follow through on this which this inspector general was obviously looking for. you know how exacting this report is. comey is bad it says in here.

he did inappropriate things. there's no question about it. but he also said this. which i want your take on. it was right for him not to charge hillary clinton. that that was done in the keeping with the consistent thoughts about prosecution within the department. so he went out of school. he did things he shouldn't have done. but he arrived at the right conclusion. is that okay with you? >> no. i've said all along, i thought he was wrong throughout this investigation. i thought he was wrong in july. >> but it was right not to charge hrc? >> i disagree. he can reach the conclusion he did, and comey reached the conclusion. i criticized comey in july and in october. i think he screwed this thing up from the get go, and i think the report points that out. and i underscore the fact that the top agents that peter struck, lisa page and fbi lawyer number 2 were involved in this, had extreme an mouse toward president trump and all i think

used that in the course of this investigation. >> but you don't know the last part. it's not in this report. >> they said they did not follow normal fbi protocol. >> it says in the report that looking at the decisions that were made in the investigation, he didn't see proof of bias. and look, the biggest fact for him, and reaching that conclusion is they didn't leak. they never -- >> no confidence that the decision was free of bias. if that's not saying bias impacted peter struck's behavior, the lead sergeant, the guy who launched the trump organization and said we'll stop trump and later says don't worry, we got an insurance policy, if that doesn't show bias impact into this, i don't know what does. >> but you're taking what the ig said with specific context to his priority of weaner versus the russia probe. and the inspector general makes a point of saying no, don't go

that far. we don't see the proof, and it makes me wonder if it's really never been about the report of the facts. you just want this to be said and out there as kind of just poisoning the well of what happens with the russia probe. >> remember the time frame. late september through late october when they had weiner's laptop. struck said don't worry about that. down play that. >> finding nothing of any value on the laptop. >> down play that, don't worry about that. let's focus on the russia investigation, because why? even though we think clinton is going to win, we got to stop trump. that was what was in his mind. >> that wasn't the only reason reflected in the report. it was russia's interfering with the election. we're getting a lot of information there's been untoward contact between the trump people and russia. >> why didn't he say we have to stop russia? he didn't say that. he said we have to stop trump. >> even in all that appendices,

they don't have all the back and forth. they don't relay it in the transcripts. the last point is that has to be addressed, the fbi was a sieve. and they say they're going to fix it, christopher wray. >> of course. >> you've been a big dog on that trail. and it spells out what was mccabe lay lying about? >> maybe with the fbi didn't have 13 different personnel at the fbi talking to one reporter, maybe if they were less concerned about their public relations and their imman and more focussed on doing their job with the normal procedures at the fbi, maybe there would have been a different outcome in the clinton investigation. >> i don't know about that. i don't know that you would have gotten a different conclusion, and there's nothing in the inspector general's report to conclude that. but that kind of leaking is something they're going to have to police. as a journalist, it's a

statement against interest. we'll see what they put in place. i look forward to talking to you about that and the other implications about that. let's see if anything gets done to help the kids on the border. >> thank you. >> all right. be well. congressman jim jordan, republican, ohio. there is a great debate to be had on the morality of separating these families crossing the border. morality and legality. we have guests to talk about it next. in 24 hours, you'll send him off thinking you've done everything for his well-being. but meningitis b progresses quickly and can be fatal, sometimes within 24 hours. while meningitis b is uncommon, about 1 in 10 infected will die. like millions of others, your teen may not be vaccinated against meningitis b. meningitis b strikes quickly. be quick to talk to your teen's doctor about a meningitis b vaccine.

we're listening to what matters most to you. and we're committed to improving every ride. starting with features designed to make it easy for your driver to find you... taking the stress out of pickups. ♪ we're putting safety at the heart of everything we do... by making it easy to verify your car, and driver. uber has new leadership, a new vision, and is moving in a new direction... forward hey, i'm curious about your social security alerts.

oh! just sign up online and we'll alert you if we find your social security number on any one of thousands of risky sites. that sounds super helpful. how much is it? well, if you have a discover card, it's free. no way! yes way! we just think it's important for you to be in the know. all right! hey... ewww! everything ok? being in the know is very good. yeah, it is. ooo don't shake! don't shake! ahhh! know if your social security number is found on risky sites. free from discover. proven to protect street skaters and freestylers. stops up to 97% uv. lasts through heat. through sweat. coppertone. proven to protect.

i'm a small business, but i have... big dreams... and big plans. so how do i make the efforts of 8 employees... feel like 50? how can i share new plans virtually? how can i download an e-file? virtual tours? zip-file? really big files? in seconds, not minutes... just like that. like everything... the answer is simple. i'll do what i've always done...

dream more, dream faster, and above all... now, i'll dream gig. now more businesses, in more places, can afford to dream gig. comcast, building america's largest gig-speed network. the trump administration today using the bible to defend separating families. it's tonight's great debate. the max slap and nina turner with us. thank you. >> thanks, chris. >> match slap. do you believe that god wants the law enforced this way on the border? separating families who cross undocumented? including asylum seekers? >> i'm a christian, but i believe in some humility and knowing exactly what god wants in these situations, i think we have a bad law that needs to be changed. i think the law prevents the children and the adults who are

breaking the law from being treated as a family unite. i think it's more humane to treat them as a family unit. i think congress should pass something to fix it. >> what is he referring to that makes the government have to do it this way? >> there is no law that makes the government do it this way. it's policy and will, the will of the trump administration. and let me say to ag sessions, we need to get him a what would jesus do bracelet. jesus would be on the side of the downtrodden and 4. and matthew 7 and 4 is clear. do unto them as you would have do unto you. it is indefensive using the bible to separate children from their parents to further traumatize the families and especially this latest about them separating the mother who was breast feeding her baby. what would jesus do? i'm going to buy him the bracelet. >> go ahead. might be tax deductible.

match slap, the proof that it's not about the law is the law has stayed the same and the enforcement policy has changed. they're making a decision. you say the remedy is change the law, make it better. okay. but i just had jim jordan on. he represents a significant portion of your party that says we won't do just that. we'll only do everything at once. >> this is a tactical question. you have democrats who basically held all legislation hostage to fixing the problem with daca. right? i think that's also a mistake. i think with immigration the big problem, there are lots of problems with the immigration laws execution. we have to always put it together. when we see problems and problems that both sides might see needs to be fixed, i'm okay with taking them as rifle shots. basically the law prevents the children from going through the legal process with their parents. what we do to try to be humane

according to our law is an unaccompanied minor goes through a system. if you come with your parents, you have this question to ask. if a parent crosses the board illegally with their child, the child has to go through a program. the adult has broken a law. maybe we give them a mull began and let them come in. maybe we don't handle the situation. the problem is you create the new set of daca at the border every day as jim went through the numbers with you. the thousands of families that come to the border and the biggest problem with our immigration laws is we actually don't execute them fully. we always have a population of people because we're good people, tolerant people. >> we were. >> yes know that people -- >> we were. that's what catch and release was. it was more humane to allow the families to stay together and hope they show up for the legal process. >> every time someone criticizes this country, i get prickly. our government gives more for humanitarian reasons around the world than -- as a people.

>> as a people we give more to charity. >> to the point. >> we give more to charity. we are compassionate. >> we both know you're no more of a patriot than i am. it's about criticizing the country when it's due. >> that's right. >> nina, most countries don't do what we're doing on our border right now. i think it is a window into what the perception that this administration wants. here's a bit of proof of it. david shapiro. he is a public official out in arizona, and he was talking about what immigration means to the united states. listen to this. >> 60% of public school children in the state of arizona today are minorities. that complicated racial immigration because there aren't enough white kids to go around. when you look at that 60% number for our school students, just taking 15 years, it's going to change the demographic voting

base of the state. that's what's going on around the country. immigration is politically stabilizing president trump's talked about this. i'm concerned about this. this immigration today represents an existential threat to the united states. >> shapiro says he was taken out of context. i don't know how existential threat is taken out of context. nina, how do you take that? >> it was clear he's on the side of what president trump is doing. it's wrong. we're talking about there's law. there's unjust laws. but there's also humanity. that is really what is being called into question here are humanity as a nation. it's curious to me the party of family values has to problems with separating families at the border. let the process take place, but the president, president donald trump has the power and the

authority right now to stop separating these children from their parents until they go through the process. he could choose to do that, but he has decided to do the other, and it is absolutely wrong. so he's being a hypocrite. so are the republicans that believe this kind of stuff is okay. i want to hear family values come out of their mouths. >> are you saying barack obama -- >> this is not about president obama. >> it is. >> hold on. let him make his point. >> are you saying that barack obama kept these families intact through the adjudication process? >> this is not about president obama. >> he separated -- >> this is about donald trump. >> he separated the children from the adults. >> this is about trump. >> president trump can do a new thing. he doesn't have to follow -- >> hold on. hold on. >> he's not the king. >> he's not the king. >> hold on. nina, matt, hold on a second. there's a middle ground here, first of all. just for fact's sake. okay? did the obama administration separate families?

yes. did they do it as much as you are doing it right now? no. >> what's your point? >> the point is -- >> what's the law say you have to do, chris? >> it doesn't say you have -- >> yes, it does. >> enforcement is up to you. >> and choosing to do it. >> look, this law was signed in 2008. it was signed by bush. it's not about democrats putting a fast one through. it's how do you want to enforce it and whether you want to take the risk that these people that come across undocumented will return for legal process. >> that's right. >> again, the facts are did obama do this? yes. did he do it as much? no. why? does he had a different mentality, his administration about what these people represent. my question to you is you used to own that mentality. reagan, bush, as i just suggested were much more open hearted. there seems to be -- >> no. ronald reagan, a president i respect deeply, one of his biggest regrets was the 1986 immigration bill.

because he thought the amnesty that was a big part of the 1986 immigration reform would be one and done. we would cure this problem. we would accept these folks and then now enforce our border enforce our laws. of course, we see even at the border today, they're not really enforced. what the two of you are advocating for -- >> i'm not advocating for anything. >> don't -- >> let me talk. you can tell me where i'm wrong. but what i'm hearing is you're saying don't separate the adult from the child. which means you don't adjudicate the adult. >> that's not true. >> what the trump administration is saying is when you come here illegally, you will be prosecuted and to do anything else than that is to simply not follow the law. that gets us into the amnesty problem. >> asylum seekers were never included. they're coming under different pretense. and you're saying we assume they're not real. >> 80% of them are not -- >> i don't know where that number livers.

until we know -- >> we don't know -- >> nina, what's your take? >> again, listen, it's funny how matt and the president, you want to bring president obama any other time president trump would not be following president obama. he needs to do the right thing. the attorney general needs to do the right thing and the congress needs to do the right thing. >> i agree. >> this is a matter of humanity at this point. that is simply -- >> why wasn't it with obama? >> you know what? people did protest president obama. i'm not ignoring that. what i'm saying to you is president trump is the president right now. and this does not have to be done. again, what would jesus do? he would be on the side of the poor and downtrodden. not on the side of what's happening right now. >> what about that point? >> i mean, i know, look, i respect your first answer which is i'm a christian, but jeff sessions didn't follow your edict on that as a christian. >> nina didn't either. i don't think either side should

say jesus is on their side. >> jesus's message is pretty clear. >> read the bible. >> i do read the bible. >> if you were going to ere on the side of whether to be humane or inhuman. what do you make of it as a tactic, the general general saying god says that process is good in and of itself and this is fair and just? >> i wouldn't have done that. i don't think that's the way to explain this. if you just give me just a short period of time, it's important to go back to the beginning. i understand that many of these people live in desperate circumstances. i understand america is a unique country where a lot of people, especially our neighbors want to come. i'd want to be here too if i wasn't here. we're a good and decent people. and the fact is at the same time you have people waiting to come here legally and waiting to come here in line filling out paperwork. they're going to our embassy and trying to come the right way as a political asylum seeker. that's the process that gets upturn pd. those people are harmed as we

allow people to cut in line. let's have a process. i'm a pro immigration republican. i don't want to cut back on the numbers. i believe people coming from mexico and other countries can make america even better. i want to make sure the process is not disorderly like we have today. i think it's a shame. >> this is still disorderly because they're losing track of kids. >> it's the law. >> but how they're enforcing it is their choice. >> that's right. and they are assuming that the folks that are at the border right now somehow are not asylum seekers and not running from tragic situations. that's a broad assumption. i'm going back to where i started. humanity is the order of the day. that could be any of us trying to save our families. it's about humanity, and it is about justice. keeping these families together, the administration can fix this. president trump can fix this, and absolutely the congress needs to fix this. and top blaming president obama. do the right thing. do what jesus would do which is

be on the side of the down troden and poor. >> well argued and thank you both. >> thank you. >> he's one of the most well known faces when it comes to the crackdown on illegal immigrants in america. what does joe arpaio think about children being taken from the parents at the border? we're going to ask him next. feel the clarity of non-drowsy claritin and relief from symptoms caused by over 200 allergens. like those from buddy. because stuffed animals are clearly no substitute for real ones. feel the clarity. and live claritin clear.

the first survivor of ais out there.sease and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen. but we won't get there without you. visit alz.org to join the fight. visit alz.org to join the fight. you're in the business of helping people. we're in the business of helping you. business funding to help make a difference.

another way we have your back. the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it. gary: i've been making blades here at gillette for 20 years. i bet i'm the first blade maker you've ever met. there's a lot of innovation that goes into making our thinnest longest lasting blades on the market. precision machinery and high quality materials from around the world. nobody else even comes close. it's about delivering a more comfortable shave, every time. invented in boston. made and sold around the world. order now at gilletteondemand.com. gillette, the best a man can get. you might be missing something.y healthy. your eyes. that's why there's ocuvite. ocuvite helps replenish nutrients your eyes can lose as you age. it has lutein, zeaxanthin and omega-3. ocuvite. be good to your eyes.

our emotions are riding high over this policy to separate families at the border and with good reason. one candidate has made immigration so central to his identity that he needed a presidential pardon on the issue. joining us now is candidate for senate from the state of arizona former sheriff joe arpaio. good to have you, sheriff. >> yeah. thanks. thanks, chris. >> all right. so make the case for this brand of enforcement at the border. why does it have to be done this way? >> you know what? you talk about emotions. i have a few emotions too. this is a tough problem that we're facing right now, but by the way, when -- i understand

separating the kids from the families. what about the thousands and thousands of people i locked up in my 58-yearlong taking the parents out of the houses for drugs or whatever, leaving the kids separated. >> those are serious crimes. not a misdemeanor of crossing the border undocumented. >> okay. you want to argue the type of crime and so on? that's okay. but you know what? everybody forgets the big problem here. central america, mexico, they have tough laws. why aren't they stopping these kids and their parents or whatever crossing our border? they should be doing it in their country so we won't have this problem. >> fair point. >> nobody talks about that. >> fair point. it doesn't relieve our responsibility, joe. that's why. let's say they are lax in their enforcement. let's say their governments aren't getting it done and even

encouraging people to get out of that country for good or bad reason. that's not in the control of the united states. how it enforces its border is. and it is choosing now to take a new direction of harshness, of prosecuting everyone who comes across, but how they'll prosecute includes separating these families even if it means these kids are going to be separated for a good period of time in conditions that we're not crazy about. does that sound like the right thing to do? >> i'll tell you something. why don't we blame the families, the adults for taking the chance, violating the law, coming across our border with these young kids? they're the ones that should held responsible. if i get to washington, i'm going to make sure there's another law, a tougher law to go after these people. >> how much tougher can you get than this? >> what? >> how much tougher could you get than this? >> well, if you charge them with more serious crimes, they'll spend more time in jail which should be a deterrent.

first, it should be a deterrent anyway. our president sent the message out. i hope because of you and everybody else talking about it, they're going to get a message, don't come across the border with your kids. first, you're going to jail, the adults or those that violate the law. for the kids, i feel sorry for them. i feel sorry for them. >> you feel sorry for them, but if you felt sorry for them, don't separate them, and why would you assume all families that come across undocumented are the same? some are fleeing prosecution. some women are running for their lives from terrible men. some are teenagers desperate to work at the factories that you guys never prosecute for hiring people illegally. you never go after the fat cats. only the small people. >> i haven't? >> you demeanize the workers. >> no. if you look at the prosecutions, the people get prosecuted. harsher than ever. not the companies, joe. not fair. >> really? >> yes. >> look at my record.

the trouble i got in for just doing that. >> well, you got in trouble for how you were rounding people up and what you were doing with your resources. >> okay. that's uncertain, one judge. i'm going to tell you something, i wrote a 25-page letter to the attorney general of the united states. i expect him to look into certain bias and the illegal immigration problem and the corruption and the politics, so we'll see what the bottom line is. >> do you include the huge factories and businesses that hire these people at sub par wages and don't have to worry about work conditions the same way because they're not citizens? did you include that in the letter? >> about raiding places that hire illegals? >> not to round up illegals but arrest the people that run the shop, joe? >> of course. >> is that in your letter? >> well, it's bigger than that. my letter has to do with the politics and this illegal immigration problem and the bias. >> all i'm saying is this, joe.

why are we being the harshest on the weakest? a lot of these people are trying to get asylum. they're fleeing prosecution. they're looking for a better life. and they're getting treated like they're all felons when they come across. that's a policy decision. the law doesn't make you have to do it this way. but we're not that harsh with the people who hire them. what does that say about us? >> well, first of all, it's illegal to cross a border. you know that. >> it's illegal to hire someone who is not a citizen under these circumstances. you know that too. >> yeah. okay. >> but we don't go after them with the same for rerociousness. we don't talk like that about the employers>> maybe if you want to be helpful, we should put more emphasis in the countries and help them stop the crime problem so people won't be leaving wanting to come to the united states. this is a bigger picture. you know that, chris. >> i do get it, joe, but i'm saying why are you dealing with

the weakest in the harshest fashion? if you want to do your tariffs and the things the president loves so much, apply them to bad actors, fine, that's a policy decision. have it out. let's see how it goes politically. if you want to go after the employers because if there's no demand, there's no supply. simple economics. right? but they know they're going to get jobs. they know they're going to come in here and get swept up and fuel lots of industries that are fundamental to american lifestyle. we never go after those people. kind of stinks. >> do it legally. get certain permits or whatever to have these people come in. i've been fighting this battle all these years. i've always said, every time there's an election, why doesn't congress do something? i even predicted even this time, even though the president is trying to do everything he can, once again, we're still arguing the situation. why doesn't congress do something instead of having no guts to -- every time, every two

years or whatever? why aren't they doing anything? all they do is talk. you're talking tonight and the same problem has been existing for all these years. >> that's my problem so bring it up, and you want to join the senator. if you win, let's see what you get done about it. joe arpaio, i appreciate you coming onto make the case. thank you. >> thank you. >> and from one of hillary clinton's critics, we now bring in her former campaign chairman and director of the center for american progress, john podesta. good to have you. >> good to be with you. let's talk about this ig report. it seems it's being viewed largely through a partisan lens. what's the headline for you and what you saw? >> you tried to say there were good facts and bad facts. i only see one set of facts. the facts are that jim comey violated practice and procedure. he applied a double standard with respect to the investigation of hillary clinton

versus the investigation of russian interference in the election, and its connection to the trump campaign. you know, he ended up hurting hillary clinton. he helped elect donald trump. there's 560 pages of detail of that in the ig ease report, but that's the facts. and people try to spin one e-mail or a bunch of e-mails one way or the other, but those are the fundamental facts of what happened last july. >> but you're leaving one out. >> and that's what mr. horowitz said. >> he says loretta lynch, i had my doubts. i had my doubts about her meeting with clinton on the tarmac, not wanting to be as aggressive, i pushed for a special counsel. i had my doubts that this would be handled fairly, and that's why i had to come forward and make sure that there was real

transparency here. that motivation is a little upsetting as well. is it not? >> and chris, the ig, take him at his word, complete lly rejecd that. he said these are the moment where you have to follow policy. >> he never said he didn't have basis for suspicion. he said how comey handled it was wrong. >> that's the big enpiece. he said the appropriate way to proceed was to follow long standing republican and democratic administration's policy and procedure. instead he applied ad hoc decision making. i never accused him of being a partisan in that regard. i just think he made a horrendous error of judgment and did i, i think, because he's kind of an arrogant guy trying to protect his own reputation. getting pushed by the new york field office who was leaking

information and getting pushed by republicans on capitol hill. i think he was protecting his reputation, the fbi's reputation, but in doing so, he wasn't protecting the country. >> the big stick that republicans and certainly trump sympathizers are swinging are look at the texts of at least five different agents, attorneys, staff members. look how much they didn't like trump. do you think there was an equal or greater population in the bureau that didn't like clinton? >> i absolutely think that is true. and i think that one of the things i heard from people who attended the house briefing today is that the matter of who was leaking out of the fbi field office, you know, rudy giuliani kept going on television saying i've heard from my sources in the fbi, that investigation is still ongoing with the inspector general. we'll see where it lands at the end of the day. but the truth is the facts are that he only hurt one candidate.

by reopening and then rapidly saying there was nothing there and closing the e-mail investigation on october 28th, ten days before the election, he absolutely damaged hillary clinton. he kept under wraps the fact that he had opened an investigation of the russian engagement and the russian involvement with the trump campaign. that didn't come out until after the election. he says he did that because that was consistent with policy and practice. but why the double standard? i think he's never really sufficiently answered that. >> look, no, i get that's something that's going to be chewed over here. he's got his answers. you also have look in terms of the political liability and where blame lies. look at hillary clinton as well. do you not? the tweet she put out today, but my e-mails. this is a reference to the fact that the ig found that comey was also using a personal g mail account. he didn't have his own server, but this tactic by hillary

clinton of taking a shot at them -- do you think that was the right move for her given that decisions she made and didn't make got her in this situation in the first place? >> look, she shouldn't have used a private e-mail system. i think she's said that. she obviously paid an enormous price for doing so. >> having people destroy the devices and not exactly complying the way -- >> come on. you want to relitigate the 2016? >> i want to put it out there as an element of people's scrutiny. >> i think it was well scrutinized. you have to agree with that. it was the subject of intense look by the -- by the mainstream media, by a more than -- >> no question. >> a more than year investigation by the fbi. and i think it was a mistake to have done that. but i think it was -- it was in the end of the day, there were no crimes. it was confirmed today saying it

was consistent with the practice of the department of justice. it wasn't just mr. comey. it was confirmed in the ig report cede. it was likened to the way the justice department handled alberto gonzalez's situation in 2008. >> i read that. >> i think that the scrutiny she came under, the attack she came under by the house republicans, i think, were unwarranted based on what was a mistake of judgment. >> john podesta, i appreciate you giving me your take. there was a lot to go through. more will come out of it. you're always welcome on the show to make the case. >> thank you. all right, don lemon standing by with a preview of what's on minutes away. >> you've been talking about immigration. we're going to continue that talk on immigration. yesterday we told you about a baby taken away from a mother while being breast fed. this one is a man who is 62 years old. he's been here for 50 years in this country. his daughter awakened 7:00 a.m.

in the morning by him screaming on the front lawn. he's watering the lawn. eight ice agents take them away. they don't explain why. he's being held. the daughter is on tonight. we'll dig into it and see what's going on with immigration in this country. >> and so the issue winds up being look, let's say he's not -- assume for the sake of argument he's not in the country legally. it then goes down to how are we enforcing it? one of the things getting ignored by the proponents to the policy is they say this is a democrat law. this is a 2008 -- >> he's a legal permanent resident. >> okay. important fact. that makes it even more of an incisive question. how do you choose to enforce the law? there's been a change in policy which is we're going all out. we're going to treat every one of these people like they're a felon. we're separating every family. forget about if it's asylum or not. that's a choice. it's not a must under the law. >> fair point.

she asked him for a warrant. and then they said they didn't have one. they said it was an administrative warrant. what's the difference? it's this whole thing that you have to deal with. and, again, we got to figure it out. we have to figure it out is it worth separating families at the border? what are we doing with people who have been here 50 years? a lot to figure out. >> even joe arpaio says lawmakers have to do more here. we got a nod that maybe ryan wood, but there was a combination bill. don lemon, thank you. check you soon. >> yep. as we've been discussing here tonight, jeff sessions cited the bible to defend separating parents and children at the border. where exactly does it say that? our final fact is next. with only a kite, a house key and a wet hemp string, benjamin franklin captured lightening in a bottle. over 260 years later, with a little resourcefulness, ingenuity, and grit, we're not only capturing energy

from the sun and wind, we're storing it. as the nation's leader in energy storage, we're ensuring americans have the energy they need, whenever they need it. this is our era. this is america's energy era. nextera energy.

proven to protect street skaters and freestylers. stops up to 97% uv. lasts through heat. through sweat. coppertone. proven to protect. ♪ he eats a bowl of hammers at every meal ♪ ♪ he holds your house in the palm of his hand ♪ ♪ he's your home and auto man ♪ big jim, he's got you covered ♪ ♪ great big jim, there ain't no other ♪ -so, this is covered, right? -yes, ma'am. take care of it for you right now. giddyup! hi! this is jamie. we need some help.

with advil liqui-gels, what bad shoulder? what headache? advil is relief that's fast strength that lasts you'll ask... what pain? with advil liqui-gels

i'm a small business, but i have... big dreams... and big plans. so how do i make the efforts of 8 employees... feel like 50? how can i share new plans virtually? how can i download an e-file? virtual tours? zip-file? really big files? in seconds, not minutes... just like that. like everything... the answer is simple. i'll do what i've always done... dream more, dream faster, and above all... now, i'll dream gig. now more businesses, in more places, can afford to dream gig. comcast, building america's largest gig-speed network. quick correction. earlier we showed a clip of an arizona lawmaker describing immigration as an existential threat to the u.s. that lawmaker's game is david stringer and he said what we said, but his name is not david shapiro. that's the man who shared the yesterday video online.

david shapiro is a good man. had to make it right. sorry. the final fact, as we've been talking about, undocumented families are being separated at the southern border. you will hear this policy defended by the trump team as simple enforcement of the law. that's not true. they're making a choice to be harsh, to prosecute all undocumented entrants, even families seeking asylum presenting themselves to authorities. and jeff sessions is citing the bible to reinforce the principle of punishment for those who disobey the law. take a listen. >> i would cite you you to paul and his clear and wise command in rolmans 13 to obey the law o the government because god ordained the government for his purposes. orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves, consistent, fair, application of law is in itself a good and moral thing,

and that protects the weak. it protects the lawful. >> so god wants these families separated at the border this way? doesn't sound very wwjd, does it? that's because it isn't. in fact, the only aspect of this practice that should be of biblical proportions should be the outrage. facts as understood by those who do believe. jesus was a refugee as a child. his mother was turned away and forced to deliver him in a stable. an indignity that serves as a lesson for believers to treat everyone with help because you never know who you're helping. of the lord's great love, we're not consumed q for his compassions never fail. more to the point, leviticus, 19:33. when a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. the foreigner residing among you

must be treated as your native born, and jesus said the most important commandment includes loving your neighbor as yourself. we all know the golden rule. let's assume you don't put any stock in rationale that's god related. just apply logic to what sessions said. this process is not orderly. it is haphazard and reckless in many cases. now you have lawmakers on both sides of the aisle saying it is certainly not fair. the question is they have common ground. will they do something about separating these families this way, or are the families going to be victimized by yet another unholy process? the political process. that's the final fact. joining us tomorrow, rudy giuliani, president trump's lawyer, is returning to prime time with a case to make, 9:00 p.m. eastern. that is all for us tonight. thank you so much for being with us. let's get after it again

tomorrow night. cnn tonight with don lemon the man starts right now. >> as we both know, people throughout the ages have used religious scripture and twisted it to, i don't know in the form of discrimination. they see in it what they want to see in it. it's not necessarily right, but they do it. t awful, but it's not something that's new. >> it is not new. what is new is this policy. and it is harsh. and it's harsh because they're trying to send a message. now, some will argue in benign fashion that message is done, done come here illegally. that assumes people are control. sometimes we're fleeing for your life. the decision on how we enforce it will inform people what we're about as a people in america. they're going to have to own that. that point to joe arpaio, you always demonize the little guy but not the big guy hiring them. >> that's a good question. we should be happy and grateful that