information or offering damaging information on hillary clinton. >> right. by our count, there are 14 trump associates who have met with russians, and, you know, the attorney is saying -- and he had to send a letter amending the testimony, of course, but the attorney is saying, and these two men are saying, look, it turned out to be nothing. what we do know for a fact, anderson, though, is that russians were knocking on every door they could possibly knock on, and they didn't get a lot of resistance from a lot of folks in being willing to meet with them or collect dirt on hillary clinton. we know that from the donald trump jr. meeting in trump tower, of course. >> so this was only revealed after mueller had the text messages and asked caputo about it, correct? >> michael caputo said he only had it when his lawyer was reviewing text messages, but he was asked about it in early may by mueller.

he had to talk about it at that point, which he did. and they have amended their testimonies before congress, but what they're clearly trying to do, anderson, is get out in front of this story and say, look, the story that we forgot this stuff, we didn't perjure ourselves, we forgot it. but what they're seeing is this greenberg man was actually a plant from the fbi and that this was really a sting operation on them. so they're saying, wait a minute, you have to look at what the fbi is doing, don't look at us. and, you know, this person actually did have a history of working for the fbi for a bunch of years, but apparently it ended in 2013. they're saying, no, it didn't, he was used by the fbi to try and frame us, and that didn't work, obviously. >> and the fbi, have they said anything about this? >> no. they never tell you who their

informants are, as you know. but it's clear that mueller may know a little bit more about this than we do. >> gloria borger, thanks very much. >> sure. that's all the time we have. time to hand it over to chris cuomo. "cuomo prime time" starts right now. chris? >> thank you, anderson. i am "cuomo prime time." children are crying at the border. we're going to play you reported sounds of life inside the trump detention centers. the administration doubling down, of course, on the virtue of prosecuting illegal entrants and claiming the law mandates tearing kids from their parents at the border. this is not true, and we will show you that. the president could stop this policy today because he started it. he has the power but why doesn't he want to do that? we're going to ask one of his top aides. kellyanne conway is here to

address the uproar and to talk opioid breakthroughs. we're also going to talk to the democrat leading the charge in calling for the secretary of homeland security to resign. congressman harris, a democrat, is here. are the votes there in congress? are the children just going to keep growing in record numbers? homeland security denies that what you're hearing is child abuse. doctors may have criticized the conditions, but she insists the kids are very well taken care of. wait until you hear this new audio. it tells a very different story. this matters. let's get after it. >> i want to play you something now. it doesn't come from my reporting on cnn. it was a secretly recorded audio tape published by pro republica purportedly inside one of the

trump detention facilities. on the tape is apparently the sounds of some of these kids who are no longer with their parents, wailing for their parents. and begging for help. this is reality and something needs to be done about it. >> mommy! [ children crying ]

>> there is a lot of kids that are in that situation. the trump administration says it's about the law. his hands are tied. the president says he doesn't like this. then why doesn't he do something about it? let's get the white house reaction to that gut-wrenching tape. kellyanne conway, counsel to the president. nobody wants to hear kids cry. we got warm blood pumping through our hearts. the president could stop the action tonight. but he won't. why? >> thank you for giving me the platform tonight since from yesterday people have amnesia. i'm a mother, i'm a catholic, i'm a person with a conscience. i agree with the first lady and everyone who has said that they don't want children to be separated from their parents unduly.

do you know there are three conditions by which minors and adults are separated in these circumstances? two of the three are to protect the children, and somehow all of you are glossing past that, so let's review the facts. the first is, if you cannot establish a familiar or custodial relationship between the adult and the minor, we have a 315% increase in the last few months alone in fraudulent cases, children being smuggled, presenting as a family. you have to care about these children also. the second reason you would separate a minor from an adult is if you feel like that child could be harmed. you see, sometimes these children clearly don't want to be with the adult man they're presenting with, and you need to find out why that is. and the third reason is that if the adult has broken the law in entering the united states and now will be prosecuted, you can get to a port of entry and present for a credible fear asylum case.

the secretary of homeland security is reminding everyone to do that. go to one of the ports of entry and support the credible fear case. i only wish you would play the audiotape, the videotape, that cnn would do a surround sound program of the hundreds of thousands of minors that have come into the border into this nation in the last several years. i don't know where they are, do you? does cnn know that those girls haven't been drug trafficked, sex trafficked? do you know that they're with adult family members, people who love them? do you know they're alive? you can play all the audiotape, videotape that you want, you show me all the girls getting birth control injections because they face certain rape. >> kellyanne, there is no reason for us to go down any avenues of speculation. i don't think tonight is the night to fight. i think this is black and white.

the only thing that changed here -- >> you want to talk about the compassion part. so did the first lady. everyone has. >> you're glossing over things because -- >> i'm not glossing over anything. where were you in 2014? >> i was on it. >> were you? you're calling them trump detention centers. isn't that clever branding? and the obama detention centers had what in them? families. >> he changed the policy. >> i'll let you speak. you want to talk facts, let's do it, it's all we have in this situation. obviously the emotion isn't enough, right? you knew this was going to happen. you knew when they increased enforcement and you didn't expand your capacity to deal with people. you knew it would make this moment. you knew it would come. what i'm saying is -- >> do you know how it gets expanded? congress has to fund the expansion. >> you could have allocated it differently, and even if congress did act, they should

act. i want people to start the #doyourjob and find common ground and work on it. >> the president has called for that. >> but the president has called for something else as well, a new harshness. we will prosecute all cases. the law did not change, you know that, kellyanne. it hasn't changed in two administrations. what has changed is the politics. catch and release, bad, weak, they don't show up for their hearings. jeff sessions will prosecute every case. that's why we have the kids crying. it's a fact. >> if you want to interview me, ask me a question. >> why did you change this policy when you knew it would lead to these kids being separated this way? >> excuse me. christopher, it's very simple. we have a law in this country, okay, and i've already talked about my capacity for compassion and the way we all feel. let me finish. congress passed a law a very long time ago that it is a crime to enter the country illegally.

if they don't like it, if you don't like it, they should rescind the law or change the law. in fact, if i were a democrat right now, i would say, you know what, i just want open borders. i want to own it. let's see what happens. why don't they have the courage to do that? why? >> because it doesn't have to be all or none. this is a misdemeanor. why don't you go out and catch scofflaws, jaywalkers? round them all up and figure out what to do with them. >> christopher, that is such a callous way of not answering my original question, my original challenge with tell me for certainty, tell everyone tonight on your show that you know what happened to those central americans. >> i don't even know where all my kids are on a regular basis, but you don't know where the kids are that were separated from their families. you don't have the high moral ground on this. you changed a policy to impress your base. you got a pop in the polls with them and you're okay with destruction and harshness. just own it. >> how dare you.

if you want to live in a sovereign nation that doesn't have borders, you go for it. say we want open borders, just do it. >> they're saying don't take kids from parents when you don't have to, the way bush chose not to, the way obama chose not to, kellyanne. you know the play here. it's an ugly play. >> listen to me. i have said to you what the president said steps behind me, or actually to the press, cnn reporters, three short days ago. we've all said it. nobody likes it. however, nobody also likes people coming and smuggling children. it is a huge enterprise. why aren't you at the border screaming every day to stop this half a trillion-dollar enterprise in child smuggling. >> i've actually covered what happens on the border. by the way, this administration hasn't been a big fan of doing something about it. what you want to do is arrest people for crossing illegally which is a misdemeanor. that's what you're doing there. >> if all you've done is broken the law by crossing illegally,

you will get a very swift adjudication. and you see senator cruz's bill doing very close to what the president called for last october. where is congress eight months ago, christopher? he asked them to double the number on immigration judges. >> why would he start prosecuting cases where he knew he would separate families and not have anywhere to put them? >> excuse me. if all you did was not come through a port of entry, if you went between the ports of entry and the only law you had broken was crossing over illegally and you agree to that, you will be adjudicated and you'll have time served and that's normally it. if you've broken another law -- >> these kids that were separated from their parents just came over the border illegally. every case had something else, to turn the question on you. you know about that, kellyanne? >> you know 7,000 boys and girls are living safe and happy in

america, right, chris? no, because everybody turns their back on it when it doesn't meet their political narrative. i'm sick and tired of talking about congressional reform when this president in january invited republicans and democrats inside the cabinet room, cnn covered all 75 minutes of it live. name for me the democrat who said, mr. president, you weren't here in 2017, but we were, because god knows we were here too long forever. we were here in 2014. we want to tell you it was a very bad summer. there was a surge of explosion over the border. we don't know what happened to the minors. we want to work with you to make sure that never happens again. who said that in that room? tell me, who said it? >> why is it an alternative waiting for congress to prosecute all illegal entrants and balloon the population of families you have to separate? >> probably on an audiotape

crying somewhere that you don't wish to find or play. >> i would go right now if i could get in. >> i'm talking about the girls and the boys who came over from central america over the last four years. none of these senators fixed that. >> we already have a problem so what's wrong with handling it this way? you're making it worse, that's the problem. >> you act like it got invented last week. >> you changed the policy. that's why they did catch and release. this is why operation streamline under bush was not made manifest. it's too harsh, it's too complicated and they chose compassion. you didn't. >> you think it was compassionate? these family detention centers looked compassionate to you? i've been reading articles all weekend. i told you already, and i'll repeat it so that those who are trying to cherry-pick this interview get it right for once, that i'm a catholic, i'm a mother, i have a conscience. i stand with the president, the first lady and everyone else who

has said many different ways, christopher, that nobody likes this result. at the same time, you have to recognize what the secretary of homeland security said today. we have a 1700% increase in asylum claims. christopher, we need the people who have credible fear presenting asylum. >> this is a deterrent. you've got rising numbers coming across the border so certainly it's not the scare factor you want it to be. if you have a conscience, why don't you tell the president, stop this policy. >> it's not a scare factor. the president is going to congress tomorrow. let's see who shows up. because so far every time your party has come to the white house and anywhere else -- >> what do you mean, my party? i don't have a party. i look at all these people the same way. they're people not getting things done for the american people. that's how i look at congress right now. but general john kelly said when he was at the department of homeland security, we believe this will have a deterrent effect. he used the language because

that's what you want to send as a message. own it. >> that was over a year ago and the department of homeland security did not say that today. >> i know, today she said something that didn't make any sense. at least he was being honest. the only thing that changed is your policy and now you have this spin for the white house that the law is the problem. the law hasn't changed. >> you won't admit that you're spinning it because you won't admit that immigration in this country and border security has been a vexing problem for many years. the president has said give me money for the wall and this catch and release into the interior, secure our borders with different technologies but also with visible barriers -- >> you want to pick that like we have, like this is "game of thrones" and we have the wildings coming across the border and they're such a virus. they don't pose the criminal threat that you say. you won't go after the employers that draw them into this country. >> that's not true. how dare you and how dare -- i'm sorry, how did he verify work

exactly well when president obama was in office? >> your 7-point plan is to try to go after the employers. >> how dare you. >> how dare i go there? it's a fact. >> when your kids are on the border, kellyanne, you'll be sorry. >> don't talk about donors. >> they donate to both parties and that's why they get protection, and that's why the family that comes across the border, they're a threat. probably ms-13. and if not, certainly up to no good. but the corporations -- >> christopher, are you laughing about ms-13? because i want you to go tell that to juan cina. when you're done talking, i'm sure this will really help. listen, if you want to go tell juan pena, if you want to tell the first lady who were their

guests this year, whose teenage daughters were savagely murdered, ms-13 gangs' motto is rape, kill and control. and you're laughing about it? you think it's nothing they've overtaken the middle schools. >> you're in a bad spot, and i get it, but i just don't get why you don't fix it. >> because i'm not on the side of child smugglers, i'm not on the side of ms-13 gangs. this president wants to end that. a permanent separation -- the permanent separation between the children -- >> the problem is you're separating families as a funnel of enforcement. >> the problem is the separation of jamal turner and his son. >> have you addressed the problem? >> are you playing an audiotape of them weeping at night missing their children?

they're permanently separated from their children. how dare you decide -- >> are they the ones that caused your problem? >> i don't have a problem. >> you've got a big problem with this policy. this is a big problem. you've got two out of three people in the country against you on this policy. two out of three. >> just cut it out and try to unpack this intelligently. i have already told you on the compassion side how we all feel. then i tried to bring up the facts -- >> but that's just words because the president created the situation, kellyanne, so he doesn't get compassion points. you don't get compassion points when you change the policy to separate families. when you have senator kamala harris on in a little while, i want you to ask her -- she prosecuted, what, a million felons at different times? how many were prosecuted that she knows were prosecuted? how many that went to jail were separated from their children? >> it's a different thing. it's not a good analogy.

>> for many reasons i won't do it. >> it's not the same thing. it's a misdemeanor that you want to make something violent. >> no, no, no, these are people committing other crimes. >> i want to keep my word. tell my audience what has changed and what it means, please. >> sure. but remember, border security also has to do with keeping the drugs out of the country. so much of it comes through the southern border. so much of it comes through our mail. this president has a 3-front war against opioid crisis and drug demand overall. first, prevention and education so that we are teaching our youth be a somebody, don't be a statistic. we are trying to reduce the stigma and silence that comes with chemical dependency and drug use. it starts in the medicine cabinet. that tiny little bottle, family doctor, local pharmacy, if you misuse someone else's prescription, it's not good. we had 6,000 americans died in

2016 due to opioids. the president has called for a 30% across the board reduction in new prescriptions in the next three years. he's already bending the curve in the right direction. we see a lot of support from the pharmacists, from the physicians, actually from legislators right, front and center, which is great. number two, education and recovery. having that rules change. having medicare and medicaid granting waiver to see we don't have empty hospital beds. i'm going very quickly here. >> thank you. >> the third one is intervention and law enforcement. do you know on the news there is a new season of fentanyl? in nebraska last weekend, they seized enough fentanyl to kill

26 million people. it is 50 times as strong as heroin, 100 times as strong as morphine. it's an instant killer for people. it's being laced into marijuana, laced into street drugs, laced into others. we have new ads out. they started running on broadcasts including, i think, your show today. they're on google and facebook and elsewhere. we teamed up with the opioid truth initiative. they have combatted tobacco use in this country, and we teamed up with the ad council, 75 years in history. we call this the crisis next door. this president, this first lady very involved. the entire administration, whole government approach. i don't think he talked about it enough. so thank you, cnn, for giving us at least two minutes' time on it. >> i appreciate it. every time you have an advancement, you can come on here and talk about it. it's a huge scourge in our society, everybody should know about it. >> pass all the laws and show heart.

we have to be able to do both. >> a phone call away from keeping those kids from crying. let's see what happens. kellyanne, thank you for being with us. >> thank you. the president wants you to say, hey, he's got a big heart. it's congress, it's this law, they've got him over a barrel. he's forced to prosecute cases this way. it's not true. and a reminder, republicans control both chambers. if they really wanted to change this, they could. two republicans are going to join us for a great debate on the firestorm. why two from the same position? because they need both seats on this tonight, next. i am totally blind. and non-24 can throw my days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do. talk to your doctor, and call 844-214-2424. and now for the rings. (♪)

i'm a four-year-old ring bearer with a bad habit of swallowing stuff. still won't eat my broccoli, though. and if you don't have the right overage, you could be paying for that pricey love band yourself. so get an allstate agent, and be better protected from mayhem. like me. can a ring bearer get a snack around here? this is a story about mail and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪

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. welcome back to "cuomo prime time." rick santorum and steve quest

are here for our great debate. i'm giving you both chairs because i think you need it on steve, i'll start with you on this. the idea of "we have to do this because we're enforcing the law," that's not the way law enforcement works. we all know that. you make a choice about it. in fact, the proof is in the government's response to the aclu suit in may. they said, don't talk to us about the law because this is an independent immigration policy choice. s it's not about the law. this suit is meritless. they admit it's their choice. fair point. >> chris, very fair point. by the way, i concede on that. this is a new policy by the trump administration. i think it's excellent new policy. >> children crying on the border being taken from their family is an excellent policy? >> no, what's excellent is we

have a sovereign right to control who enters our country. that is not cruel, it's not racist, american citizens have the right. by the way, there is no compassion in saying that if you show up with a child, we're going to allow you in, because what do we do then? we incentivize people to show up with children as a ticket in, which almost guarantees there will be more pain for children, more smuggling for children, more abuse of children. so the compassionate thing to say is you cannot come into this country illegally, period, and if you come with a child, you will be separated from that child. >> but it's a misdemeanor and you get separated and prosecuted this way. remember that, it's a misdemeanor. >> that's for americans, chris. these are not americans. these are people breaking and entering into our home, the american home. they're breaking and entering. >> i don't think that somebody's kid matters more or less if they're american. i don't see it that way.

i would take care of kids first as a priority. let me get rick in on this, as much as he's enjoying watching you on this. rick, let me bring you in on this. the idea of the compassion here. i don't see how you can have high ground on this. separating these kids, you knew this was going to happen, you didn't have the capacity. you knew that when you increased enforcement. >> what the trump administration is saying is that the law that prevents them from doing what they want to do, which is what steve just said, what the president said, what everybody said. they want to enforce the law. what they mean is that if you cross illegally, then we are going to go through the process of deportation. the law that blocks -- that creates this problem is a law that says that you can't keep minors together with their parents and detain them jointly and remove them jointly. you can't do that. because of this -- >> you can't keep minors in the condition you can keep adults.

and you can't keep them as long. >> well, you also, because of this law they passed several years ago to protect children who were being smuggled, they can't be -- a family unit can't be kept together and deported together. that's the problem. >> that's not what the flores agreement says. there is no law that mandates you do what you're doing right now. in fact -- >> i agree with that. the difference is that -- >> the conditions may have sucked, but at least they got to stay together. you could keep these families together. or you could do catch and release and you could do it a different way. this is why bush and obama did it this way. >> you can't process them the same way. there has to be a separation, that's the problem. and the reality is the big change, and this is what steve is saying, they are enforcing the law about adults who come here illegally. that's the big change. and you're right, they should have done a better job in preparing for this. ted cruz's bill which i know has been talked about a lot today,

and the president suggested this a while ago about increasing the number of judges, increasing the number of detainment facilities, but the idea has to be keeping them together as a family and keeping them on the same path as a family which doesn't happen today. >> if you had thought about it, you would have done that first. you have bush with operation streamline, and you have obama, and why did they both end up doing it basically the same way? overcapacity. >> how was border in both those situations, by the way? it was dangerous, full of human smuggling. >> over the year, 35%. >> are we going to brag about the condition of the border under the last two presidents, both bush and obama? >> let's give it some time. the border has been ignored as an issue for the american people for decades in this country. why? because it served the interest

of elites who wanted cheap labor and the democrats quite frankly wanted votes. >> why don't you go after them? >> i am. >> going after the big employers. >> this president is finally saying, look, we as a sovereign nation have every right to control our borders. >> when has he said he's going after the employers? the reason people come here, unless they're seeking asylum, unless they're fleeing persecution or domestic violence, they're coming here for a job. they're not just rich people's maids, okay? they're hired by big businesses. >> agreed. agreed. why isn't it in the plan? >> it has been good for corporate america and terrible for american workers. and that's the part 2 that's never talked about in this. it's not that it's dangerous to have a poor border, it is, but tagging millions of illegal workers in this country for so many years has been wage depressing and horrible for

average wage earners, many who are hispanic and black. >> you know that's a loaded stat it has not suppressed jobs that americans are doing. that's how this whole thing came into being. because you can underpay them, you can protect them, you can demonize them. they'll do things americaning won't do because of desperation. they haven't changed the american wage situation, you know that, rick. you know that's a cherry-picked stat. >> there are jobs that illegal immigrants do that americans are not doing. but if you look at all the wage categories, i think there's 400-some -- >> but we can go after the people that underpay them, steve. you won't do that because you want to hang out with them when you're raising money for your candidates. >> to say americans won't do those jobs is so demeaning.

>> but if there were no demand, you would have no supply. if americans were doing those jobs -- >> the fact is of the 400-some-odd categories in the labor department, there are five of which the majority are immigrants, illegal or otherwise, who are the majority of workers in those areas. they're primarily in the agricultural area. i would agree with you. i think we need a much more agressive program to allow people to come into this country illegally and do work in the agriculture area. that's a given. but the vast amount of the jobs that illegals do take are jobs americans are willing to do. construction jobs, landscaping jobs, other jobs that are very heavily populated with illegal immigrants and americans. there is a way to depress the impact of american impact with those jobs. >> instead of doing what you're doing on the border, fellows, go after these employers that hire the jobs that americans want and pay them lower wages.

it's nowhere in your plan and the president has never said it. steve? >> chris, get rid of h1b visas, control the border, protect america, protect our sovereignty and our security. look, he didn't separate them, the parents separated themselves from the children when they made the willful decision to illegally cross our border. >> if you had done it the way it was done, your numbers aren't better, they are worse. you're right, we'll see what happens over time. >> they chose to cross our border. they chose that. >> that's true. they broke the law. it is a misdemeanor. i don't see you guys going out and rounding up everybody that has a dui. those are felonies. i'm saying how we enforce the law matters. the reason bush and obama were more selective in their

enforcement was twofold. one, they didn't want to get in a pinch of overcapacity and get in harshness that you are in now. and second, it didn't work. bush was compassionate conservatism. obama was just straight up compassion. >> or they were both in the bag of business. they were both in the bag of globalists. >> they thought he understood those people better. trump wants to sell a message to his people and it's working. 58% of republicans agree with this policy. the problem is two out of three americans don't. this is a message of harshness and strength, and it resonates with some -- with some -- but i don't know how you guys grow the tent with this policy. steve, last word to you and then bounce it to rick. >> i will say this. the american worker has been ignored for so long. this is part of protecting the rights of the american worker, the american citizen. it's heartbreaking, of course it is. the children are wanting for their parents.

just as it is in our country when parents make terrible choices and commit a crime. the point is, don't come across our border illegally. if you're seeking asylum legitimately, come to the port of entry, do it the right way and you won't be separated from your children. that's the way to protect children, not just the ones that are already here but the ones that are possibly en route. >> i'm out of time. rick, i take your nod as an ascent to what steve just said. you both are welcome to be on our show. although, steve, i don't think they'll take your words and put it on the statue of liberty any time soon. the president is not going to stop this policy. why? he likes the policy. i know people are saying he doesn't like it, it hurts his heart. i'm not seeing proof of that. what will congress do? senator harris is leading the charge. a democrat makes her case on "prime time," next.

find the remote yet? nah. honey look, your old portable cd player. my high school rethainer. oh don't... it's early 90s sitcom star dave coulier... cut...it...out! [laughing] what year is it? as long as stuff gets lost in the couch, you can count on geico saving folks money. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

if you have moderate to severe or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ♪ otezla. show more of you.

with pg&e in the sierras. and i'm an arborist since the onset of the drought, more than 129 million trees have died in california. pg&e prunes and removes over a million trees every year to ensure that hazardous trees can't impact power lines.

and since the onset of the drought we've doubled our efforts. i grew up in the forests out in this area and honestly it's heartbreaking to see all these trees dying. what guides me is ensuring that the public is going to be safer and that these forests can be sustained and enjoyed by the community in the future. so here's the reality. despite all the talk, the op-eds, the condemnation which are all due what's happening on the border, the government is actively separating kids from their families and it's going to continue. so if the president who started it won't undo it, then where does that leave us? that leaves us with congress, the homeland security secretary put this in the lap of congress as well this morning. listen to this. >> congress and the courts created this problem and congress alone can fix it. it's clearly within their power

to make the laws and change the laws. this is a very serious issue that has resulted after years and years of congress not taking action. we are trying to protect the children, which is why i'm asking congress to act. it's a law passed by the united states congress. >> joining me now is democratic senator from california, kamala harris. thank you for being with us. >> it's good to be here, chris. thank you. >> you called for the senator to resign. why? >> she is, i think, incapable of running the agency in a way that reflects america's values. she is leading an agency and a policy that is separating children from their parents, children as young as one year old, four years old. and for no reason. and it is, i think, unconscionable, i think it's immoral, it's unnecessary and wrong, and it's got to stop.

clearly she does not see the need for it to stop so she should go. >> she's doing what she's told, right, and what she was told was that a.g. sessions changed how they were going to prosecute under the applicable laws, that they are going to prosecute all the cases. why aren't you calling for him to resign? >> well, she does not work for the attorney general, and she does not work at his discretion. and, listen, i sat in confirmation hearings where she talked about how she would run the agency according to what she believed is the right thing to do. she has an independent responsibility to the american public and she -- and i know this is a career prosecutor -- she's running a law enforcement agency. and every head of a law enforcement agency has discretion to make decisions about where they will put their limited resources. she has chosen, as a leader of that agency, to put incredible resources into separating babies from their parents. it's got to stop. i'm not going to absolve her, and i don't think anyone should absolve her of her responsibilities.

>> i get it, i'm just saying she's one link in a chain. they had to know that when they changed the policy to prosecute all illegal entries into the country, they were going to wind up here, right? i mean, there was only one scenario. if you increase the prosecutions and you don't expand your resources for how to detain and deal with them, didn't they know we would wind up here? >> well, i think more than didn't they know it, they knew it and they planned on it. i've been on the committee, the homeland security committee in the united states senate for almost 18 months. i've been asking them since as early as march of last year about this policy. we've been hearing about it. i asked, for example, elaine duke who was acting secretary for a while, it's on the record. i asked her, what's going on with this? yeah, there have been conversations, she said, about the policy separating children from their parents for purposes of deterrence of immigration. this is not something that just happened to them.

this has been a plan, and they're implementing the plan, they're enforcing the plan and it's wrong. and we're now seeing vivid images of babies, children being put in cages, chris. put in cages. and this is of their own making. this is of their own making. i agree with you, there is a nexus between this and the attorney general's policy around basically prosecuting every case that comes to the border without exercising clearly any discretion, this no tolerance policy, but the secretary of the department of homeland security runs an agency of tens of thousands of people and has in her discretion and power to stop this thing, this unconscionable thing from happening, but she refuses to do it. she should leave. >> the president could do it with a phone call -- >> you're absolutely right. >> maybe they do like the message of strength even when it plays as harshness. he says he doesn't like children being separated from their families, but if that were true,

couldn't he make it stop right away? >> you are absolutely correct. of course he can make it stop. one phone call and it's done. so, yeah, that is exactly right. and, you know, listen, let's just think about this. there is -- listen, we all want to protect the border from any threats on our national security. you don't have to snatch children from their parents in order to protect the border or border security. that's just a false choice and it's misleading to the american public. >> here's the other part of the equation. you guys down there in d.c., the president has put it on you by saying, change the laws, give me a better law, make it easier to do, and there doesn't seem to be any urgency in washington, d.c. i saw the bills that came up. nobody put up a bill that deals with just this. now there are rumors that maybe something will be slipped into an appropriations bill. why is there not more urgency on the part of congress? >> well, respectfully i disagree. the feinstein bill that i worked

with her on deals with this directly, which is creating rules for the department of homeland security. when they undertake to separate, and in many cases, forcefully separate children from their families. but there is no law, chris, that requires the separation of these children from their families, so it's a red herring for this administration to suggest that congress needs to act in order for them to stop this unconscionable practice. that is just absolutely not true. to your point, one phone call the president can make. one decision. the secretary of dhs can make this decision and it would stop. >> here's what i'm saying. i accept your argument. it's a good one. i started with it. but what i'm saying is we know that's not going to happen. the president likes what's happening right now. this is deterrence, this is strength. this is what he's about. he's stronger than obama and smarter than bush and that's why people voted for him. that's his argument. it's really going to be up to

you guys to make it stop. so are you seeing any kind of percolation? i've seen the feinstein bill and i've seen the other ones. you're not going to get the majority where the president says, this stops with a vote. why not say, brothers and sisters, if we can't get on the same board about this, we should all be thrown out. >> you are right. you are right. i would like to think at some point everyone has a code or, you know, a line where they draw and then they say, you know what, this has gone too far, i'm not going any further with this. i agree with you. if this isn't it, i don't know what is, in saying that people who care about keeping families together if, in fact, we do, if we agree that the united states government shouldn't be in the business of tearing families apart, we should be in the business of keeping families together, it would seem to me

that folks would see this shouldn't even be a bipartisan issue, this should be a nonpartisan issue. we should draw the line and say on this i'm not going to play politics. it's just wrong. if we care about families, we have to say it's just morally wrong to take a child from their mother, from their father. we have cases where breastfeeding mothers have been -- their children have been taken from them. the case of the father who was so traumatized, he committed suicide. the american medical association and pediatrics associations have said on this very issue, this is resulting in trauma that may be lifelong trauma, and why is this necessary? why is this necessary? and these are innocent children. >> there's no question about it. some of them are teenagers and there are always going to be circumstances where people can pick out what they want to see in this population. but here's my concern. everybody says they're concerned about the kids, yet the kids are still crying. they're still getting separated, they're still sitting in those hot boxes. that's where they're going to be

for the foreseeable future. my concern in telescoping this out is this is going to hurt you guys down there. because if you can't rise to a challenge like this and it stays mired in the four pillars of immigration, what will you do with chains and the visa lottery and how much money for the wall. you got to remember that. it's a misdemeanor.guys can't g when children are crying and it's all about the politics and the democrats, say, well, this will help us in the midterms because they're bad people doing this, and the republicans will say this will help us in the midterms because we're strong, i think you're all in trouble. >> so let me just say i believe very strongly this should not be the subject of political gamesmanship. it should not be. how can it be? how can it be? and, again, let's just go back to the earlier point. at some point people have to draw a line and say, you know, on certain things we just cannot, should not, and will not play politics.

>> you know what happens next. i know you do. >> i agree. >> i'm pushing for action on common ground because you can be one of those people who can be a catalyst. i'm telling you what happens next. i've covered these stories. what happens next is the god forbid, the kid they can't find, the kid who gets sick. and then what? then it's too late. >> you're exactly right. listen, i'm having the conversation. i think many of us are having a conversation. >> and it wasn't easy to get people, senator. a point to your favor, it wasn't even easy to get democrats tonight to talk about this. why? >> i don't know. i don't know. listen, when it comes down to it, each of us is going to have to look in a mirror and, you know, and speak to, you know, our minds and our hearts to our god, you know, to whatever is that touchstone about, you know, what is the right thing to do. but this has got to be one of those moments where people

really take a cold, hard look at themselves and ask themselves what is the right thing to do here and then do the right thing and have the courage to do it. i believe that courage will be rewarded in every way, including politically. i believe that. >> this has reached a tipping point in terms of media interest. that means the american voters are listening, and we'll see who does what, when, and how. >> that's right. >> i'll tell you, senator harris, it wasn't easy to even get democrats on tonight to talk about this. i'm not sure why. you took the opportunity. thank you for doing so. we'll be watching. >> i appreciate you. it's time to speak the truth, all of us. thank you. >> we will. speaking the truth is important. doing something about the truth is even more important in a situation like this. don lemon is standing by with a preview of "cnn tonight" which is just minutes away. i'm not kidding, it wasn't hyperbole. it was hard to get people on the show tonight to talk about this. >> i can only imagine. we have two guests i think you're going to find fascinating. chris, i even thought about you today as you were doing this story, interviewing kellyanne conway.

she's a mother and i get it. she has a heart and all that, and you as well. it's tough because it's one of those things where you don't want to make it personal, but then you listen to that audio, and how can you not make it personal, especially if you're a parent, if you're a human being. so speaking of that audio -- and these are the two guests. we're going to have the lawyer who is the source of that audio for propublica, and the reporter who followed up on this story. there have been a lot of people saying should this have been released. it shows just how horrifying this is. we'll be talking to them tonight in just a bit. >> you know the old expression, right? they remember how you make them feel. politics is about emotion and mobilizing people's feelings as much as anything. i'll look forward to seeing those interviews, my friend. check with you in a second. >> see you soon. >> the children are crying. that's a fact. another fact is that in the most recent poll, two-thirds of you

say you oppose what's happening at the border. so we have a message for the lawmakers who represent you in my closing argument. i am totally blind. and non-24 can make me show up too early... or too late. or make me feel like i'm not really "there." talk to your doctor, and call 844-234-2424. this is a story about mail and packages.

and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪ it's these new fresh-fx car air fresheners from armor all.

each scent can create a different mood in my car. like tranquil skies. armor all, it's easy to smell good. i'm a tin can tied to your bumper, cause.... i don't think enough people heard about your big day. but nothing says "we got married" like a 12 ounce piece of scrap metal. yo! we got married! honk if you like joint assets. now you're so busy soaking up all this attention, you don't see the car in front of you. and if i can crash your "perfect day", imagine what i can do to the rest of 'em. so get allstate, and be better protected from mayhem. like me.

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.

president trump says he hears them, that he doesn't like it, but he knew this would happen, didn't he? the president knew when the policy to prosecute all cases of illegal entry, a misdemeanor, was hatched by his a.g. harshness plays as strength, he hopes. and, yes, they also hope this does send a message to others looking for safe passage into the u.s. forget the lady with the lamp in the harbor. beware before you dare to come here. catch and release, that was the policy under obama, somewhat under bush. letting people go pending a court date that some would never show for. that's weakness.

president trump must equal strength. so let the children cry. remember, they knew this would happen. second argument for trump, i was forced into this. wrong. this is not about a bad law. the law is the same as it was for the last two administrations. the enforcement policy is what changed. president trump did this. he knew they would not have the facilities to hold all these people being arrested. a big reason obama and bush did not enforce the law this way. so the children are going to keep crying. the republicans hear them, and some will say they don't like it, but they aren't going to join with democrats to fix it. why? some like the strong enforcement message. more are afraid of president trump, afraid he'll make them cry in primaries like these kids are crying now.

and also there's some pragmatism at play. some hope this will motivate action on the other immigration policies they want to pass that dems don't want. the democrats will chastise as the media pushes them to address children. however, there is a solution. do your damn job. compromise. find common ground like crying kids and act on it. conscience, that sick feeling you should have hearing these kids as parents, as people with warm blood pumping through your heart. that's what it should make you do. but if it doesn't, then act anyway. you know why? fear of consequence. more than two-thirds of americans are against this, and i bet that number is going to rise. who would vote for a member of any party who watched this happen and did nothing?