2:00 in the west, 5:00 in the east. president trump lashing out against amazon, using his favorite tool, twitter. for the second time in three day, this time calling the company's deal with the u.s. postal service, a deal that is a perhaps the president is being driven here by a report that came out, your bi-line on president trump at the moment. how his businesses, at the moment at least, are seeing a bit of push back. under siege is the headline. >> i don't started the tweet

line. president trump maintained ownership of his business in the white house. the business itself is secretive. it is guarded, the secrecy of his parter ins and three legal challenges are trying to pry back that secrecy and see the investigation. the mueller investigation, the stormy daniels lawsuit and a lawsuit filed by d.c. and maryland. >> which one is the biggest threat for this presidency? >> well, the mueller investigation seems like it has the most fire power behind it. a special council, they can serve subpoenas. the one i am most interested in is saying that president trump violated the constitution, to accept payments from foreign

countries, they aren't out his ball rooms, high gets the money. a chance to examine his books and tax return, to see how much money he gets from foreign government that say huge inelectrocution into this private company. >> which one will pop the first? first pop, excuse me? >> that is hard to know. the immoll umts, a few hurdles have to be cleared benefit they get to the investigation stage. mueller could be way ahead or way behind of where he needs to be. and stormy daniels case is interesting, because of trump organization employees, joe martin, mike kohen were involved in setting up the nondisclosure agreement. stormy daniel's lawyer is trying to get into those communications, it could be one

of the most immediate threats, the intimidation or surveillance idea from the trump owner. >> the news organization, going back to where we started this hour, here. and the president against amazon. we know that ceo of amazon owns "the post." there could be linkages here, working for the news organization. >> i am glad you asked that. we are an independent organization. we are not part of amazon. as long as there is no interference from him. we have trouble covering amazon, they are privatesa well. we are not acting in amazon's interests here. >> political report for the washington post. thank you for your time.

>> we will bring in a panel. bloomberg news chsiev correspondent. good to see you here. >> happy easter to you as well. >> what do you make on the attack against amazon. it has been recent. a couple of times in the last week. it goes back to december. the president tweeth out, on this topic. why is he doing this? >> first and foremost, this is fake news argument. part of a broader argument from the administration about the main stream media. this is a second one, a business point. it is interesting to see a republican defending the united states post office. i remember when elizabeth warren was trying to turn the post office into banks. so, from that standpoint, very

point in his political career, is that what he is echoing, i care about you small town business, there may be a behemoth taking over your livelihood. >> the postal service argument, he called them the delivery boy for amazon, which resulted in people saying, it is a post office, everybody is a delivery boy. the post office has been in trouble for a long time. with the growth of businesses like amazon, that helped them. in terms of main street, in terms of tax policy, goods that we buy online, that is a completely separate issue, than how amazon sends us package,

that is something that appeals to the independent pharmacy, small town grocery, they can't compete and buy bulk in compete with organizations like amazon. >> one of the ideas, before we move on there, say concern about silicon valley right now. the idea that amazon become a single buyer. all both not good for everyday americans in a free market economy. >> i think silicon valley, from every source i talk to in washington, richard, is in for a wake-up call. zuckerberg, i cover the financial regulation. if a big bank were to behave like mark zuckerberg, and didn't testify on capitol hill, i think

the regularatory is going to shift. i sbried one republican, who compared it to big oil. this is not a we are looking at a massive change in regulation over the course of the next m as far as amazon, i think the regulatory -- take the media stuff out of it. they are looking at drone, you can have easter baskets delivered by drones, in the next couple of years. >> they are working on a distribution of their own. we will see what happened. >> the other topic. shall we say, the spring cleaning of the cabinet, of this swrgz. i want to go to a speet the ron jacket, on the secretary of the v firing david sheldon. >> this is the first person the

president fired by twitter. >> this is not the way to recruit good people. >> that is not the way i would do it. >> you would understand if needs to understand the effects. here at the va, with some controversy, being fired, learning about it in a way that is not typical. is there a talent gap problem that will continue and only grow larger? >> well, it might not be typical, it is getting increasingly fired this way. it is not surprising. i think that is something to be concerned about. if you want, we are seeing with the president's attempt to hire lawyer, those who are dying to be a president's lawyer are turning him down there. is so much uncertainty, what

will turn the president's head. i think that raises interesting issues. >> kevin, who is left? >> who is standing? >> i feel like i need a march madness bracket. >> it has been said. >> from a policy standpoint. ceo's of their own agencies, when someone like carson is under fire for spending, that trickles down. that really draws questions in terms of how the staffers and senior staffers are able to execute any sort of substantial policy plan. >> you have to wonder, that is the second large est the va secd here. there is talked about before as well.

and bob costa, at the "washington post." using unhinged or unleashed, white house stabilizers are gone. is that too far? is that unleashed? unhinged, is that accurate or too much? >> i will say, people who have been brought in, republicans and d.c., people who thought that it would be a stabilizing force. when these people go, you have to wonder, who is left to keep them in check. they have drained the white house. there is a limited pool of people, better at reigning him n keeping him on message and keeping him focused. the more. >> this is the way he has always

been. >> we will see what happens, next. we didn't bring up pruitt yet as part of the conversation. good luck to you. i a am -- an autopsy reveals th clark was shot seven times from behind. and the white house, silent when it am cans to police shootings.

parodontax, the toothpaste that helps prevent bleeding gums. if you spit blood when you brush or floss you may have gum problems and could be on the journey to much worse. help stop the journey of gum disease. try parodontax toothpaste. ♪

>> that is why i am out here. man, i am a father of two. they killed clark, they can continue to kill us. it can be any of us. having a bit of color to your skin means your guilty, that shouldn't be the case. >> matt barnes, retired nba player. leading today, from the protest for clark. the autopsy showed he was shot eight time, seven of the bullets striking him from behind or side. the findings fueling anger and why police muted the audio, immediately after that shooting. and sterling in baton rouge, louisiana. officers facing disciplinary action, but no criminal charges.

jason johnson, from "the root." and form er federal investigators. >> no criminal charges. we get more information, more video of the body cam video from the two officers, what happened? >> i would have used that video in my closing statement for murder charges against those police officers who we see wrestling mr. sterling to the ground. calling him every word in the book but the "n" word. threatening with a taser and shooting him point blank range. if viewers believe they are seeing murder, that is what they are seeing. whether or not the police acting, a gutless wonder, what

he they got fired, by the chief of police. >> when you listen to the statement that paul is alluding to here, you go through the words, and they are long, and many of them. before the prosecutors says no criminal charges. and everybody watching it looks at the tape as paul is saying, they may come away from this is aing, how could this happen again? change the names and the faces, we talked about this story way too many times. >> yes, paul is exactly right. at its core, we have to look at changing some of the fundamentals in the law. changing the fundamentals about whether or not being in fear is a justification for the use of legal force. it requires political action. for people to get more involved in replacing and holding county

and city prosecutors accountable. this is a story that is not a new story. sterling -- we hear about one case every six weeks. the thing most problematic, the statements sound the same. it is not just the statements from the police officers themselves, who claim that clark was running toward them. how many run toward someone with a gun isn't statements from the prosecutors is the same. i tried my best. although we knew they didn't. it is an embarrassment, it is a shame, and the lack 6 real change they we have seen as far as enforcement. for communities to get the justice they need. it is a tragic. >> i will play a bit from the police chief, murphy paul. take a listen. >> treat our police officers

with respect that their positions deserve. i assure you that men and women of the baton rouge police department will reciprocate that gesture. please stop resisting. stop running. when the police officer gives you directions, listen. >> paul. you listened to the words here. your reflection? >> the police should stop lying. they should stop blaming the victim when they shoot people who they don't have reason to do. interested in what will happen in sacramento, where the police turned off the sound of their, so the fix was there. will that police chief blame the victim? or bring the officers to justice? >> i can't help but think of

ferguson. the former police chief standing up. he stood up for that leadership that i was alluding to here. to address what was local. and difficult on both side, we can't help but think there would be more folks like jackson, right? >> it is not really about the individual leadership of any particular police chief. i think that police chief in baton rouge is disgusting and a coward. there is nothing in his statement that should comfort any of the person necessary that community. for him to claim, if you run, if you are afraid, police can shoot you. often time, we have seen video, police officers are claiming people are resisting when they are not. it is not resisting if i am trying to put my head on the ground. it is about accountability. when are the officers who engage in this behavior will be held

accountable? the same way a teacher or others do things that cost people's lives. >> this may be two cases we are talking about today? >> yes. >> he himself handled a handful, similar to these cases. >> at the same time police kill a thousand people a year. less than half of those cases resulted in conviction says over 15 years. the police are getting away with murder at some point. that has to stop. >> one plus one together here. when you see does it change the conversionization. i think it expands the conversation. i that police against people of color is slightly different.

>> great to have you with us. >> and the expulsion of diplomats, is the white house finally getting tough on russia?

>> we have new video in the diplomatic blow up between u.s. and russia. buses full of diplomats boarded buses. russia heading back, shutting down the u.s. coltalate in st. petersburg. shutting down a missile, sat an 2. white house officials tells nbc that president trump is getting tougher on russia. while the firm stance sources say he wants his staff to say quiet on actions to avoid upsetting valdimir putin. retired four-star general, and former national security council member. and nancy woodruff, reporter, "daily beast."

and former national security spokesperson under president obama. nemptd back and forth. back and forth. when does the back and forth end and how? >> that is the question. we on have only seen escalation from both sidesides. for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. that is precisely what we have seen. what we need to find here is someone to be that deesq vote. >> you have called this president a threat to national security in the past. what do you see happening, if

you will, factory doors. what is that potential offramp? >> the russians are provocative. poor mr. pint is running an imploferished second or third world country, with essential, oil, natural gas and nuclear weapon that is we care about. he has threatened his neighbors, and turned into a party dictatorship. it is a problem for us. the language out of the russians doesn't make any sense. we had 70,000 nukes on both sides in the 80s, we are down to 14,000. and don't make any sense. neither side can over come or

first strike the other side. the question is, what is mr. putin doing? a lot of sanctions on him. he is going down the wrong path. i think president trump is starting to recognize that at least, there was some joint response with the european allies in the assassination in the united kingdom. >> when the eu was formed, who do we call in the united states for issues related to this issue of national security? who do they call? is it general mattis? >> he is one of the influential voices in this admin strag. takes the more traditional, if you will, republican or national security space line on russia. while, also, crucially, holding the ear of the president.

having the capability of influencing him. one of the major changes over the year in change in trump's time in office, is the state department essentially put on the back burner. being marginalized. foreign diplomats, figuring out how to influence policy, and feel that state department is not a place that matters it isn't a place that matters in this administration. one voice that is important, is nicki hailey, she has been, in the trump administration. close relationship with the iranian government. there is such a disannance between the president and approximate people surrounding him. none of it makes sense, unless you realize that state department has effectively been sidelined. >> thank you for that leading into syria.

the president's decision to hold off $200 million for forces in that country. i want us to first listen to general jonathan braga, the director against isis. listen to that first. >> it is totally dangerous. we do not want to go back. we can't afford to go backwards on that. the world will may -- pay a price. i don't want to contemplate that. that isn't a world i want to live in. >> part of the complexity, it is not only isisthat general has to worry about. it is turkish forces, and on assignment reporting, as well as the concern of russia. >> it is becoming a regional -- the general is right. we are otd two-yard line.

the successive administrations have made gains pushinging isisout of iraq and syria. all of that can be jeopardyidized if the trump administration withdraws. the president has governed in a different way than what he said on the campaign trail. increasing the number of 2r506s in sievia 10 fold, now he is talking about pulling back. it is not clear this is red meat to his political base, when he talks about withdrawing from sir ya, or if it is something he wants to do. what we are hearing from dod, this is something we need to see through. >> talking about a campaign trail. you saw, the president, on thursday, saying, pull out of syria. let them take care of

themselves. $200 million, according to braga on the ground. how key is the $200 million. >> as a continued presence, and special operations force, we have a couple of from, 9,000 plus in african gan. the naval -- we have a lot of leverage. this is 50,000 plus isisfighters killed. this is not the time at which to break ranks with the people on the ground. there is no over skating the complexity of it you need a score guards to sort out of kurds, the syrian factions,

sunni and it is not clear to me where we should go. we should not abandon the fight until isishas been terminated. isis, is a concept. >> i am not going to get the 200 million. a complex situation. the likelihood that president discussed that fundings is plausible. that is something he would have. it appears he is getting what he wanted from president trump. >> ned price here, the programming note. we were 7:00 on msnbc, a lnk to

a russian spy. robert mueller's attempt to connect the dots in the russia investigation.

as international tepgzs with russia escalate, mueller's investigation continues, this week, mueller's team detained ted malik said he was questioned

with the campaign. rick gates was knowly in contact with a former intelligence officer. john dowd, floating pardons for manfort, and flynn. bringing in former u.s. attorney in michigan. natasha bertrand. >> when we got that video, at least the view of malik now being detailed, what was your takeaway of the relevance of that? >> it shows that mueller is going after roger stone. malic is a stone ally. of ferrage, that lead the campaign in the eu.

if shows that mueller is trying to get information about people about what they know about whether or not they were told by roger stone that he knew anything in advance. that is the only reason why mueller detained him. if he, himself, has been to the london, and wanted to know more about his relationship with stone. >> no stone unturned. >> this is a huge piece. roger stone seemed to have advanced knowledges of where wiki leaks. did he tell anybody, was there anything between the campaign, and roger stone was in touch with the president. was there any, that mate be some

sort of collusion. >> dowd, floating the option of pardons, when does it get tricky? the issue of pardons? >> the president's power to bardon, is absolute. if it is offered in change for a benefit, there is concern that it could be evidence of obstruction of justice or bribery. the so, if the pardons are offered in xwanchlg for an agreement not to cooperate with mueller, it could be a bribe or obstruction of justice. the idea they there would be no reason for the president's personal lawyer, not the white house lawyer, not the pardon attorneys, to be discussing did. i think there may already be a

problem here. >> what would you be watching for? >> with respect to paul manfort. >> he is holding out. >> velikely, in a position, he was at the trump power mighting. whether there was something nefarruous that happen there or not. paul manfort is the one who seems to be the key to that information conversely, you can understand why president trump would have a strong interest of pardoning him. >> and the former russian intelligence officer, we are talking about killniche.

when does this get pain talking with a gru. >> the reason why mueller is asking for his -- it is because what he can so with what kind of communication they were having with the rush. he was still in touch with that races the stakes. gru is the sglpt of course, xhupted if he knew that colim neck was an agent could paul

manfort have known about the hack and dump in the election. >> go blue! >> 6:09 today, it will happen. five and a half points favored. thank you. >> are you a u.s. how the simple question - dad's got all the answers. - anncr: prevagen is now the number-one-selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. - she outsmarts me every single time. - checkmate! you wanna play again? - anncr: prevagen. healthier brain. better life. and when you switch to esurance, in the modern world, it pays to switch things up.

you can save time, worry, hassle, and yup, money. in fact, drivers who switched from geico to esurance saved hundreds. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call.

. >> the purpose is to determine individuals that are here, it is helps to comply with the voting rights act. without that information, it is hard to make those determinations, that information needs to be gathered and it has been part of the united states census, every time we have had a census since 1965, with the one exception, the 2010 census. >> the white house defending the decision. several democratic state attorney generals saying they will sue the trump mmpgz. adding the question can scare off undocumented immigrants from

participating. >> the reason we haven't seen it in four, five decades, we know that it can dissuade people to participa participate. great to have all three of you here. what does the constitution say? >> the constitutional mandate on the census is clear. article one, section 2, and the 14th amendment say that all persons shall be considered counted in the enurmeration. that has been upheld by the supreme court. as recently as 2016. that was a redistricting case.

we should count all, that will be a huge hurdle for the trump >> and so asking about citizenship here, chris, it does not appear based on the explanation from raul that it is illegal or not part of the intention, but it is a question that critics will say might keep away those who are not citizens of the united states. >> well, that is exactly right. and this is part of a larger power play by the trump administration. not only to make it more challenging for communities of color to vote, to support jerry mander districts, to scape goat communities. and we have six former census directors who have come out and opposed this, democrats and republicans. this move was also done over the advice of the career civil servants at the census bureau

because the focus groups found people of color, asian or americans and more reluctant to return the census if this question was asked. and so this will have real consequences not only in terms of disenfranchising people but leading to the loss of critical dollars that help communities. >> and the census bureau had done -- i think you might be alluding this and to ramona, and they found that when this question was asked, lower numbers participated in the census. at least in their testing in the polling here. does that make sense to you? >> not really. it is not asking -- this question about citizenship doesn't are you here illegally or an undocumented resident of the its and just if you are a citizen. there are a lot of people that are green card holders or spouses of green card hoerlds who are here legally. but not citizens. and they'll have no problem answering the question. and in fact, it is also the case that the census bureau is not

allowed to share the information that it collects with any other agency or with anyone. so it seems a little bit of a tempest in a teapot to me. >> well, two points in regard to what mona is saying there. first of all, the census bureau is nonpartisan and not allowed to share this information. but there are two instances in heat -- history where they did and in world war ii they shared information about japanese in the secret service and then about arab americans with homeland security. so there have been times when that has occurred. but what is more important to know here is that in the last census, 2010, by their own internal review, the census found that they undercounted latino's by 1.5% and undercounted african-americans 2% and native american population by 4%. now fast forward to now. we're in a very politicized climate with where many immigrant communities are afraid

of deportation and i.c.e. and any contact with government. so this is a very real thing. and we -- just think about it for a second. this is out west it is a holiday. this is caesar chavez day for latinos in mixed status family, there is a fear of participating because people worry that if they responded in any way the government might come back and use this information against them. so the fear is absolutely real. even having the discussion shows nor anxiety and confusion around this issue. >> mona, your response. >> i still don't see what it is the people need to be afraid of. you're abouting asked are you a citizen or not a citizen. seems like a reasonable thing for government to ask. they ask how many toilets you have in your skr -- the names and ages of your children and they ask where you work, all kinds of intrusive questions. the idea that somehow asking whether you are a citizen to which anyone can respond no, without fear, i just don't -- i

don't see what the -- the danger is really. >> and one thought, chris, might be then why haven't they done it for about half a century, i believe since 1950, asked a question like this. right. that is exactly right. last time this question was asked was in 1950 and things have changed in this country during that period of time. we used to have jim crow laws and mccarthyism. and even the terminology changes and negro was an appropriate term to so it is important to update and understand the real consequences, not only in communities of color but for the loss of social services around the country. this is not just a blue state issue. states like texas and florida and arizona will see the loss of federal dollars and the loss of congressional seats if this happens. >> it might make it a little bit more expensive to do the census. if people are worried about responding, then what they'll have to do is send census workers to knock on the door of

the people next door and ask questions about the people who didn't return the forms. that is one of the things they do. so it might increase costs a little bit. but i don't necessarily agree that it would mean that the count would be inaccurate. and it is -- it's awfully difficult to get a perfectly accurate country of millions of people but they are objecting to -- worried about losing money and federal dollars allocated based on population. and so it is a matter of bucks rather than civil rights. >> well it may be both. we've run out of time. mona, thank you so much. and chris lew, ronald rays and a real power panel. wish we had more time. in case of an emergency, call an accountant. how this 36-year-old hero safed the day and the game for the chicago blackhawks during his unexpected nhl debut. stick around.

many people dream about what it would be like to be a professional athlete. the 36-year-old accountant scott fauster suited up for the chicago blackhawks on thursday night. nhl teams only carry two goalies but having an emergency goalie on stand by in case the two get injured. that is what happened to the blackhawks. foster was in goal for the final 14 minutes as a result of the game.

and played well. helping chicago win the game. way to go. that wraps it up for us this hour. i'm richard lui. stay with us throughout the evening for breaking news. follow me on facebook, instagram and twitter. let me know what you think. all in with chris hayes starts now. >> tonight on "all in." >> we're going to end the government corruption and we're going to drain the swamp in washington, d.c. >> new allegations of corruption from the swamp of donald trump's creation. >> you're right about the swamp. say it again. >> tonight, what looks like the most egregious abuse to date from a member of trump's cabinet. plus, why robert mueller's investigators detained a mystery trump ally at an airport this week. new reporting on the drinking games inside the white house personnel office. examining the trump fence. in thing 1 thing 2. >> it's not a fence. it's a wall. as advertisers pull away from a fox news show.