We know. The stakes got higher. 16 parents in all now facing an Additional Charge. Lets back up a second and remember that all of the parents connected to this College Admissions scheme were originally charged in a criminal complaint with one federal charge. The government has always been saying, according to our sources, if you dont plead and if you dont cooperate with us, you do face the risk of an Additional Charge. And that is what were seeing today. An indictment now against 16 parents and including now this charge of money laundering. It does come after we saw 13 parents, including Felicity Huffman plead guilty yesterday, taking ownership of what the government said they did with their connection to the College Admissions scheme. Felicity huffman giving a very long, heart felt seemingly apology in a statement yesterday. But, yeah, this again, stakes are higher and were talking now about Lori Loughlin and her husband, mossimo jean annually and more charges and going back to court and be arraigned on new brin, thank you. So help us understand. For the parents that arent taking ownership, is this a way for prosecutors to hit them hard . You know, brooke, good to be with you. That is absolutely the case. Remember what weve seen prior to this. The setup to this is that we saw a number of parents agree to enter pleas of guilty. Prosecutors believe they have the goods here. They believe that, listen, in the event that you want to take a plea and accept responsibility, remember under the federal guidelines it is not contrition matters, acceptance of responsibility. You get a score. What the feds do is they look at your criminal history, and then they look at the Offense Level with regard to what you did and that represents a score under the federal sentencing guidelines. Now if you want to deviate from those guidelines and it is advisory, not mandatory, accepting some responsibility is a way to get a bet eve a bett score and which results in a bet every sentence. If you want to plead, you plead early and apparently those who have are rewarded because in addition to pleading early, you could agree to turn states evidence. That is to cooperate and give the federal government information relevant to the case and help them build a case. And ill say this. In addition to the indictment with Additional Charges, that raises the stakes as Brynn Gingras was speaking about. There could be based on this investigation other parents and other administrators, other coaches who are embroiled in this. And so there is no question that this raises the ante and pretty much brings people to the table and says, plea now, and if you fight the power, that is the government, you have an awful lot of explaining to do. Upping the ante and sending a message from the government. Joey jackson, thank you very much. Well keep our eye on that. I want to move along and take a turn to the first faceoff between lawmakers and bill barr over the Mueller Report. House democrats on the Appropriation Committee grilled him all morning about how he handled this 300, 400 page report and when it will be leas leased be released and whether the white house will or has seen. And he talked about the litter released on march 24th and when the special counsel had any say in it. The letter of the 24th, mr. Muellers team did not play a role in drafting that document. Although he offered in the opportunity to review it before we sent it out and he declined that. Right now the special counsel is working with us on identifying information in the reports that fall under those four categories. We will color code the excisions from the report and provide explanatory notes describing the basis for each redaction. From my standpoint, by within a week. I will be in a position to release the report to the public and then i will engage with the chairman of both Judiciary Committees about that report and about any further requests that they have. Did the white house see the report before you released your summarizing letter . Has the white house seen it since then . Have they been briefed on the contents beyond what was in your summarizing letter to the Judiciary Committee . Ive said what im going to say about the report. Cnn senior Congressional Correspondent manu raju is outside of the room on capitol hill and you just talked to chairman nadler. What did he share with you . Reporter yeah, the chairman of the house Judiciary Committee not happy with that testimony from this morning. Namely bill barr saying he will not provide the unredacted report to the house Judiciary Committee and he did not intend to go to court to seek a court order to release the grand jury information of witnesses who testified before the mueller investigation. That was something that also nadler demanded. I talked to him just moments ago and he said that he planned to serve the Justice Department with a subpoena if that redacted report comes to capitol hill and includes those redactions as barr had made very clear he plans to do. He said that theyre going to wait until the report, they receive the redacted report until they serve the Justice Department with the subpoena. So a bit of news there. Because before he had not said that as explicitly. They had been authorized to serve subpoenas, the house Judiciary Committee approved to serve them but had not made a decision on whether to issue them and in the aftermath of bill barrs testimony that the committee will not get the unredacted vote and he made it clear this will be a subpoena fight and for that information. He also discussed the what bill barr said about the grand jury information, saying there is nothing in the law or show me a provision in the law in which grand jury information should go over to capitol hill. That is what barr said today. Nadler responded and said this is ample precedent in his side he believes the starr investigation for the watergate investigation and where grand jury information has been provided to capitol hill. He also raised questions of concerns about the white house him barr not saying whether the white house had been briefed about the full Mueller Report and said that an unacceptable response. So youre seeing tension building here between the House Democrats and the Justice Department over the Mueller Report and the clear sign, a subpoena will be served in just a matter of days now that the it is certain that theyll get a redacted report within the next week. That is new news from the chairman. I appreciate that. Lets start there. With me dana bash, also with us Paul Rosenstein who served as counsel during the watergate investigation and we have a lot to talk about that how that is hanging over this current situation. But first to you, subpoenas getting served up and obviously the democrats want to see every single word of this thing. They dont want the redactions. Can you just speak a little bit to what the democrats are trying to do and how tensions are listen, it became very clear with the exchange between the committee and the attorney general there is no immediate intention at the department of justice to give Even Congress the full report, the unredacted report. And so that obviously caused some worry among democrats. And that is why they clearly are taking the next step. And look, this is and you will speak to this far different from what we did we saw with the starr report and there is a reason for it and that is because this is a different statute. This is a special counsel and he is somebody who is falling under the purview or did fall under the purr vieh of the Justice Department and he was appointed with very specific guidelines and the department of justice and attorney general has a lot of leeway on who sees what and for what obviously during the ken starr investigation, members of congress got all of that, right . And so that is what that precedent was set and mr. Barr was very clear today in saying, no, you will not be seeing those details, he mentioned the color coded redactions and specifically wont see the grand jury information. What do you make of what is happening now and why cant congress get it all . Well, that is a great question. And i think the answer is congress could if barr wanted to let them have it. Exactly. The choice that hes making is a conscious choice. He could go to court to ask for authority to release it. That is what happened in the starr investigation. That is what happened in the jaw woreski investigation and there is a provision of law that allows for the disclosure in cases of intelligence and foreign influence kinds of things without the intervention of a court at all. It is already in the statute and so he could make a disclosure to congressman schiff and nunes as part of the Intelligence Committee investigation and if he wants to. But he has chosen not to. The interesting question is going to be why and whether or not this is consciously hiding something. What about the piece, he was definitive no on the grand jury information and quite transparent for much of the morning say ill do x, y and z and when he was asked whether or not the white house has been or would be briefed he tap danced. He tap danced. It is a very interesting contrast because in his letter he said that the president had publicly said he wouldnt claim privilege so im not going to give them the report in order to conduct a review. How do you square that . I think something has changed in the intervening time. As it seems what could it be . It seems the president s attitude has changed as well so maybe the president has had a chance to read the entire report and doesnt think it is as good for him as he liked it when it was just a fourpage summary. Is that a possibility . Yeah. If they were able to read it. Is that a possibility . Anything is possible. Certainly barr has every authority to share it with the president if he wants. He works for the president and the fact that he wont no is an easy answer. Has the president seen it. No. He wouldnt say that. And he did say that two and a half weeks ago. That is noteworthy. What else from this morning watching, your biggest takeaway. The fact that barr revealed that he and his team asked Robert Mueller if they would like to coordinator consult on the letter that he wrote, that fourpage letter. And Robert Mueller said no. He declined to have anything to do with it. Which i think says a lot about Robert Muellers well daylight but also his understanding of how this is going to be perceived and that is that bill barr is a political appointee, that this is going to be a political letter, and also why would he help in summarizing a summary that mueller spent so long doing. Just put out his own summary. And so he said, i did my job and i tried to stay as apolitical as possible and im out and this is your deal. Okay. Paul and dana, thank you so much. Good to see both of you. President trump meantime is disputing his Senior Administration officials today after it was reported that the president now wants to reinstate and broaden the controversial family separation policy. President obama had child separation. Take a look. The press knows and we all know it. Im the one that stopped it. President obama had child separation. Now ill tell you something, once you dont have it, that is why you see many more people coming. They are coming like it is a picnic, because lets go to disneyland. [ inaudible question ]. Were not looking to do that. Thank you very much. But it does it brings a lot more people to the border. When you dont do it, it brings a lot more people to the border. So that is a lie. Here are the facts. Under past administrations some Border Crossers were occasionally prosecuted for guidelines during the obama and george w. Bush administration prioritized the deportation of criminals and drug running and gang affiliation if they arrived with children they were indeed separated. But here is where the president doesnt tell the truth. Under his 2018 zerotolerance policy, those guidelines were tossed out and any border crosser accused of criminal activity, including the act of crossing the border illegally, was prosecuted and that is what triggered this surge in family separation. Despite President Trump saying hes not trying to separate families, a Senior Administration official tells cnn that trump has now empowered his aide steven miller, a hard liner when it comes to cracking down at the border, to take the lead on immigration that official telling jake tapper that the president , quote unquote, just wants to separate families. And my next guest is one of three democratic congresswomen who were denied entry at a Child Detention Center in florida. She is congresswoman donna shall a law. And so thank you for being with me. Youre welcome. So i want to get into what happened to you and the other two women in a second. But first on the news here, do you believe President Trump when he said he is not looking to restart these family separations . No. Its very clear that he is going to restart the family separations. Enough people in the administration have reported that. And he believes that family separations actually reduce the number of people that come to the border. And that simply is not true. His lack of investment in the countries are coming from, the fact that he wants to pull the money out of el salvador and honduras and guatemala is very dangerous because those are the places that people are fleeing. You are referring to the aid they want to pull. And the president s new attorney general was asked about this testifying on capitol hill and this is his response. So would you enforce and put forth policies of new discussions that have been happening about President Trump wanting to restart this separation practice . Well, i can say i personally sitting here am not familiar with those discussions. What would you support continuation of separation of families . I i support the president s policy which is were not going to separate families. So i hear you congresswoman saying, you dont believe the president , would you believe the attorney general that theyll stop separating the families . It is very clear there is a lack of communication with the attorney general about the policies that are being planned. The president simply comes up with them and he rarely notifies the cabinet officers that are in charge, the secretary of homeland security, it was very clear that she was not notified about major policies and policy changes that took place and where decisions were made in the white house. Im not surprised at his answer. Hes just not part of the discussion going on. Has the president you dont think the president s own attorney general is involved in those corporations. He said hes not. He supported the policy but he gave every impression he wasnt part of any discussions that are taking place at the white house about an immoral policy to take children away from their families. And let me add a layer to this. Were also reporter here at cnn that President Trump told federal Border Agents to break the law and essentially ignore judges overseeing the immigration policies. Do you think that the president should be investigated over this . Well, certainly he should be held accountable over this. Look, we have the law on our side to go and inspect a facility that houses 1500 teenagers who have been taken away from their families, who have not been placed back with those families. The law was very clear. We read the law to the officials there and they refused to let us in. Why were you denied . They said they didnt have the authority to let us in. The contractor that was there, when we tried to call the department, the office of Refugee Resettlement by the way, i ran that department for eight years. No one answered the phone. They knew we were coming. We notified them a week ahead of time. And they would not let us in. This is really breaking the law. The law is very clear, it was past as part of the appropriations bill saying any member of congress could enter those detention facilities at will. We need to spot check them. We need to make sure the children are being taken care of. They dont have that rule about inspecting Nursing Homes in this country. They dont notify people ahead of time that theyre going to go and inspect Nursing Homes in the department. But they want to hold back members of congress from taking a very careful look at the housing, the detentions of thousands of teenagers and in that case the homestead facility, they want to almost double it. Theyre going to have more kids there than we have at Homestead High School and they go home to their families. This is unforgivable what this administration is doing. It is antichildren, antifamily. It doesnt represent american values. Congresswoman donna shall a law thank you so much. Nice to have you on. And were keeping an eye on the hill as Steven Mnuchin is testifying before the House Financial Services committee and were waiting to see if hell block the release of President Trumps tax returns. Plus well look at the nine top Administration Officials that dare to tell the president no. Run