Analysis and discussion of the day's top stories and compelling issues from Lawrence O'Donnell.
have always said the purpose of the meeting was, so get information on hillary clinton. the original trump lie about this meeting was that the meeting was about russian adoptions. but the president's lawyers were forced to admit in a letter to the special prosecutor that president trump dictated a false statement to "the new york times" about that meeting knowing it was false, a statement saying the meeting was about russian adoptions. the legal implications of the president's tweet are gravely threatening to the president's son. this was a meeting to get information on an opponent, totally legal and done all the time in politics. but it is not done all the time in politics, and it's totally, totally illegal. if it is a meeting with foreign citizens trying to help the trump campaign. federal law makes it a crime for a foreign national to, quote, directly or indirectly help an american campaign with financial contributions or, quote, an other thing of value.
federal election law recognizes opposition research as, quote, a thing of value. federal election law makes it a crime to, quote, solicit, accept or receive a thing of value to a campaign for foreign national. the e-mail traffic setting up the meeting in trump tower during the campaign with russian nationals shows donald trump jr. eagerly soliciting what they call dirt on hillary clinton after they had clinton dirt to contribute to the trump campaign. the president's tweet yesterday said that the meeting, quote, went nowhere. the trump line of defense about the meeting was that the russians didn't hand over any dirt on hillary clinton. as we sit here tonight, we don't know if that's true. we don't know what happened in the meeting. we don't really know what happened after the meeting. we don't know whether the russians directly handed over
dirt to the trump campaign about hillary clinton directly to donald trump jr. or to anyone else in the campaign. but there are three ways to violate federal election law on contributions from foreign nationals. the trump line of defense says the trump campaign did not actually receive any dirt on hillary clinton from the russians, and, so, there was no crime. they are now insisting that the meeting was legal because they did not receive any dirt on hillary clinton. and so if that is true. donald trump jr. is not guilty of having received a thing of value from the trump campaign from russians. but he did solicit it. it is illegal to solicit, accept or receive a thing of value from a russian national. he said i love it. other e-mails show donald trump eagerly setting up the meeting in which he hoped to accept and receive help from the russians.
all donald trump's eager maneuvers could fit the legal definition of solicit. president trump reportedly knows that. and according to one report has expressed worries about donald trump's legal jeopardy, which brings us back to why. why would the president write a tweet yesterday morning that might put his son in even more legal jeopardy? leading off our discussion now, jill wine-banks and mimi roca. she's an msnbc contributor. jill, it was a quick 44 years ago that richard nixon yesterday was handing over those tapes and three days later was gone. on the anniversary of that moment, of the handing over of the tapes, we get this extraordinarily strange tweet
from the president. since i read that tweet, all i have been wondering about is why. can you make any sense of the why that tweet would go out? >> i have long since given up trying to figure out why the president does anything because almost none of it makes any sense. that was very harmful, not just to his son who he was throwing under the bus by admitting the real purpose of the meeting, but to him as well because he drafted a fake report about why the meeting happened. so now he's admitting to obstruction of justice, not just to working with the russians. and you clearly defined what the law is. you cannot accept anything. and if you tried to get it but failed, you have attempted to violate the law. and that's just as much a crime as actually taking it. if i go into a bank and say, give me your money and you refused, i still tried to rob
your bank, and i can be tried for a crime. so the fact that he didn't succeed or at least says he didn't and as you pointed out, we don't know whether he actually got dirt or not. we certainly know that there was an announcement that there would be dirt and then there was a leak of the e-mails. so did they know that that's what was going to happen? that would be conspireing with the russian government to hurt the election. and that's a crime. >> mimi roca, we don't know if the president had help with this tweet. we don't know if someone else gave him that big, fancy word, fabrication. but if he did have help with this tweet or a lawyer looking over his shoulder on this tweet, can you find any conceivable legal theory that would suggest this tweet could be somehow helpful?
>> i don't think he had a good lawyer helping him, if he had a lawyer helping him. >> okay. >> but, so no. i don't see a great legal theory. one, he sees the writing on the wall about his son and that, you know, all arrows point to his son is going to likely be charged with something in relation to this meeting and he's trying to engender some part of sympathy. my poor son. woe is him. there are some people out there, some trump supporters who may go along with that and feel that. this is part of the witch hunt without using the word witch hunt. there is a second part of the tweet that what he's done in the tweet is after 100 tweets of no collusion, no collusion. he now has basically said without using the words in this tweet, yes, collusion. but it was my son and i feel bad for him and i didn't know about
it. so he's trying to distance himself. it's just -- it is a total what we call false exculpatory, what he says about his knowledge. it looks false because it is. and so i think, again, if he had a lawyer advising him, it was not a good lawyer. >> and, jill, the idea that this is helpful to the president himself alone saying this is a way of saying that the president isn't guilty of anything, i still can't think of any reason to put that in a tweet, even if that's what the president believed, that he wasn't guilty of anything. >> he's not getting very good legal advice. and something she said also reminded me of why, for example, rosemary woods was never indicted for perjury. she testified she erased 18.5 minutes and described how she did it and the testimony showed that that did not happen.
but we didn't indict her because it would have been a distraction. i don't think the same is true with donald trump jr. donald trump jr. played a pivotal role in the campaign and he is not just some assistant to the president who shouldn't be indicted. if he did as his e-mail said, please give me the dirt. i love it. especially release it later in the summer when it will do maximum damage, that's an indictment crime and he should be tried for it. >> if donald trump jr. solicited this information from russian nationals without knowing that that was a crime, how does that factor into charging this crime or defending against this charge? >> he doesn't have to know that it is a crime. what he has to have is a general intent here that he knew, you know, what he was doing. so here he knew he was accepting information. whether it be, you know, actual
documents. when we talk about dirt, as you mentioned, it could just be that they told him they were going to do something or that they had access to information, and that's why, you know, trump made that announcement. so he does not have to know. ignorance of the law is no defense and people are familiar with that. there are some crimes when you have to have a more specific intent. but here it would have to be general knowledge about the conduct that he was doing, not the specific law that he was violating. and in particular, if we're talking about conspiracy law, you know, he could be liable for joining a conspiracy that the russians already had underway when they hacked into the democratic e-mails and had them in their possession. you can join a conspiracy at any time. you don't have to be there from the beginning, as long as you are aware of the general object of the conspiracy and you join it and do something in furtherance, which again all
arrows point to trump jr. did that. >> thank you both for starting us off tonight. really appreciate it. when we come back, the prosecution's star witness took the stand today in the trial of former trump campaign manager paul manafort and immediately implicated paul manafort in several crimes. and new reports from white house sources indicate the president is more worried than ever about the special prosecutors investigation, especially the investigation of donald trump jr. the fact is, there are over ninety-six hundred roads named "park" in the u.s. it's america's most popular street name. but allstate agents know that's where the similarity stops. if you're on park street in reno, nevada, the high winds of the washoe zephyr could damage your siding. and that's very different than living on park ave in sheboygan, wisconsin, where ice dams could cause water damage. but no matter what park you live on, one of 10,000 local allstate agents knows yours.
now that you know the truth, are you in good hands? crisp leaves of lettuce. freshly made dressing. clean food that looks this good. delivered to your desk. now delivering to home or office. panera. food as it should be. panera. this is not a screensaver.game. this is the destruction of a cancer cell by the body's own immune system, thanks to medicine that didn't exist until now. and today can save your life. ♪ ♪
today rick gates, the star prosecution for the case of the united states of america versus paul manafort testified that he committed crimes with the former trump campaign chairman, paul manafort. the prosecution asked did you commit any times with mr. manafort. gates again responded yes. gates is manafort's long-time business association, who is cooperating with mueller in exchange for a reduced sentence. gates spent his first hour on the stand admitting to the jury most of the bad things and crimes that he has done. gates admitted to helping paul manafort commit bank and tax fraud, holding money in hidden bank accounts, money that was
used to fund paul manafort's lavish lifestyle. he testified he knew what they were doing was illegal but said he lied because paul manafort directed him to lie. but he also admitted to crimes of his own, such as embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars from paul manafort and lying to the fbi. this is a crucial element in the manafort defense team's approach, which is to try to blame rick gates for these financial crimes, insisting that paul manafort was taken advantage of by rick gates. paul manafort sat in the courtroom staring down his former aid just at the beginning of this show down and the jury will, in the end, have to pick who to believe, rick gates or paul manafort. joining us now the intelligence national supporter for nbc news.
mimi is still with us. we don't know if paul manafort is going to take the witness stand in his own defense. although, it is hard to imagine a real defense in this case that doesn't include paul manafort. so what do you think at this stage the jury is seeing in the rick gates testimony? >> well, they're seeing kind of an unattractive character on the one hand, lawrence, an admitted criminal. a guy that got up there and talked about a crime spree that he and paul manafort were involved in by his story. but also admitted, as you said, to all these other crimes, some of this the prosecution said they didn't even know about until mr. gates brought it to his attention as part of his plea agreement where they say you need to confess all your bad acts because it will come out at trial anyway. she thought the jury's body language, they were leaning back in their seats after having been leaning forward as if to express
skepticism about gates. that doesn't mean they won't eventually believe what he's saying. i thought he was an effective and compelling witness even as he was admitting to all these crimes because he is a man with nothing left to lose. his whole goal right now is to minimize his prison term. if he lies on the stand, his agreement is null and void. so, you know, he's only started part way down the road of admitting to all these various charges in the specifics that he acknowledges up front he was guilty of. he was indicted alongside mr. manafort of the same bank and tax fraud charges. right up front he said, yes, i was guilty of those charges. i only pled guilty to this one charge, but i was guilty of all this other stuff. here's what else i was guilty of.
>> mimi, as a prosecutor, you have dealt with this many times. you put on the stand your star witness is a person that committed crimes with the defendant. so you have the admitted criminal on the witness stand in exchange for a reduced sentence saying, that guy over there, that defendant, is a criminal. >> absolutely. and, you know, i put on the stand witnesses who have been committed just horrible crimes, murders, you know, drug trafficking, liars, fraudsters. as ken noted, the jury does -- they get it. they don't like those cooperators and they probably don't like rick gates and they may be leaning back in their seat, but that doesn't mean they won't believe them. that's the key. you don't have to like him. you have to believe him. you don't have to, but you should.
and here's why. and then they give the jury reasons to believe the cooperator. the government prosecution is never going to ask a jury to solely rely on a cooperaing witness like rick gates. they will back their case up with corroboration, evidence. they will ask, does this make sense and fit in with the other evidence. they will point to the cooperation agreement. it is very important. it is designed, the government corop ration agreement that all u.s. attorneys offices use and the one that was used here to incent vise truth telling. the way a cooperator can mess himself up is to plead guilty under a cooperation agreement and lie on the stand. they will end up getting a higher sentence than if they pled guilty on other crimes. that's how they get a reduction in the sentence. so there is all these different
tools that prosecutors will point to to a jury to explain why they can believe the cooperator. they don't have to like him and they probably won't, but here is why you should believe him. they will also remind the jury that we, the government, we didn't pick this guy. paul manafort did. and of course he committed crimes. that's what paul manafort was doing. and gates took responsibility for it, and that's why he's here today. >> and, ken, to mimi's point that prosecution is never relying on any one witness, the gates testimony follows one of the shortest witnesses in the case so far, federal official simply pointing out the fact that they never reported any of the, what, 15, 14 or so foreign bank accounts that they were legally required to report, gates and manafort. that's just fact at this point. >> yes, lawrence. absolutely right. that's why i have been saying tonight that even if gates totally collapsed under cross-examination and the jury
discounts everything he says, there is still a pretty strong case against paul manafort on exactly the point that you just made. there was a treasury agent who testified about the requirements to report foreign bank accounts. paul manafort didn't report any of him. and his tax preparer said the reason is because she never disclosed them to her. she was totally unaware of them and that is a felony if it is proven that it was willful. the only manafort defense there is he didn't know it was a crime. there is a lot of evidence to contradict that, lawrence. >> thank you very much for joining us tonight. really appreciate it. >> you bet. >> when we come back, a former head of the cia said that the president has deep, twisted and irrational impulses and a former four-star general is now saying the president has outright separation from the truth. donald trump is starting to sound even more dangerous to those former government officials. and later, why are
republicans in danger of losing what is supposed to be a very safe republican seat? there is a one-point lead in the latest poll by the democrats in that very dramatic race where the voters will go to the polls tomorrow in ohio. (burke) at farmers, we've seen almost everything so we know how to cover almost anything. even "vengeful vermin." not so cute when they're angry. and we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma
♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun♪ ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma ♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun transitions™ light under control™ ♪ ♪ ♪ raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens ♪ ♪ bright copper kettles and warm woolen mittens ♪ ♪ brown paper packages tied up with strings ♪
♪ these are a few of my favorite things ♪ ♪ ♪
said they believe is sick and dangerous tweeted this. the fake news hates me saying that they are the enemy of the people, only because they know it's true. i am providing a great service by explaining this to the american people. they purposely cause great division and distrust. they can also cause war! they are very dangerous and sick! the former acting director of the cia responded to that tweet saying, we pay way too much attention to these whacky trump tweets that shouldn't drive news cycles, but the more i stare at this one, the more it seems like a deep, twisted and irrational impulse that, alarmingly, he can't control. it's beyond "un-presidential." here is a sampling of the president's recent musing that could be labeled delusional and sick.
>> remember the beautiful first lady coming down the escalator in the white dress that big day when everybody said, oh, he's just doing this for fun. he doesn't really mean it. man, if i don't mean it, i hope you tell me soon because it's a lot of work. but coming down the escalator and you remember what i said? i mentioned words i won't even mention them tonight because there is a lot of young people here. but i mention words and everybody thought it was wonderful. but then about two days later, they said, did he say this? did he say that? guess what? what i said is peanuts compared to what turns out to be the truth. it's peanuts. >> so there is the president of the united states telling his audience last week that what he said in the speech announcing
his candidacy was unfit for the ears of young people and children. tonight retired four-star army general said, president trump behavior becoming more alarming and ill logical in 55 years of service in the armed service, civil government and business, i have never encountered this level of anger, insulting behavior and outright separation from the truth. joining us now sergeant mccaffrey. i want more of your reaction from what you are seeing from the president. i know you have been alarmed for a long time from what you hear from donald trump. but is this a new level of alarmed for you? >> i'm not qualified to talk about the president's mental state. i'm just talking about his behavior. i have been decades levels serving at the highest levels of armed forces, the business community.
i personally have never encountered this kind of behavior, the insulting nature dealing with his clients or us. i mean, the business community does that. the armed forces, we'd sack a commander who dealt that way with his soldiers. so i think it's of great concern. we've got a couple of more years, at least, with president trump as the chief executive. and it's looking very worrisome the way he's dealing with his domestic audience as well as the international community. >> and there is a washington post report from white house sources indicating that some of the president's behavior might be linked to his increased anxiety about the special prosecutor's work. the washington most said in private president trump spent much of the past week brooding. yet in public, trump is a man roaring. the president more than ever is channelling his internal frustration and fear into a
ravenous maw of grievance and invective. we can expect that it will intensify some more. >> lawrence, here's the thing. all of this fury is at his enemies. who appears to be donald trump's enemies? the press and black people who do nice things, whether it happens to be a reporter on another network or an african-american from akron who opened up a school. part of what makes donald trump so dangerous as a president is that his rage is not at injustice. it is not at how the united states is viewed against the world. his anger is always focussed on things that don't reflect well on him.
that's what makes him dangerous. i have also said, look, constitutionally, we have the rules in case to keep bad presidents in check. we do not have rules in place to take narcissistic presidents in check. we do not have rules to take care of that. we have seen it in national security and domestically. if we get some fundamental change this is fall, i suspect he'll become more unhinged if he has to face a democratic house of representatives. >> to jason's point that the chain of command designed does not really have any provisions for dealing with a president who people would in that chain of command might suspect as being irrational and out of control. >> the chain of command, i have been after the media about this, the commander in chief title only deals with the u.s. armed forces.
nobody else. he's not the commander in chief of the country. and within that chain of command, i think we're very fortunate, look, the pentagon, secretary jim mattis is an intellectual. he is worshipped by the armed forces. he is a law-based person. fortunately, we got service secretaries who are absolutely the best i have seen in 25 years. so i don't think we've got a problem. as secretary mike pompeo, very smart, capable person. but what we are now seeing is a complete separation between the facts on the ground in national security and foreign policy and what the president is saying. his team makes a lot of sense dealing with alliances, dealing with the real threat in north korea and iran. but the president's utterances, for example, coming home from singapore and saying, the new clear threat is gone. where did he come up with that? it is hard to fathom what is going on.
>> and, jason johnson, has i said earlier in the program, it seems one of the areas of trump tweeting that does have a logic is the racist component of trump tweeting, which is in effect a kind of an open form of direct mail to the members of his support group who are racist. >> right. and here's the thing, lawrence. i think this is very important. and i'm sure your other guests will agree with me. racism and white nationals is a national security issue. it is a national security issue when the president of the united states demonizes certain working segments of the u.s. population as somehow being let fit, less trustworthy or less capable. this is what our enemies exploit. this is what russia exploits. this is what china exploits. you look throughout history when other countries have attempted propaganda. what they talk about is how the u.s. treats blacks and chinese people and thatnative americans.
when you have a president that attacks black people, it makes the united states a weaker country. it makes us less capable of protecting ourselves or projecting the kind of strength we need to project abroad. >> thank you both for joining us tonight. really appreciate it. >> up next, the president showed up at a rally in ohio for the republican candidate in a congressional district and now the democrat is in the lead. ♪
a hotel can make or break a trip. and at expedia, we don't think you should be rushed into booking one. that's why we created expedia's add-on advantage. now after booking your flight, you unlock discounts on select hotels right until the day you leave. ♪ add-on advantage. discounted hotel rates when you add on to your trip. only when you book with expedia. you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase sensimist relieves all your worst symptoms, including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist. these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care.
expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com
♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪ one more. there is just one more special election for a congressional seat, and this one is now down to a one-point race. that election is tomorrow in ohio where the republican should have a very strong lead and where tonight we seem to be headed for another very dramatic finish to that race with the democrat, donny o'connor, pulling one point ahead of republican troy balderson. donald trump won this congressional district by 11 points. president trump went to the district an saturday night, but that appearance might have been more helpful to the democratic candidate. the president was not invited to campaign in this race.
>> i asked him. i said -- i said, troy, did you invite trump in here, the president? he said, no, i didn't. so i think donald trump decides where he wants to go and i think they think they're firing up the base. president trump's approval rate is only 46%. a democrat has not held the seat since 1982. here's what a republican woman said about her decision to not only vote for the democrat, danny o'connor, but to actually go help his campaign. >> there is not a lot to be proud of about his behavior or his leadership. and when balderson said that he can't -- i don't know. i believe there was a debate where he said he can't think of a single thing where he would disagree with trump on. and i thought, really?
there is kind of a lot to disagree with trump on. maybe not everything. but he's done a lot of pretty questionable remarks just even since he's been in office. i don't think he's grown into the presidency. if anything he's gotten worse on what he says and does. >> in the last congressional election in this district, the republican won by 37 points in 2016. charlie cook will join us next to explain why that 37-point lead has disappeared and become a one-point lead for the democrat and what all this might mean for the big election night in november of this year. at alt trades and high-yield savings. but if that's not enough, we offer innovative investing tools to prepare you for the future. looks like you hooked it. and if that's not enough, we'll help your kid prepare for the future.
don't hook it kid. and if that's still not enough, we'll help your kid's kid prepare for the future. looks like he hooked it. we'll do anything... takes after his grandad. seriously anything, to help you invest for the future. ally. do it right. your hair is so soft!ng, to help you invest for the future. did you use head and shoulders two in one? i did mom. wanna try it? yes. it intensely moisturizes your hair and scalp and keeps you flake free. manolo? look at my soft hair. i should be in the shot now too. try head and shoulders two in one. omar, check this out. uh, yeah, i was calling to see if you do laser hair removal. for men. notice that my hips are off the ground. [ engine revving ]
and then, i'm gonna pike my hips back into downward dog. [ rhythmic tapping ] hey, the rain stopped. -a bad day on the road still beats a good one off it. -tell me about that dental procedure again! -i can still taste it in my mouth! -progressive helps keep you out there. sharper vision, without limits. days that go from sun up to sun down. a whole world in all its beauty. three innovative technologies for our ultimate in vision, clarity, and protection. together in a single lens. essilor ultimate lens package. purchase the essilor ultimate lens package and get a second pair of qualifying lenses free. essilor. better sight. better life.
provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it's the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome. today, nbc spoke to democrat danny o'connor, who now has a one-point lead in tomorrow's special congressional election in ohio. >> the democrats can watch what you do here and do it in other places in november? >> i hope they do because i hope people go out and talk about bread and butter issues that matter to working class families. right now it is all they fight it out in the ring and go back to their partisan corners. that's a problem. we need people who will be focussed on delivering actual solutions for working families. >> joining us now charlie cook.
he is the editor and publisher of the cook editorial report. and viewers of this program know he is the person i defer to on all matters involving congressional elections. charlie, how did this happen? how did the democrat not democra close this thing, but now sit with a one-point lead on election eve? >> pat teaberry had, as you noted earlier, no problems. this is not a republican district, but it's not a donald trump district. it's not suburbs, well educated, and so it's not a trump specific kind of district. and i think the president's causing republicans just a lot of problems in this district. >> what lessons are there out of this campaign that democrats and republicans need to think about in november?
>> well, you know, this special elections, we watch them in the odd-numbers years and the first part of election years to give us a sign of what direction is the wind blowing and roughly the velocity. but the thing is, we knew a year ago that the republican majority in the house was going to be in danger and we have known that for some time. that's why this is maybe not as instruct i have as the pennsylvania '18 or the georgia special election last year. we know that the republican majority in the house is just teetering right on the edge, so this would be sort of less illustrative of what's going on than, say, pennsylvania was earlier this year. but it's -- look, they're in real trouble. >> for the democrat to win, he has to change the minds of voters who voted for donald trump in the presidential campaign.
can't win without getting trump voters. is there something in the way this candidate that has spoken to them that can be helpful to democrats strategically? >> i don't know that it's the messaging as much. neither of these are particularly memorable candidates. i don't think it's a message as much as voters saying, maybe it's time for a little check and balance, putting a check on president trump. i think it's more that kind of thing that a lot of voters are just -- have real misgivings about what's going on and this is a way to send a signal that they're not all in for president trump or where the republican congress is going right now. but pat teaberry was a very, very moderate republican, and that kind of republican can do well, but they've got their hands full tomorrow.
>> there is that fear among democrats that all they need to do is run against donald trump. >> you know, i think -- i'm not sure that would be my messaging but that would be in effect what's going on, that for the voters that are really upset with president trump, they just need to have an opportunity to vote against him. but a democratic candidate would be well-advised not to focus too much on president trump but to come up with a positive message, an economic message, and be the vehicle for that discontent toward president trump. >> charlie cook, thanks for joining us tonight. really appreciate it. ton's last word is next. viewer warning, there will be boston accents. community organizations like united way, non-profits like the american red cross, and our nation's veterans.
we knew helping our communities was important then. and we know it's even more important today. so we're stepping up to volunteer more and donate over a million dollars every day. so our communities can be even stronger. it's a new day at wells fargo. but it's a lot like our first day. for my constipation, my doctor recommended i switch to miralax. stimulant laxatives forcefully stimulate the nerves in your colon. miralax is different. it works with the water in your body. unblocking your system naturally. miralax. now available in convenient single-serve mix-in pax. it's a high-tech revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. to help you lose your dad bod, train for that marathon, and wake up with the patience of a saint.
the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999. smarter sleep will change your life.
crisp leaves of lettuce. freshly made dressing. clean food that looks this good. delivered to your desk. now delivering to home or office. panera. food as it should be. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands?
parishioner for 45 years. marty walsh administered the oath of office. >> raise your right hand and repeat after me. i william grass. >> i william grass. >> do solemnly swear. >> do solemnly swear. >> that i will faithfully and impartially. >> that i will faithfully and impartially. >> do all duties incumbent on me. >> according to the "b" of my abilities in understanding agree bli to the constitution of the united states of america. >> the constitution and laws of this commonwealth. >> the constitution and laws of this commonwealth. >> the ordnances of the city of boston. >> the ordnances of the city of boston. >> and the rules and regulations. >> and the rules and regulations.
>> of the boston police department. >> of the boston police department. >> so help me god. >> so help me god. >> congratulations, commissioner. [ cheers and applause ] >> boston police commissioner william grass gets tonight's last word. philip rutger and ashley parker are the reporters whose story apparently drove president trump into a tweet storm this weekend. they will join brian in lawyer lawyer where brian williams that starts now. >> tonight, the unraveling cover story for that trump tower
Analysis and discussion of the day's top stories and compelling issues from Lawrence O'Donnell.
the meeting was, so get information on hillary clinton. the original trump lie about this meeting was that the meeting was about russian adoptions. but the president's lawyers were forced to admit in a letter to the special prosecutor that president trump dictated a false statement to "the new york times" about that meeting knowing it was false, a statement saying the meeting was about russian adoptions. the legal implications of the president's tweet are gravely threatening to the president's son. this was a meeting to get information on an opponent, totally legal and done all the time in politics. but it is not done all the time in politics, and it's totally, totally illegal. if it is a meeting with foreign citizens trying to help the trump campaign. federal law makes it a crime for a foreign national to, quote, directly or indirectly help an american campaign with financial contributions or, quote, an
other thing of value. federal election law recognizes opposition research as, quote, a thing of value. federal election law makes it a crime to, quote, solicit, accept or receive a thing of value to a campaign for foreign national. the e-mail traffic setting up the meeting in trump tower during the campaign with russian nationals shows donald trump jr. eagerly soliciting what they call dirt on hillary clinton after they had clinton dirt to contribute to the trump campaign. the president's tweet yesterday said that the meeting, quote, went nowhere. the trump line of defense about the meeting was that the russians didn't hand over any dirt on hillary clinton. as we sit here tonight, we don't know if that's true. we don't know what happened in the meeting. we don't really know what happened after the meeting. we don't know whether the russians directly handed over dirt to the trump campaign about
hillary clinton directly to donald trump jr. or to anyone else in the campaign. but there are three ways to violate federal election law on contributions from foreign nationals. the trump line of defense says the trump campaign did not actually receive any dirt on hillary clinton from the russians, and, so, there was no crime. they are now insisting that the meeting was legal because they did not receive any dirt on hillary clinton. and so if that is true. donald trump jr. is not guilty of having received a thing of value from the trump campaign from russians. but he did slis solicit it. it is illegal to solicit, accept or receive a thing of value from a russian national. he said i love it. other e-mails show donald trump eagerly setting up the meeting in which he hoped to accept and
receive help from the russians. all donald trump's eager maneuvers could fit the legal definition of solicit. president trump reportedly knows that. and according to one report has expressed worries about donald trump's legal jeopardy, which brings us back to why. why would the president write a tweet yesterday morning that might put his son in even more legal jeopardy? leading off our discussion now, jill wine-banks and mimi roca. she's an msnbc contributor. jill, it was a quick 44 years ago that richard nixon yesterday was handing over those tapes and three days later was gone. on the anniversary of that moment, of the handing over of the tapes, we get this
extraordinarily strange tweet from the president. since i read that tweet, all i have been wondering about is why. can you make any sense of the why that tweet would go out? >> i have long since given up trying to figure out why the president does anything because almost none of it makes any sense. that was very harmful, not just to his son who he was throwing under the bus by admitting the real purpose of the meeting, but to him as well because he drafted a fake report about why the meeting happened. so now he's admitting to obstruction of justice, not just to working with the russians. and you clearly defined what the law is. you cannot accept anything. and if you tried to get it but failed, you have attempted to violate the law. and that's just as much a crime as actually taking it. if i go into a bank and say, give me your money and you refused, i still tried to rob
your bank, and i can be tried for a crime. so the fact that he didn't succeed or at least says he didn't and as you pointed out, we don't know whether he actually got dirt or not. we certainly know that there was an announcement that there would be dirt and then there was a leak of the e-mails. so did they know that that's what was going to happen? that would be conspireing with the russian government to hurt the election. and that's a crime. >> mimi roca, we don't know if the president had help with this tweet. we don't know if someone else gave him that big, fancy word, fabrication. but if he did have help with this tweet or a lawyer looking over his shoulder on this tweet, can you find any conceivable legal theory that would suggest this tweet could be somehow helpful? >> i don't think he had a good lawyer helping him, if he had a
lawyer helping him. >> okay. >> but, so no. i don't see a great legal theory. one, he sees the writing on the wall about his son and that, you know, all arrows point to his son is going to likely be charged with something in relation to this meeting and he's trying to engender some part of sympathy. my poor son. woe is him. there are some people out there, some trump supporters who may go along with that and feel that. this is part of the witch hunt without using the word witch hunt. there is a second part of the tweet that what he's done in the tweet is after 100 tweets of no collusion, no collusion. he now has basically said without using the words in this tweet, yes, collusion. but it was my son and i feel bad for him and i didn't know about
it. so he's trying to distance himself. it's just -- it is a total what we call false exculpatory, what he says about his knowledge. it looks false because it is. and so i think, again, if he had a lawyer advising him, it was not a good lawyer. >> and, jill, the idea that this is helpful to the president himself alone saying this is a way of saying that the president isn't guilty of anything, i still can't think of any reason to put that in a tweet, even if that's what the president believed, that she whe wasn't g of anything. >> he's not getting very good legal advice. and something she said also reminded me of why, for example, rosemary woods was never indicted for perjury. she testified she erased 18.5 minutes and described how she did it and the testimony showed that that did not happen. but we didn't indict her because
it would have been a distraction. i don't think the same is true with donald trump jr. donald trump jr. played a pivotal role in the campaign and he is not just some assistant to the president who shouldn't be indicted. if he did as his e-mail said, please give me the dirt. i love it. especially release it later in the summer when it will do maximum damage, that's an indictment crime and he should be tried for it. >> if donald trump jr. solicited this information from russian nationals without knowing that that was a crime, how does that factor into charging this crime or defending against this charge? >> he doesn't have to know that it is a crime. what he has to have is a general intent here that he knew, you know, what he was doing. so here he knew he was accepting information. whether it be, you know, actual
documents. when we talk about dirt, as you mentioned, it could just be that they told him they were going to do something or that they had access to information, and that's why, you know, trump made that announcement. so he does not have to know. ignorance of the law is no defense and people are familiar with that. there are some crimes when you have to have a more specific intent. but here it would have to be general knowledge about the conduct that he was doing, not the specific law that he was violating. and in particular, if we're talking about conspiracy law, you know, he could be liable for joining a conspiracy that the russians already had underway when they hacked into the democratic e-mails and had them in their possession. you can join a conspiracy at any time. you don't have to be there from the beginning, as long as you are aware of the general object of the conspiracy and you join it and do something in
furtherance, which again all arrows point to trump jr. did that. >> thank you both for starting us off tonight. really appreciate it. when we come back, the prosecution's star witness took the stand today in the trial of former trump campaign manager paul manafort and immediately implicated paul manafort in several crimes. and new reports from white house sources indicate the president is more worried than ever about the special prosecutors investigation, especially the investigation of donald trump jr. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands?
crisp leaves of lettuce. freshly made dressing. clean food that looks this good. delivered to your desk. now delivering to home or office. panera. food as it should be.
today rick gates, the star prosecution for the case of the united states of america versus paul manafort testified that he committed crimes with the former trump campaign chairman, paul manafort. the prosecution asked did you commit any times with mr. manafort. gates again responded yes. gates is manafort's long-time business association, who is cooperating with mueller in exchange for a reduced sentence. gates spent his first hour on the stand admitting to the jury most of the bad things and crimes that he has done. gates admitted to helping paul manafort commit bank and tax fraud, holding money in hidden bank accounts, money that was
used to fund paul manafort's lavish lifestyle. he testified he knew what they were doing was illegal but said he lied because paul manafort directed him to lie. but he also admitted to crimes of his own, such as embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars from paul manafort and lying to the fbi. this is a crucial element in the manafort defense team's approach, which is to try to blame rick gates for these financial crimes, insisting that paul manafort was taken advantage of by rick gates. paul manafort sat in the courtroom staring down his former aid just at the beginning of this show down and the jury will, in the end, have to pick who to believe, rick gates or paul manafort. joining us now the intelligence national supporter for nbc news.
mimi is still with us. we don't know if paul manafort is going to take the witness stand in his own defense. although, it is hard to imagine a real defense in this case that doesn't include paul manafort. so what do you think at this stage the jury is seeing in the rick gates testimony? >> well, they're seeing kind of an unattractive character on the one hand, lawrence, an admitted criminal. a guy that got up there and talked about a crime spree that he and paul manafort were involved in by his story. but also admitted, as you said, to all these other crimes, some of this the prosecution said they didn't even know about until mr. gates brought it to his attention as part of his plea agreement where they say you need to confess all your bad acts because it will come out at trial anyway. she thought the jury's body language, they were leaning back in their seats after having been
leaning forward as if to express skepticism about gates. that doesn't mean they won't eventually believe what he's saying. i thought he was an effective and compelling witness even as he was admitting to all these crimes because he is a man with nothing left to lose. his whole goal right now is to minimize his prison term. if he lies on the stand, his agreement is null and void. so, you know, he's only started part way down the road of admitting to all these various charges in the specifics that he acknowledges up front he was guilty of. he was indicted alongside mr. manafort of the same bank and tax fraud charges. right up front he said, yes, i was guilty of those charges. i only pled guilty to this one charge, but i was guilty of all this other stuff. here's what else i was guilty
of. >> mimi, as a prosecutor, you have dealt with this many times. you put on the stand your star witness is a person that committed crimes with the defendant. so you have the admitted criminal on the witness stand in exchange for a reduced sentence saying, that guy over there, that defendant, is a criminal. >> absolutely. and, you know, i put on the stand witnesses who have been committed just horrible crimes, murders, you know, drug trafficking, liars, fraudsters. as ken noted, the jury does -- they get it. they don't like those cooperators and they probably don't like rick gates and they may be leaning back in their seat, but that doesn't mean they won't believe them. that's the key. you don't have to like him. you have to believe him. you don't have to, but you should. and here's why. and then they give the jury
reasons to believe the cooperator. the government prosecution is never going to ask a jury to solely rely on a cooperating witness like rick gates. they will back their case up with corroboration, evidence. they will ask, does this make sense and fit in with the other evidence. they will point to the cooperation agreement. it is very important. it is designed, the government corop ration agreement that all u.s. attorneys offices use and the one that was used here to incent vise truth telling. the way a cooperator can mess himself up is to plead guilty under a cooperation agreement and lie on the stand. they will end up getting a higher sentence than if they pled guilty on other crimes. that's how they get a reduction in the sentence. so there is all these different tools that prosecutors will
point to to a jury to explain why they can believe the cooperator. they don't have to like him and they probably won't, but here is why you should believe him. they will also remind the jury that we, the government, we didn't pick this guy. paul manafort did. and of course he committed crimes. that's what paul manafort was doing. and gates took responsibility for it, and that's why he's here today. >> and, ken, to mimi's point that prosecution is never relying on any one witness, the gates testimony follows one of the shortest witnesses in the case so far, federal official simply pointing out the fact that they never reported any of the, what, 15, 14 or so foreign bank accounts that they were legally required to report, gates and manafort. that's just fact at this point. >> yes, lawrence. absolutely right. that's why i have been saying tonight that even if gates totally collapsed under cross-examination and the jury
discounts everything he says, there is still a pretty strong case against paul manafort on exactly the point that you just made. there was a treasury agent who testified about the requirements to report foreign bank accounts. paul manafort didn't report any of him. and his tax preparer said the reason is because she never disclosed them to her. she was totally unaware of them and that is a felony if it is proven that it was willful. the only manafort defense there is he didn't know it was a crime. there is a lot of evidence to contradict that, lawrence. >> thank you very much for joining us tonight. really appreciate it. >> you bet. >> when we come back, a former head of the cia said that the president has deep, twisted and irrational impulses and a former four-star general is now saying the president has outright separation from the truth. donald trump is starting to sound even more dangerous to those former government officials. and later, why are republicans in danger of losing
what is supposed to be a very safe republican seat? there is a one-point lead in the latest poll by the democrats in that very dramatic race where the voters will go to the polls tomorrow in ohio. nk that all money managers are pretty much the same. but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investments never does. and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma
♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun♪ ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma ♪that i'm a traveller transitions™ light under control™ i got it. i gotcha baby. (vo) it's being there when you're needed most. he's the one. (vo love is knowing... it was meant to be. and love always keeps you safe. (vo) love is why we built a car you can trust for a long time. the all-new subaru impreza sedan and five-door.
a car you can love no matter what road you're on. the subaru impreza. more than a car, it's a subaru. right now, get 0% apr financing on the 2018 subaru impreza.
psychiatrists have publically said they believe is sick and dangerous tweeted this. the fake news hates me saying that they are the enemy of the people, only because they know it's true. i am providing a great service by explaining this to the american people. they purposely cause great division and distrust. they can also cause war! they are very dangerous and sick! the former acting director of the cia responded to that tweet saying, we pay way too much attention to these whacky trump tweets that shouldn't drive news cycles, but the more i stare at this one, the more it seems like a deep, twisted and irrational impulse that, alarmingly, he can't control. it's beyond "un-presidential." here is a sampling of the president's recent musing that
could be labeled delusional and sick. >> remember the beautiful first lady coming down the escalator in the white dress that big day when everybody said, oh, he's just doing this for fun. he doesn't real ly mean it. man, if i don't mean it, i hope you tell me soon because it's a lot of work. but coming down the escalator and you remember what i said? i mentioned words i won't even mention them tonight because there is a lot of young people here. but i mention words and everybody thought it was wonderful. but then about two days later, they said, did he say this? did he say that? guess what? what i said is peanuts compared to what turns out to be the truth. it's peanuts. >> so there is the president of the united states telling his audience last week that what he said in the speech announcing his candidacy was unfit for the
ears of young people and children. tonight retired four-star army general said, president trump behavior becoming more alarming and ill logical in 55 years of service in the armed service, civil government and business, i have never encountered this level of anger, insulting behavior and outright separation from the truth. joining us now sergeant mccaffrey. i want more of your reaction from what you are seeing from the president. i know you have been alarmed for a long time from what you hear from donald trump. but is this a new level of alarmed for you? >> i'm not qualified to talk about the president's mental state. i'm just talking about his behavior. i have been decades levels serving at the highest levels of armed forces, the business community. i personally have never
encountered this kind of behavior, the insulting nature dealing with his clients or us. i mean, the business community does that. the armed forces, we'd sack a commander who dealt that way with his soldiers. so i think it's of great concern. we've got a couple of more years, at least, with president trump as the chief executive. and it's looking very worrisome the way he's dealing with his domestic audience as well as the international community. >> and there is a washington post report from white house sources indicating that some of the president's behavior might be linked to his increased anxiety about the special prosecutor's work. the washington most said in private president trump spent much of the past week brooding. yet in public, trump is a man roaring. the president more than ever is channelling his internal frustration and fear into a
ravenous maw of grievance and n inv invective. we kcan expect that it will intensify some more. >> lawrence, here's the thing. all of this fury is at his enemies. who appears to be donald trump's enemies? the press and black people who do nice things, whether it happens to be a reporter on another network or an african-american from akron who opened up a school. part of what makes donald trump so dangerous as a president is that his rage is not at injustice. it is not at how the united states is viewed against the world. his anger is always focussed on things that don't reflect well on him. that's what makes him dangerous.
i have also said, look, constitutionally, we have the rules in case to keep bad presidents in check. we do not have rules in place to take narcissistic presidents in check. we do not have rules to take care of that. we have seen it in national security and domestically. if we get some fundamental change this is fall, i suspect he'll become more unhinged if he has to face a democratic house of representatives. >> to jason's point that the chain of command designed does not really have any provisions for dealing with a president who people would in that chain of command might suspect as being irrational and out of control. >> the chain of command, i have been after the media about this, the commander in chief title only deals with the u.s. armed forces. nobody else.
he's not the commander in chief of the country. and within that chain of command, i think we're very fortunate, look, the pentagon, secretary jim mattis is an intellectual. he is worshipped by the armed forces. he is a law-based person. fortunately, we got service secretaries who are absolutely the best i have seen in 25 years. so i don't think we've got a problem. as secretary mike pompeo, very smart, capable person. but what we are now seeing is a complete separation between the facts on the ground in national security and foreign policy and what the president is saying. his team makes a lot of sense dealing with alliances, dealing with the real threat in north korea and iran. but the president's utterances, for example, coming home from singapore and saying, the new clear threat is gone. where did he come up with that? it is hard to fathom what is going on. >> and, jason johnson, has i said earlier in the program, it
seems one of the areas of trump tweeting that does have a logic is the racist component of trump tweeting, which is in effect a kind of an open form of direct mail to the members of his support group who are racist. >> right. and here's the thing, lawrence. i think this is very important. and i'm sure your other guests will agree with me. racism and white nationals is a national security issue. it is a national security issue when the president of the united states demonizes certain working segments of the u.s. population as somehow being let fit, less trustworthy or less capable. this is what our enemies exploit. this is what russia exploits. this is what china exploits. you look throughout history when other countries have attempted propagan propaganda. what they talk about is how the u.s. treats blacks and chinese
people and thatti tinative amer. when you have a president that attacks black people, it makes the united states a weaker country. it makes us less capable of protecting ourselves or projecting the kind of strength we need to project abroad. >> thank you both for joining us tonight. really appreciate it. >> up next, the president showed up at a rally in ohio for the republican candidate in a congressional district and now the democrat is in the lead.
or suicidal thoughts or actions with chantix. serious side effects may include seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking or allergic and skin reactions which can be life-threatening. stop chantix and get help right away if you have any of these. tell your healthcare provider if you've had depression or other mental health problems. decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. use caution when driving or operating machinery. the most common side effect is nausea. i can't tell you how good it feels to have smoking behind me. talk to your doctor about chantix. it's a high-tech revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. to help you lose your dad bod, train for that marathon, and wake up with the patience of a saint. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999. smarter sleep will change your life.
guys,but you've got sto be strong.st remember janet? she got cash back shopping with ebates and hasn't been skeptical since. where'd the money come from? stores pay ebates. psh!!! psh!!! then ebates pays you. psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! psh!!! and they'll send you a check. psh!!!! oohh!! sign up for free. shop your favorite stores. get cash back. ebates. something to believe in. join today for a $10 bonus. at ally, we're doing digital financial services right. but if that's not enough, we have more than 8000 allys looking out for one thing: you. call in the next ten minutes... and if that's not enough, we'll look after your every dollar. put down the phone. and if that's not enough, we'll look after your every cent. grab your wallet. (beeping sound) (computer voice) access denied. and if that's still not enough to help you save... oh the new one! we'll bring out the dogs. mush! (dogs barking) the old one's just fine! we'll do anything, seriously anything, to help our customers. thanks. ally. do it right.
one more. there is just one more special election for a congressional seat, and this one is now down to a one-point race. that election is tomorrow in ohio where the republican should have a very strong lead and where tonight we seem to be headed for another very dramatic finish to that race with the democrat, donny o'connor, pulling one point ahead of republican troy balderson. donald trump won this congressional district by 11 points. president trump went to the district an soaturday night, bu that appearance might have been more helpful to the democratic candidate. the president was not invited to campaign in this race. >> i asked him. i said -- i said, troy, did you
invite trump in here, the president? he said, no, i didn't. so i think donald trump decides where he wants to go and i think they think they're firing up the base. president trump's approval rate is only 46%. a democrat has not held the seat since 1982. here's what a republican woman said about her decision to not only vote for the democrat, danny o'connor, but to actually go help his campaign. >> there is not a lot to be proud of about his behavior or his leadership. and when balderson said that he can't -- i don't know. i believe there was a debate where he said he can't think of a single thing where he would disagree with trump onme. and i thought, really? there is kind of a lot to
disagree with trump on. maybe not everything. but he's done a lot of pretty questionable remarks just even since he's been in office. i don't think he's grown into the presidency. if anything he's gotten worse on what he says and does. >> in the last congressional election in this district, the republican won by 37 points in 2016. charlie cook will join us next to explain why that 37-point lead has disappeared and become a one-point lead for the democrat and what all this might mean for the big election night in november of this year. so wet anything. even "vengeful vermin."
not so cute when they're angry. and we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪
of the cook editorial report. and viewers of this program know he is the person i defer to on all matters involving congressional elections. charlie, how did this happen? how did the democrat not democr close this thing, but now sit with a one-point lead on election eve? >> pat teaberry had, as you noted earlier, no problems. this is not a republican district, but it's not a donald trump district. it's not suburbs, well educated, and so it's not a trump specific kind of district. and i think the president's causing republicans just a lot of problems in this district. >> what lessons are there out of this campaign that democrats and republicans need to think about in november? >> well, you know, this special
elections, we watch them in the odd-numbers years and the first part of election years to give us a sign of what direction is the wind blowing and roughly the velocity. but the thing is, we knew a year ago that the republican majority in the house was going to be in danger and we have known that for some time. that's why this is maybe not as instruct i have as the pennsylvania '18 or the georgia special election last year. we know that the republican majority in the house is just teetering right on the edge, so this would be sort of less illustrative of what's going on than, say, pennsylvania was earlier this year. but it's -- look, they're in real trouble. >> for the democrat to win, he has to change the minds of voters who voted for donald trump in the presidential
campaign. can't win without getting trump voters. is there something in the way this candidate that has spoken to them that can be helpful to democrats strategically? >> i don't know that it's the messaging as much. neither of these are particularly memorable candidates. i don't think it's a message as much as voters saying, maybe it's time for a little check and balance, putting a check on president trump. i think it's more that kind of thing that a lot of voters are just -- have real misgivings about what's going on and this is a way to send a signal that they're not all in for president trump or where the republican congress is going right now. but pat teaberry was a very, very moderate republican, and that kind of republican can do well, but they've got their hands full tomorrow.
>> there is that fear among democrats that all they need to do is run against donald trump. >> >> you know, i think -- i'm not sure that would be my messaging but that would be in effect what's going on, that for the voters that are really upset with president trump, they just need to have an opportunity to vote against him. but a democratic candidate would be well-advised not to focus too much on president trump but to come up with a positive message, an economic message, and be the vehicle for that discontent toward president trump. >> charlie cook, thanks for joining us tonight. really appreciate it. ton's last word is next. viewer warning, there will be boston accents. in the u.s. it's america's most popular street name. but allstate agents know that's where the similarity stops. if you're on park street in reno, nevada, the high winds of the washoe zephyr could damage your siding.
and that's very different than living on park ave in sheboygan, wisconsin, where ice dams could cause water damage. but no matter what park you live on, one of 10,000 local allstate agents knows yours. now that you know the truth, are you in good hands? crisp leaves of lettuce. freshly made dressing. clean food that looks this good. delivered to your desk. now delivering to home or office. panera. food as it should be.
his mother has been a parishioner for 45 years. marty walsh administered the oath of office. >> raise your right hand and repeat after me. i william grass. >> i william grass. >> do solemnly swear. >> do solemnly swear. >> that i will faithfully and impartially. >> that i will faithfully and impartially. >> do all duties incumbent on me. >> according to the "b" of my abilities in understanding agree bli to the constitution of the united states of america. >> the constitution and laws of this commonwealth. >> the constitution and laws of this commonwealth. >> the ordnances of the city of boston. >> the ordnances of the city of boston. >> and the rules and regulations. >> and the rules and
regulations. >> of the boston police department. >> of the boston police department. >> so help me god. >> so help me god. >> congratulations, commissioner. [ cheers and applause ] >> boston police commissioner william grass gets tonight's last word. philip rutger and ashley parker are the reporters whose story apparently drove president trump into a tweet storm this weekend. they will join brian in lawyer lawyer where brian williams that starts now. >> tonight, the unraveling cover story for that trump tower
Brian Williams examines the day's top political stories and current political-campaign news.
our colleague kristen welker there is still a steep hurdle to an interview with robert mueller. it would, quote, raise significant article ii questions going to the heart of presidential authority. it's not just about this president but about the presidency. meanwhile, rudy giuliani spokes with axios. they report, quote, there are two topics the president's lawyers want to rule out in order to agree to a trump sit-down with mueller. one, why trump fired fbi director james comey. two, what trump said to comey about the investigation of former national security adviser michael flynn. tonight, bloomberg has also spoken to giuliani and also reports that those two topics are off limits. according to bloomberg, giuliani said, quote, if asked the president would tell the special counsel that he didn't urge comey to stop investigating flynn and didn't fire comey to cut off his investigation into russian interference in the 2016 campaign but the president's personal lawyer said trump's
room back in april. for months, as you may know, an independent lawyer, a so-called special master who happens to be a former federal judge, reviewed all the seized boxes of documents and files to decide what should be offlimits in the investigation. her review is now complete, which means it's now up to prosecutors to decide whether they will bring charges. it's a lot to get to. so we will with our lead-off panel on a thursday night. mimi roca is back with us, former assistant civil attorney for the southern district of new york. lisa larabek, national politics reporter for the associated press. michael crowley returns as well, national security editor and senior foreign affairs correspondent for politico. lisa, i don't want to put you in a bad spot, because you don't do commentary, you do straight on news. but is there any reason to believe this is anything but political side showing? we emphasize to our audience,
we're hearing 50% of the argument on a sit-down with mueller. mueller's side doesn't talk and mueller's side doesn't leak. >> right. lawyers are generally not out debate their client's legal strategy in public which leads one to believe this is not so much a legal strategy as a pr strategy. our reporting has told us that the president's lawyers are not eager for him to testify. but there's also concern from some in the white house that if he appears unwilling to speak to mueller, that could look like he has something to hide. that might not -- that could be politically lethal, in a way. so part of the strategy here is to keep this back and forth going, to make it look like there is a negotiation. whether there is one or not. and most importantly, that the president is willing to sit down for this interview, particularly ahead of the midterms. >> mimi, one of the guests last night hadn't thought of the president in these terms. the president got a paycheck from this company and this building for 14 years.
investigation. >> can you pause some aspects of it? >> you just don't want to do something overt. he can keep doing lots of stuff, it's not like they're going to close up shop come september 1st. giuliani is creating this deadline, september 1st, september 1st. if people buy into that, because who knows about this doj guidance, most people don't, and how it works, it's very fact-based and nuanced, then come september 1st, if mueller doesn't wrap it up, giuliani can say he's blown the deadline. he makes mueller look bad by creating this false reality. >> michael crowley, any reason to believe the giuliani strategy is anything other than these three words, delay, distract, and discredit? >> i don't think so, brian. think about rudy giuliani's recent history. where is the track record of this guy being a master strategist? he was mayor of new york city,
lot of this, he may find it comical that giuliani is setting these deadlines and issuing what are in effect demands and orders. i just think mueller is doing what he's doing on his own time frame, has a huge amount of information at his disposal, is really the guy in charge here. and there's something -- you know i could be completely wrong in the way this turns out, but from where i sit right now, there's something almost a little satirical, rudy raging at the dying of the light here, and i just don't think there's much to it. >> lisa, no judgment here because a number of us are, but the president is cable addicted. having established that, what are the kind of unique pressures? here he is on vacation, playing golf, as far as we can tell, every day, although our lenses are kept far, far away from his golf course. what are the pressures he is seeing and feeling? >> he's certainly seeing a lot of coverage of the manafort trial, which has not been particularly flattering either
for manafort or rick gates or the campaign. he's seeing what's going on with his former personal lawyer michael cohen and how the pressure is racheting up over there. and he's feeling the pressure of the midterms. while he claimed a number of victories in the midterms this week, that special election in ohio was awfully, awfully close. we still don't have a conclusive winner. that's a district that trump won by 11, it should not have been that close. he's feeling a number of legal and political pressures. but i think what his team is seeing that's making them feel like their strategy may be working, is the polling numbers. they're seeing that the longer they -- as you put it, the longer they delay, the more disapproval of mueller and the investigation seems to rise. but as you pointed out at the beginning of the show, we're only hearing 50% of the story. so while those numbers have been moving a certain way, the big question is what happens once the public starts hearing the other half of the story, do we
indictment, either one, really, depending on what his actions were exactly. probably the hacking one, or a separate indictment with other u.s. citizens, possibly. it all seems possible to me right now. and it's not that the longer mueller goes on, you know, he's scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to find something. i think he's going on because he keeps uncovering more and more evidence. >> i've wanted for months to see whatever whiteboard they have in his office. >> yes. >> hey, michael, part of your life's work has been studying and writing about foreign affairs. and so here we have russia. remembering this is all about russia's interference in our election. sanctions just put in place against russia. they called it unfriendly. just a quick reminder, with true north as our guide, how weird is the u.s./russia relationship as of right now? >> it's bizarre. i can't think, brian, of another example where you had so much
distance between the commander in chief and his seniormost advisers on the subject matter. so in this case, the distance between trump and his top national security officials on how the united states should be approaching russia. trump wants to befriend russia. trump wants to reset relations, in effect. he seems to basically trust vladimir putin. and then there is this whole apparatus around him that is ensuring that we don't do any of those things, that we harden our resolve against russia, that we continue to impose sanctions. secretary of state mike pompeo, who some people have depicted as a bit of a yes man, who basically wants to please trump, he came out and issued a statement saying the u.s. would never recognize russian annexation of crimea until it is reserv reversed, and that is not the position that trump has held, he's left the door open. pompeo has been tough on this
subject. and republicans in congress who have deferred to trump on all kinds of other issues are mad at hell, for the most part, with notable exceptions, some of the senators who traveled to moscow. it's bizarre, brian, i've never seen a divide on this level in our government. >> just thought i would ask. our thanks to all three of you, really appreciate it. coming up for us, as we approach our first break, it's something you don't hear often in a federal courtroom. what the judge had to say after a feisty exchange with prosecutors. there have been a few. and later, president trump has said it a lot, he only hires the best people. however, the list of trump associates with legal problems just keeps getting longer. i'll get it out. "the 11th hour" just getting under way on a thursday night. let's get started. show of hands. who wants customizable options chains? ones that make it fast and easy to analyze and take action?
how about some of the lowest options fees? are you raising your hand? good then it's time for power e*trade the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. alright one quick game of rock, paper, scissors. 1, 2, 3, go. e*trade. the original place to invest online. whoooo. tripadvisor makes finding your perfect hotel... relaxing. just enter your destination and dates. tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites to find the hotel you want for the lowest price. dates. deals. done! tripadvisor.
♪ it is such a good time to dance ♪ ♪ it is such a good time to [ laughing ] ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo [ goose honking ] ♪ [ laughing ] a bad day on the road still beats a good one off it. ♪ progressive helps keep you out there. ♪ the first survivor of alzis out there.ase and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen. but we won't get there without you. join the fight with the alzheimer's association.
irs witness should have been allowed to testify after having been allowed to be in court, judge t.s. elliott told the jury, quote, it appears i may well have been wrong. he went on to say, this robe doesn't make me anything other than human. i sometimes make mistakes. paul manafort, a reminder, facing bank tax fraud charges, charges he denies. this is his first trial as a result of the investigation by mueller's office. with us tonight to talk about it, we're so pleased to have chuck rosenberg back, former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of attorney, who has spent his fair share of time in that very courtroom where the trial is being held. he also happens to be a former senior official with the fbi. and eric tuck certificate back with us, justice department reporter for the associated press. he was in court for today's proceedings. chuck, i've thought of you so ma many times because, in plain english, you were u.s. attorney
where this trial is taking part. you've had your fair share of time to watch this judge. what do you make of all of it? i've heard straight down the middle reporters say kind of straight up that he has been prejudicial, he has clearly and provably been tougher on the prosecution. >> you know, brian, i've seen him be tough on the prosecution. i've seen him be tough on defense counsel. but there i think is a better way to do it, right? i mean, if a judge has something she needs to say to counsel, defense or prosecution, she can call them to the bench. she can excuse the jury. she can even yell at us, that happens too. but it should be done in private, because judges have so much authority in their courtroom. and the jury listens carefully to what they say. the concern i have is if he's angry at one side or the other, even if he's right, the fact that he yells at them, berates them, castigates them in front of the jury can tip the scales and the judge has to be so careful never to do that. >> i was going to say, chuck,
i've covered my share of proceedings in federal and state courts. and so often have seen a judge say, counsel approach the bench, and kind of covers the microphone and has a little bit of a sidebar discussion. >> and that's happened to me too. i told a story earlier today where i accidentally, and it wasn't a crime against humanity, came back from lunch with a piece of chewing gum in my mouth and a federal judge in the eastern district of virginia handed me a tissue, after asking me to come to the bench, and we discreetly took care of the problem. he didn't do it in front of the jury. these judges have to be so careful. the government has no appeal. for the defendant, it's a matter of liberty or even life. the notion that you would put a finger on the scale, even accidentally --
>> i'm so glad we finally have something on you. it's really unfair that the judge goes by t.s., but it's ellis, not elliott. that one is on me, i apologize. what do you make of the room, of the dynamic, and the reporters who have been saying today that he's unmistakably tough on the prosecution, do they have it about right? >> no question, brian, it was an extraordinary moment for everyone coming into the courtroom this morning for the judge to basically tell the jury to put out of their minds something that he in fact had said yesterday and to offer a semi apology. the one thing that i think we should definitely not lose sight of, though, is what precipitated this, which is actually a government request last night and early this morning where they said to the judge, respectfully, your honor, if you review the transcript, you actually permitted this witness to be in the courtroom, you are correcti incorrect and as a matter of fact we would actually like for you to alert the jury that
you're mistaken. and that's really unusual. and one could read this one document, this one filing from the government, as actually sort of a broader request of the judge to say, there are many things that the judge has said that hopefully in the government's mind, the government would like to see undone or unwound. >> and chuck, something you just said has me going back to this, especially if you're in your line of work, if you've ever been on jury duty, if you've ever watched the trial, the judge is really your conduit,'s almost your father figure during the proceedings. he turns and addresses members of the jury. he's your go-between. you often see a trial in his or her lens. and so it is critical, i would love to be able to watch the jurors as they visually relate to this judge. >> that's right. and look, for most people
serving on a jury, it's probably the only time, brian, they've ever had that experience. they don't know what courtrooms are like, they don't know what prosecutors or defense attorneys are like. they certainly don't know what judge ellis is like. so what he says goes. i mean, not just as a matter of law but as a matter of fact. and if he's mad at the prosecutor, for instance, then maybe they are too. and so that's why a judge has to be so very careful. remember, both sides are entitled to a fair trial, not just one, but both sides are entitled to a fair trial. i think judges that remain cognizant of that throughout the proceedings are really doing both sides a favor. look, i like judge ellis. he's a very smart judge. but sometimes he ought to just call balls and strikes and not try and play all nine positions on the field as well. >> and a civics reminder for all our viewers, federal judges have an awesome responsibility. it's why they have to be nominated by the president, approved by the senate, and then
they are seated for life. eric, one final note. otherwise, prosecution had a very good day? >> yes. so i would say that today got really back to the meat and potatoes part of this trial. we really saw the building blocks of the fraud, the bank fraud allegations that make up a significant portion of this indictment. you'll remember, brian, that obviously the last several days have been focused on rather salacious allegations. there's been discussions of extramarital affairs involving rick gates, who is the government's star witness. he had a fairly challenging cross-examination. today there was none of that. this really got to the core of the government's case, and prosecutors really i think made some significant inroads in being able to establish that when paul manafort applied repeatedly for mortgages, for loans on his new york properties, he made what appeared to be false statements and in one instance, for instance, he alleged that this property was owner occupied when
in fact they found it being listed as a rental. and so right away, manafort had an issue. so yes, i would say today was a fairly good day for the government. >> we are thankful for two of the very best guests to explain all of this as the man afor trial churns on. gentlemen, thank you both. coming up for us, with a couple of this week's elections yet to be decided, republicans look to november. but do they all see the same thing about now? when "the 11th hour" continues.
with the new chase ink business unlimited card i get unlimited 1.5% cash back. it's so simple, i don't even have to think about it. so i think about mouthfeel. introducing chase ink business unlimited with unlimited 1.5% cash back on every purchase.
you always get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed? let's say it in a really low voice. carl? lowest price, guaranteed. just stick with badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com crisp leaves of lettuce. freshly made dressing. clean food that looks this good. delivered to your desk. now delivering to home or office. panera.
food as it should be. we have one to two fires a day and when you respond together and you put your lives on the line, you do have to surround yourself with experts. and for us the expert in gas and electric is pg&e. we run about 2,500/2,800 fire calls a year and on almost every one of those calls pg&e is responding to that call as well. and so when we show up to a fire and pg&e shows up with us it makes a tremendous team during a moment of crisis. i rely on them, the firefighters in this department rely on them, and so we have to practice safety everyday. utilizing pg&e's talent and expertise in that area trains our firefighters on the gas or electric aspect of a fire and when we have an emergency situation we are going to be much more skilled and prepared to mitigate that emergency for all concerned. the things we do every single day that puts ourselves in harm's way, and to have a partner that is so skilled at what they do is indispensable,
and i couldn't ask for a better partner. a story that's been a little bit lost the later half of the week, votes are still being counted tonight in a couple of those tuesday elections. trump-endorsed candidate kris kobach lost half of his already narrow lead today in that kansas gop gubernatorial primary. "the washington post" reports that according to a vote-tallying error, kobach's lead over incumbent republican governor jeff colyer is just 91 votes. kobach acknowledges the lead could change but he intends to keep campaigning. he's secretary of state of kansas which means his office
would oversee any policy recount. and tonight on television kobach said he would be happy to recuse himself in that event, although he reminded all of us, recounts are county by county affairs. you may recall he led president trump's now-disbanded commission on election fraud. we are also still following that special election, the ohio 12th congressional district. that race remains too close to call. if you were with us that night watching, steve kornacki's coverage, you understand how that could be. republican troy balderson is leading by less than 1 percentage point. and after republican new york congressman chris collins was arrested on insider trading charges yesterday, now new york's 27th congressional district could be up for grabs. big area of real estate upstate. collins, who pleaded not guilty, says he'll be staying in that seat and his name will be on the ballot come november. so it's a lot to talk about.
michael steele, former chairman of the republican national committee, that's why he's smiling, i said "former." and shannon pettypiece, white house correspondent for bloomberg. michael, i'm coming right at you. >> yes. >> if you had your old job, other than looking for a new job, if you had your old job as party chairman, how worried would you be tonight? >> you see this? >> you had a full head of hair. >> exactly. it would be like that. i would be very concerned at this stage. we are coming out of the summer, you know, doldrums, if you will, where folks don't pay attention to politics and it's a little bit of a wasteland even though you've got primaries and all that going on. the fact of the matter is, from a party perspective, in terms of setting up the november campaign, you want the kind of momentum that's going to energize your base, get those dollars flowing, and really put in place the messaging that you want to bring it home, right?
it connects all those pieces. i call it the messenger, the message, and the money. and that combination is one that works to empower the base to go out and deliver that vote. in this case -- i was going to say, in this case, the fact that you have a red district like this that is that close, that the president won by 11 points in 2016, is a real problem. it will impact the money. it will impact the message. and it certainly will impact the messengers around the country who have to make that delivery. >> and forgive, michael, shannon, pick up right on what michael just said. you've got this barn burner of a race in ohio that should be done and dusted, safe republican district, right into that we have the arrest of collins, 27th district of new york. it can't look good. tell us about the folks you've been talking to. >> well, i mean, within the white house, and within president trump's outer circle,
they are certainly aware that this does not look good. it is no shock to anyone that the ohio 12th district, as michael was explaining, if that is up for play, well, there is about 70 other house seats that are up for play too. and the democrats only need 23. and it is certainly not lost on the president or anyone in his inner circle of what a democratic-controlled house means to them. it means investigations on everything from russia to the emoluments clause. it means the risk of impeachment which his lawyer rudy giuliani raised today with me, the fact that if there is something referred to mueller in a democratic house, that probably means impeachment. the president is very aware of this. what they're going to do is still a question, because there's still a debate about whether or not the president is the greatest tool in the republicans' toolbox, or, you know, their worst enemy. >> michael, as bumper stickers go, if you had to design the gop bumper sticker to be used
universally around the country in all 435 districts for the midterms, what would your terse message be to the voter? >> who, me? >> oh, man. you're on fire tonight. >> that would be it. because that sums up the state of the party right now, a party that has not really defined its relationship with the american people. it has clearly defined and continues to define its relationship with the president. and that is the problem. this has got to be about how the american people view -- now, look, you don't have to go back that far in history, brian, to understand what this election looks like. it looks like 2006 in many respects. it's got elements of 2008 to it. it's got all of these pieces from the past where the party has dropped the ball, where it has not clearly defined itself with the american people or has
defined itself in a way that the american people summarily reject. i said in 2006, running for the united states state, that it was like running with a scarlet letter "r" on your chest, and it was. and we took a big drubbing. that scarlet letter "r" is back on our chests and like the american flag when it's in crisis, it's upside down. >> we're going to have all these republicans on these ballots, are they all kind of ad libbing their association with the guy at the top of the ticket for republicans, being a part of the trump era gop? >> i mean, they're really in a difficult situation. because they need that trump base as a republican, you need that trump base to turn out. but that's not going to be enough to get you to beat the democrat on the ticket. you also need to get moderates and independents as well.
i mean, that's what everybody across the country is struggling with. and i mean, to this point michael was just making about 2006, i hear a number of people referencing that. and with this indictment of chris collins, it again looks more like 2006, because if you remember then, there was this wave of scandal seats that opened up, that people were able to move into. and there is a sense there's going to be more of these scandals bubbling. now this party is not just associated with trump, but people's questions, or this taint in their mind about corruption and concerns about what's going on in the republican party. >> we'll have you both back to talk about this very same thing with our great thanks. michael steele, shannon pettypiece, we appreciate you both coming on. as our guests just mentioned, 12 years ago democrats accused republicans of the culture of corruption and took over congress. why one conservative said today this is the age of corruption and cruelty. that when we come back. we just got married.
we're all under one roof now. congratulations. thank you. how many kids? my two. his three. along with two dogs and jake, our new parrot. that is quite the family. quite a lot of colleges to pay for though. a lot of colleges. you get any financial advice? yeah, but i'm pretty sure it's the same plan they sold me before. well your situation's totally changed now. right, right. how 'bout a plan that works for 5 kids, 2 dogs and jake over here? that would be great. that would be great. that okay with you, jake? get a portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change from td ameritrade investment management. the doctor's office just for a shot. but why go back there... when you can stay home with neulasta onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%, a 94% decrease. neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the day after chemo and is used by most patients today. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to it
or neupogen (filgrastim). an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. if you'd rather be home ask your doctor about neulasta onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card. well, esurance makes it simple and affordable. in fact, drivers who switched from geico to esurance saved an average of $412. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call. paying too much for insurance that isn't the right fit? well, esurance makes finding the right coverage easy. in fact, drivers who switched from geico to esurance saved an average of $412. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call.
esurance. an allstate company. let someone else do the heavy lifting. tripadvisor compares prices from over 200 booking sites to find the right hotel for you at the lowest price. so you barely have to lift a finger. or a wing. tripadvisor. the new united explorer card hooks me up. getting more for getting away. traveling lighter. getting settled. rewarded! learn more at theexplorercard.com
i keep thinking about what is our time going to be remembered for, what is this the age of. listening to the program today, these themes, this will be the age of corruption and cruelty. >> that got our attention today. corruption and cruelty. that's the conservative author and radio talk show host charlie sykes, a friend of this broadcast, coming up with those two words that, again, he predicts will define this administration and this era at a point where we're able to look at it in the rearview mirror. one illustration of this era was posted on twitter by aaron blake, senior political reporter over at "the washington post." he wrote the following. quote, list of people charged with and pleading to crimes. trump's second campaign manager. trump's deputy campaign manager. trump's national security adviser. trump's foreign policy adviser.
trump's first campaign manager, battery charges later dropped. trump's first congressional endorser. walter isaacson, a distinguished fellow of the aspen institute, if you ask me, he's a distinguished person of any kind. biographer of franklin, einstein, kissinger, jobs, and da vinci and professor of history at tulane in his spare time. welcome back to our studio. what do you make of his choice of those who words, corruption and cruelty? >> they're very simple words. they're very true. and they go to the heart of what's going to be a problem for this administration, because it is a lot of corruption. just people at the trough, for money, simple corruption. and it gets -- you know, sleazy, congre congressmen on the white house
lawn, getting phone calls to dump stock. and then you have cruelty, a country that is intentionally cruel to people. and just character, a lot of people lying to us. >> our friend steve schmidt sees this as a lack of rigor, a lack of standards in all tiers of the trump operation. >> you know, when you set out to destroy norms, norms get destroyed. we have norms in our society, which is, you know, you don't sit at the trough trying to take money and being greedy and being corrupt. that's why people voted for trump at first, they thought he was going to drain the swamp. the clintons got in trouble because they seemed greedy and there was a taint of corruption to the clinton foundation. so a lot of people voted against her, voted for trump. and you have him now and his whole administration, his family, trying to make money off
of the presidency. and then you have that unnecessary bullying and cruelty. and here is what i think -- i think it will get to the heart of the problem, because americans deep down inside, they're not cruel people. we're not corrupt people. and we try to at least feel we have some character. and so i think most americans, you know, certainly most republicans aren't cruel, they aren't corrupt, yet they're watching this happen. and you're starting to see the support seep away, i think. >> we're very proud of calling ourselves the most generous nation on earth, in fact. 44 years ago today, richard nixon lifted off the south lawn for the last time. >> the helicopter. >> yes, and gerald ford talked about our long national nightmare. do you see, do you entertain any echoes of anything nixonian in what we're witnessing now, as a
historian yourself? >> oh, absolutely. i mean, history never repeats itself, but as you know, twain said it rhymes, or perhaps you can say it echoes. the corruption now is sort of different, it's sort of money grubbing, greedy corruption, to make money, emoluments as they call it, to make money out of their office. you see the same type of coverups and, frankly, lying. when somebody who is the president of the united states says things that aren't sure, that should still unnerve us a bit. and trump is much different from nixon, he kind of does it in public, which is try to obstruct justice. but it's still very unnerving that you're breaking down the rule of law, especially when republicans had always been strong about the rule of law, always been strong against corruption, always, you know, been strong on character, which is the most important issue when we select our leader. >> do you think, in 30 seconds
or less, seeing this stuff in plain sight, is harder for us to discern in the public realm when the president tweets something that he couldn't possibly have meant that. well, of course he does. >> that's a really good point, it's hiding in plain sight. it's a coverup that's not a secret coverup. it's being done in plain sight. and it's weird how our own immune system to this types of thing gets a little bit jangled when people do it in plain sight. >> thank you. great to see you. those parents watching, send your kids to tulane, they'll get to sit in his class. walter isaacson with us here in new york. coming up, would you believe over a thousand dead in puerto rico as a result of hurricane maria? it's certainly now matching what the people on the ground there had been seeing and saying. we'll explain when we come back. it's kind of like playing your own version of best ball.
because here, you can choose any car in the aisle, even if it's a better car class than the one you reserved. so no matter what, you're guaranteed to have a perfect drive. [laughter] (vo) go national. go like a pro. see what i did there? but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. it's a revolution in sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999, intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts. so you wake up ready to train for that marathon. and now, save up to $500 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. ends wednesday.
>> if you look at a real catastrophe like katrina and you look at the tremendous hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people that died, and you look at what happened here with really a storm that was just totally overpowering, nobody's ever seen anything like this, what is your death count as of this moment? 17? >> 16, 17. >> 16 people certified. 16 people versus in the thousands. you can be very proud of all of your people, all of our people working together. 16 versus literally thousands of people. >> that was the president early on eager to diminish a humanitarian crisis. eager to point out that while still sad, the loss of life in puerto rico was relatively minimal. well, the new death count by the government of puerto rico has leaked out today. of course, it's staggeringly high. over 1400 people are now
believed to have lost their lives as a result of hurricane maria. way higher than the official death toll of 64 lives lost. how else to explain a minimal loss of life when so many towns and villages and homes were cut off, not just in terms of electric power but completely cut off from the rest of the island from humanity. in the months since the storm, fema has admitted to being underprepared for the storm. power, would you believe, still not completely restored on the island. one in ten health centers still running on generators. just getting street lights up and on and operating was a huge struggle especially in parts of san juan. after the storm, some in the media wondered allowed if the president initially understood that puerto rico was a u.s. territory and that all puerto ricans are u.s. citizens. he was eager tore rate his own
administration's response as 10 out of 10. yes there have been other death toll estimates, one as high as 4,000. but this new government estimate of 1400 seems closer to the truth given the size and scope of this disaster. but this is interesting. asked about the government's new death toll estimates, the rolando ortiz told nbc news the updated figure still doesn't match what he lived. "the numbers from the government seem low to me still but the reality is that the people who died died and it's painful because those are human lives, but this is evidence of the government's inability to tell the truth. that's the most terrifying news." another break for our broadcast and coming up, it's something the president has campaigned against loudly. today it came to the rescue of his own in-laws when we continue. the fact is, there are over ninety-six
it's america's most popular street name. but allstate agents know that's where the similarity stops. if you're on park street in reno, nevada, the high winds of the washoe zephyr could damage your siding. and that's very different than living on park ave in sheboygan, wisconsin, where ice dams could cause water damage. but no matter what park you live on, one of 10,000 local allstate agents knows yours. now that you know the truth, are you in good hands? here's a trip tip: when you search hotels on tripadvisor... enter your destination and the dates of your stay. tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites... to find the best deal on the right hotel for you. tripadvisor. until i held her. managing my type 2 diabetes wasn't my top priority. i found my tresiba® reason. now i'm doing more to lower my a1c. i take tresiba® once a day. tresiba® controls blood sugar for 24 hours for powerful a1c reduction. (woman) we'd been counting down to his retirement.
it was our tresiba® reason. he needs insulin to control his high blood sugar and, at his age, he's at greater risk for low blood sugar. tresiba® releases slow and steady and works all day and night like the body's insulin. (vo) tresiba® is a long-acting insulin used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. don't use tresiba® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. don't share needles or insulin pens. don't reuse needles. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause dizziness, sweating, confusion, and headache. check your blood sugar. low blood sugar can be serious and may be life-threatening. injection site reactions may occur. tell your prescriber about all medicines you take and all your medical conditions. taking tzds with insulins like tresiba® may cause serious side effects like heart failure. your insulin dose shouldn't be changed without asking your prescriber. get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing, fast heartbeat, extreme drowsiness, swelling of your face, tongue or throat, dizziness or confusion.
(man) i found my tresiba® reason. find yours. (vo) ask your health care provider about tresiba®. covered by most commercial health insurance and medicare part d plans. with i get rewarded explowherever i go. going out for a bite. rewarded! going new places. rewarded! learn more at theexplorercard.com last thing before we go here tonight has to do with one of those phrases, one of those causes the president is so fond of mentioning and often. >> end chain migration. ending chain migration and canceling the visa lottery. >> we will get rid of chain migration. >> i started talking about chain migration. >> chain migration. >> chain migration is one of the
disasters. chain migration is a disaster. >> a disaster. >> a total disaster. >> we have to end chain migration. we have to end chain migration. >> if you guessed chain migration, you would be correct. yet, chain migration is exactly what led to melania trump's parents donald trump's in-laws, gaining their u.s. citizenship today. remember the first lady herself has only been a citizen for 12 years since '06. born and raised in slovenia, our first ever naturalized citizen first lady. her parents immigration lawyer admitted today that chain migration is the dirtier temple for what happened today. "the new york times" was more direct. their headline reads "melania trump's parents become u.s. citizens using chain migration trump hates." >> chain migration is bringing
Brian Williams examines the day's top political stories and current political-campaign news.
election, that means the more careful you have to be in how overtly you investigate or charge someone who is going to be on the ballot in that election. first of all, donald trump, as far as i know, is not on the ballot in 2018. so this whole issue about them affecting the election is actually pretty tangential. it's not clear how much it applies. >> but mueller is so clearly cautious and observant of precedent and law. >> yes. so he will take it into account. but it's sort of a sliding scale. trump's not on the ballot. so you don't have to be quite as careful as, for example, charging someone like collins who is up for reelection. so there they had to be very, very careful. and also, you know, you have to not -- you don't have to stop the whole election -- the whole
investigation. >> can you pause some aspects of it? >> you just don't want to do something overt. he can keep doing lots of stuff, it's not like they're going to close up shop come september 1st. giuliani is creating this deadline, september 1st, september 1st. if people buy into that, because who knows about this doj guidance, most people don't, and how it works, it's very fact-based and nuanced, then come september 1st, if mueller doesn't wrap it up, giuliani can say he's blown the deadline. he makes mueller look bad by creating this false reality. >> michael crowley, any reason to believe the giuliani strategy is anything other than these three words, delay, distract, and discredit? >> i don't think so, brian. think about rudy giuliani's recent history. where is the track record of this guy being a master strategist? he was mayor of new york city, which is an extremely challenging job. he wasn't an especially popular one for most of that time until a cataclysmic event in the form of a massive terror attack
transformed his image. but that happened out of the blue and a lot of it was just sort of how he performed on camera. then he ran for president. his presidential campaign was basically a flop. he wasn't remembered for any great or powerful message or insights. since then his reputation has kind of taken a beating. he's made a lot of money basically influence-peddling. and his reputation has suffered. so, you know, there are people -- and i'm not saying people on this show here are doing this, they're not, but other people are sort of suggesting there is this brilliant strategy behind what he's doing, and it's putting mueller on the defensive. i see no reason to think that we should imagine that there's a strategy behind this unfolding. it's hard to discern on the surface level.
and i suspect that mueller -- a lot of this, he may find it comical that giuliani is setting these deadlines and issuing what are in effect demands and orders. i just think mueller is doing what he's doing on his own time frame, has a huge amount of information at his disposal, is really the guy in charge here. and there's something -- you know i could be completely wrong in the way this turns out, but from where i sit right now, there's something almost a little satirical, rudy raging at the dying of the light here, and i just don't think there's much to it. >> lisa, no judgment here because a number of us are, but the president is cable addicted. having established that, what are the kind of unique pressures? here he is on vacation, playing golf, as far as we can tell, every day, although our lenses are kept far, far away from his golf course. what are the pressures he is seeing and feeling? >> he's certainly seeing a lot of coverage of the manafort trial, which has not been particularly flattering either
for manafort or rick gates or the campaign. he's seeing what's going on with his former personal lawyer michael cohen and how the pressure is racheting up over there. and he's feeling the pressure of the midterms. while he claimed a number of victories in the midterms this week, that special election in ohio was awfully, awfully close. we still don't have a conclusive winner. that's a district that trump won by 11, it should not have been that close. he's feeling a number of legal and political pressures. but i think what his team is seeing that's making them feel like their strategy may be working, is the polling numbers. they're seeing that the longer they -- as you put it, the
longer they delay, the more disapproval of mueller and the investigation seems to rise. but as you pointed out at the beginning of the show, we're only hearing 50% of the story. so while those numbers have been moving a certain way, the big question is what happens once the public starts hearing the other half of the story, do we see those numbers change. polling moves. >> mimi, another associate of roger stone is about to receive or has received a subpoena to come in and talk to the mueller team. this is now a line of associates, the stars and moons around roger stone. i think i've asked you this question about five times before. would you want to be roger stone right about now? he hasn't been called. >> absolutely not. i mean, look, it's dangerous to make predictions about mueller because we've all said many times, he knows so much more than we know. but just based on what's in the public record and, as you say, the process and how it's playing out that so many of his associates have been subpoenaed and he hasn't been asked to come talk to them, i think really does point in the direction that he's going to be looking at an indictment. and the question is, indicted for what exactly, and with whom. is he going to be put into the -- he could just be added into the already existing russia indictment, either one, really,
depending on what his actions were exactly. probably the hacking one, or a separate indictment with other u.s. citizens, possibly. it all seems possible to me right now. and it's not that the longer mueller goes on, you know, he's scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to find something. i think he's going on because he keeps uncovering more and more evidence. >> i've wanted for months to see whatever whiteboard they have in his office. >> yes. >> hey, michael, part of your life's work has been studying and writing about foreign affairs. and so here we have russia. remembering this is all about russia's interference in our election. sanctions just put in place against russia. they called it unfriendly. just a quick reminder, with true north as our guide, how weird is the u.s./russia relationship as of right now? >> it's bizarre. i can't think, brian, of another example where you had so much distance between the commander in chief and his seniormost advisers on the subject matter. so in this case, the distance between trump and his top national security officials on how the united states should be approaching russia. trump wants to befriend russia. trump wants to reset relations, in effect.
he seems to basically trust vladimir putin. and then there is this whole apparatus around him that is ensuring that we don't do any of those things, that we harden our resolve against russia, that we continue to impose sanctions. secretary of state mike pompeo, who some people have depicted as a bit of a yes man, who basically wants to please trump, he came out and issued a statement saying the u.s. would never recognize russian annexation of crimea until it is reversed, and that is not the position that trump has held, he's left the door open. pompeo has been tough on this subject. and republicans in congress who have deferred to trump on all kinds of other issues are mad at hell, for the most part, with notable exceptions, some of the senators who traveled to moscow. it's bizarre, brian, i've never seen a divide on this level in our government.
>> just thought i would ask. our thanks to all three of you, really appreciate it. coming up for us, as we approach our first break, it's something you don't hear often in a federal courtroom. what the judge had to say after a feisty exchange with prosecutors. there have been a few. and later, president trump has said it a lot, he only hires the best people. however, the list of trump associates with legal problems just keeps getting longer. i'll get it out. "the 11th hour" just getting under way on a thursday night. are you ready to take your wifi to the next level?
it was a good day. >> an attorney for president trump's formerly campaign chairman paul manafort sounding confident. day eight of the manafort trial. today's testimony focused on charges that manafort lied and committed bank fraud to qualify for bank loans. the more notable moment may have come before any witnesses even took the stand this morning. it was in the form of a rare mea culpa from this judge, who has clashed frequently with the special counsel's team, the government prosecutors. referring to a tense exchange the day before over whether an irs witness should have been allowed to testify after having
been allowed to be in court, judge t.s. elliott told the jury, quote, it appears i may well have been wrong. he went on to say, this robe doesn't make me anything other than human. i sometimes make mistakes. paul manafort, a reminder, facing bank tax fraud charges, charges he denies. this is his first trial as a result of the investigation by mueller's office. with us tonight to talk about it, we're so pleased to have chuck rosenberg back, former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of attorney, who has spent his fair share of time in that very courtroom where the trial is being held. he also happens to be a former senior official with the fbi. and eric tuck certificate back with us, justice department reporter for the associated press.
he was in court for today's proceedings. chuck, i've thought of you so many times because, in plain english, you were u.s. attorney where this trial is taking part. you've had your fair share of time to watch this judge. what do you make of all of it? i've heard straight down the middle reporters say kind of straight up that he has been prejudicial, he has clearly and provably been tougher on the prosecution. >> you know, brian, i've seen him be tough on the prosecution. i've seen him be tough on defense counsel. but there i think is a better way to do it, right? i mean, if a judge has something she needs to say to counsel, defense or prosecution, she can call them to the bench. she can excuse the jury. she can even yell at us, that happens too. but it should be done in private, because judges have so much authority in their courtroom. and the jury listens carefully to what they say. the concern i have is if he's angry at one side or the other, even if he's right, the fact that he yells at them, berates them, castigates them in front of the jury can tip the scales and the judge has to be so careful never to do that. >> i was going to say, chuck, i've covered my share of proceedings in federal and state
courts. and so often have seen a judge say, counsel approach the bench, and kind of covers the microphone and has a little bit of a sidebar discussion. >> and that's happened to me too. i told a story earlier today where i accidentally, and it wasn't a crime against humanity, came back from lunch with a piece of chewing gum in my mouth and a federal judge in the eastern district of virginia handed me a tissue, after asking me to come to the bench, and we discreetly took care of the problem. he didn't do it in front of the jury. these judges have to be so careful. the government has no appeal. for the defendant, it's a matter of liberty or even life. the notion that you would put a finger on the scale, even accidentally -- >> i'm so glad we finally have
something on you. it's really unfair that the judge goes by t.s., but it's ellis, not elliott. that one is on me, i apologize. what do you make of the room, of the dynamic, and the reporters who have been saying today that he's unmistakably tough on the prosecution, do they have it about right? >> no question, brian, it was an extraordinary moment for everyone coming into the courtroom this morning for the judge to basically tell the jury to put out of their minds something that he in fact had said yesterday and to offer a semi apology. the one thing that i think we should definitely not lose sight of, though, is what precipitated this, which is actually a government request last night and early this morning where they said to the judge,
respectfully, your honor, if you review the transcript, you actually permitted this witness to be in the courtroom, you are incorrect and as a matter of fact we would actually like for you to alert the jury that you're mistaken. and that's really unusual. and one could read this one document, this one filing from the government, as actually sort of a broader request of the judge to say, there are many things that the judge has said that hopefully in the government's mind, the government would like to see undone or unwound. >> and chuck, something you just said has me going back to this, especially if you're in your
line of work, if you've ever been on jury duty, if you've ever watched the trial, the judge is really your conduit,'s almost your father figure during the proceedings. he turns and addresses members of the jury. he's your go-between. you often see a trial in his or her lens. and so it is critical, i would love to be able to watch the jurors as they visually relate to this judge. >> that's right. and look, for most people serving on a jury, it's probably the only time, brian, they've ever had that experience. they don't know what courtrooms are like, they don't know what prosecutors or defense attorneys are like. they certainly don't know what judge ellis is like. so what he says goes. i mean, not just as a matter of law but as a matter of fact.
and if he's mad at the prosecutor, for instance, then maybe they are too. and so that's why a judge has to be so very careful. remember, both sides are entitled to a fair trial, not just one, but both sides are entitled to a fair trial. i think judges that remain cognizant of that throughout the proceedings are really doing both sides a favor. look, i like judge ellis. he's a very smart judge. but sometimes he ought to just call balls and strikes and not try and play all nine positions on the field as well. >> and a civics reminder for all our viewers, federal judges have an awesome responsibility. it's why they have to be nominated by the president, approved by the senate, and then they are seated for life. eric, one final note. otherwise, prosecution had a very good day? >> yes.
so i would say that today got really back to the meat and potatoes part of this trial. we really saw the building blocks of the fraud, the bank fraud allegations that make up a significant portion of this indictment. you'll remember, brian, that obviously the last several days have been focused on rather salacious allegations. there's been discussions of extramarital affairs involving rick gates, who is the government's star witness. he had a fairly challenging cross-examination. today there was none of that. this really got to the core of the government's case, and prosecutors really i think made some significant inroads in being able to establish that when paul manafort applied repeatedly for mortgages, for loans on his new york properties, he made what appeared to be false statements and in one instance, for instance, he alleged that this property was owner occupied when in fact they found it being listed as a rental. and so right away, manafort had an issue. so yes, i would say today was a fairly good day for the government. >> we are thankful for two of the very best guests to explain all of this as the man afor trial churns on. gentlemen, thank you both. coming up for us, with a couple of this week's elections yet to be decided, republicans look to november. but do they all see the same thing about now? when "the 11th hour" continues.
week, votes are still being counted tonight in a couple of those tuesday elections. trump-endorsed candidate kris kobach lost half of his already narrow lead today in that kansas gop gubernatorial primary. "the washington post" reports that according to a vote-tallying error, kobach's lead over incumbent republican governor jeff colyer is just 91 votes. kobach acknowledges the lead could change but he intends to keep campaigning. he's secretary of state of kansas which means his office would oversee any policy recount. and tonight on television kobach said he would be happy to recuse himself in that event, although he reminded all of us, recounts are county by county affairs. you may recall he led president trump's now-disbanded commission
on election fraud. we are also still following that special election, the ohio 12th congressional district. that race remains too close to call. if you were with us that night watching, steve kornacki's coverage, you understand how that could be. republican troy balderson is leading by less than 1 percentage point. and after republican new york congressman chris collins was arrested on insider trading charges yesterday, now new york's 27th congressional district could be up for grabs. big area of real estate upstate. collins, who pleaded not guilty, says he'll be staying in that seat and his name will be on the ballot come november. so it's a lot to talk about. michael steele, former chairman of the republican national
committee, that's why he's smiling, i said "former." and shannon pettypiece, white house correspondent for bloomberg. michael, i'm coming right at you. >> yes. >> if you had your old job, other than looking for a new job, if you had your old job as party chairman, how worried would you be tonight? >> you see this? >> you had a full head of hair. >> exactly. it would be like that. i would be very concerned at this stage. we are coming out of the summer, you know, doldrums, if you will, where folks don't pay attention to politics and it's a little bit of a wasteland even though you've got primaries and all that going on. the fact of the matter is, from a party perspective, in terms of setting up the november campaign, you want the kind of momentum that's going to energize your base, get those dollars flowing, and really put
in place the messaging that you want to bring it home, right? it connects all those pieces. i call it the messenger, the message, and the money. and that combination is one that works to empower the base to go out and deliver that vote. in this case -- i was going to say, in this case, the fact that you have a red district like this that is that close, that the president won by 11 points in 2016, is a real problem. it will impact the money. it will impact the message. and it certainly will impact the messengers around the country who have to make that delivery. >> and forgive, michael, shannon, pick up right on what michael just said. you've got this barn burner of a race in ohio that should be done and dusted, safe republican district, right into that we have the arrest of collins, 27th district of new york. it can't look good. tell us about the folks you've been talking to. >> well, i mean, within the white house, and within president trump's outer circle, they are certainly aware that this does not look good. it is no shock to anyone that the ohio 12th district, as michael was explaining, if that is up for play, well, there is about 70 other house seats that are up for play too. and the democrats only need 23.
and it is certainly not lost on the president or anyone in his inner circle of what a democratic-controlled house means to them. it means investigations on everything from russia to the emoluments clause. it means the risk of impeachment which his lawyer rudy giuliani raised today with me, the fact that if there is something referred to mueller in a democratic house, that probably means impeachment. the president is very aware of this. what they're going to do is still a question, because there's still a debate about whether or not the president is the greatest tool in the republicans' toolbox, or, you know, their worst enemy. >> michael, as bumper stickers go, if you had to design the gop bumper sticker to be used universally around the country in all 435 districts for the midterms, what would your terse message be to the voter? >> who, me? >> oh, man. you're on fire tonight. >> that would be it. because that sums up the state of the party right now, a party that has not really defined its relationship with the american people. it has clearly defined and continues to define its relationship with the president. and that is the problem. this has got to be about how the
american people view -- now, look, you don't have to go back that far in history, brian, to understand what this election looks like. it looks like 2006 in many respects. it's got elements of 2008 to it. it's got all of these pieces from the past where the party has dropped the ball, where it has not clearly defined itself with the american people or has defined itself in a way that the american people summarily reject. i said in 2006, running for the united states state, that it was
like running with a scarlet letter "r" on your chest, and it was. and we took a big drubbing. that scarlet letter "r" is back on our chests and like the american flag when it's in crisis, it's upside down. >> we're going to have all these republicans on these ballots, are they all kind of ad libbing their association with the guy at the top of the ticket for republicans, being a part of the trump era gop? >> i mean, they're really in a difficult situation. because they need that trump base as a republican, you need that trump base to turn out. but that's not going to be enough to get you to beat the democrat on the ticket. you also need to get moderates and independents as well. i mean, that's what everybody across the country is struggling with. and i mean, to this point michael was just making about 2006, i hear a number of people referencing that. and with this indictment of
chris collins, it again looks more like 2006, because if you remember then, there was this wave of scandal seats that opened up, that people were able to move into. and there is a sense there's going to be more of these scandals bubbling. now this party is not just associated with trump, but people's questions, or this taint in their mind about corruption and concerns about what's going on in the republican party. >> we'll have you both back to talk about this very same thing with our great thanks. michael steele, shannon pettypiece, we appreciate you both coming on. as our guests just mentioned, 12 years ago democrats accused republicans of the culture of corruption and took over congress. why one conservative said today this is the age of corruption and cruelty. that when we come back.
remembered for, what is this the age of. listening to the program today, these themes, this will be the age of corruption and cruelty. >> that got our attention today. corruption and cruelty. that's the conservative author and radio talk show host charlie sykes, a friend of this broadcast, coming up with those two words that, again, he predicts will define this administration and this era at a point where we're able to look at it in the rearview mirror. one illustration of this era was posted on twitter by aaron blake, senior political reporter over at "the washington post." he wrote the following. quote, list of people charged with and pleading to crimes. trump's second campaign manager. trump's deputy campaign manager. trump's national security adviser. trump's foreign policy adviser. trump's first campaign manager, battery charges later dropped. trump's first congressional endorser. walter isaacson, a distinguished fellow of the aspen institute, if you ask me, he's a distinguished person of any kind. biographer of franklin, einstein, kissinger, jobs, and da vinci and professor of history at tulane in his spare time.
welcome back to our studio. what do you make of his choice of those who words, corruption and cruelty? >> they're very simple words. they're very true. and they go to the heart of what's going to be a problem for this administration, because it is a lot of corruption. just people at the trough, for money, simple corruption. and it gets -- you know, sleazy, congressmen on the white house lawn, getting phone calls to dump stock. and then you have cruelty, a country that is intentionally cruel to people. and just character, a lot of people lying to us. >> our friend steve schmidt sees this as a lack of rigor, a lack of standards in all tiers of the trump operation. >> you know, when you set out to destroy norms, norms get destroyed.
we have norms in our society, which is, you know, you don't sit at the trough trying to take money and being greedy and being corrupt. that's why people voted for trump at first, they thought he was going to drain the swamp. the clintons got in trouble because they seemed greedy and there was a taint of corruption to the clinton foundation. so a lot of people voted against her, voted for trump. and you have him now and his whole administration, his family, trying to make money off of the presidency. and then you have that unnecessary bullying and cruelty. and here is what i think -- i think it will get to the heart of the problem, because americans deep down inside, they're not cruel people. we're not corrupt people. and we try to at least feel we have some character. and so i think most americans, you know, certainly most republicans aren't cruel, they
aren't corrupt, yet they're watching this happen. and you're starting to see the support seep away, i think. >> we're very proud of calling ourselves the most generous nation on earth, in fact. 44 years ago today, richard nixon lifted off the south lawn for the last time. >> the helicopter. >> yes, and gerald ford talked about our long national nightmare. do you see, do you entertain any echoes of anything nixonian in what we're witnessing now, as a historian yourself? >> oh, absolutely. i mean, history never repeats itself, but as you know, twain said it rhymes, or perhaps you can say it echoes. the corruption now is sort of different, it's sort of money grubbing, greedy corruption, to make money, emoluments as they call it, to make money out of their office. you see the same type of coverups and, frankly, lying. when somebody who is the president of the united states
says things that aren't sure, that should still unnerve us a bit. and trump is much different from nixon, he kind of does it in public, which is try to obstruct justice. but it's still very unnerving that you're breaking down the rule of law, especially when republicans had always been strong about the rule of law, always been strong against corruption, always, you know, been strong on character, which is the most important issue when we select our leader. >> do you think, in 30 seconds or less, seeing this stuff in plain sight, is harder for us to discern in the public realm when the president tweets something that he couldn't possibly have meant that. well, of course he does. >> that's a really good point, it's hiding in plain sight. it's a coverup that's not a secret coverup. it's being done in plain sight. and it's weird how our own immune system to this types of thing gets a little bit jangled
when people do it in plain sight. >> thank you. great to see you. those parents watching, send your kids to tulane, they'll get to sit in his class. walter isaacson with us here in new york. coming up, would you believe over a thousand dead in puerto rico as a result of hurricane maria? it's certainly now matching what the people on the ground there had been seeing and saying. we'll explain when we come back. >> if you look at a real
ever seen anything like this, what is your death count as of this moment? 17? >> 16, 17. >> 16 people certified. 16 people versus in the thousands. you can be very proud of all of your people, all of our people working together. 16 versus literally thousands of people. >> that was the president early on eager to diminish a humanitarian crisis. eager to point out that while still sad, the loss of life in puerto rico was relatively minimal.
well, the new death count by the government of puerto rico has leaked out today. of course, it's staggeringly high. over 1400 people are now believed to have lost their lives as a result of hurricane maria. way higher than the official death toll of 64 lives lost. how else to explain a minimal loss of life when so many towns and villages and homes were cut off, not just in terms of electric power but completely cut off from the rest of the island from humanity. in the months since the storm, fema has admitted to being underprepared for the storm. power, would you believe, still not completely restored on the island. one in ten health centers still running on generators. just getting street lights up and on and operating was a huge struggle especially in parts of san juan. after the storm, some in the media wondered allowed if the president initially understood that puerto rico was a u.s. territory and that all puerto ricans are u.s. citizens. he was eager tore rate his own administration's response as 10 out of 10. yes there have been other death toll estimates, one as high as 4,000. but this new government estimate of 1400 seems closer to the truth given the size and scope of this disaster. but this is interesting.
asked about the government's new death toll estimates, the rolando ortiz told nbc news the updated figure still doesn't match what he lived. "the numbers from the government seem low to me still but the reality is that the people who died died and it's painful because those are human lives, but this is evidence of the government's inability to tell the truth. that's the most terrifying news." another break for our broadcast and coming up, it's something the president has campaigned against loudly. today it came to the rescue of his own in-laws when we continue.
treating cancer isn't one thing we do. it's the only thing we do. expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. last thing before we go here tonight has to do with one of those phrases, one of those causes the president is so fond of mentioning and often. >> end chain migration. ending chain migration and canceling the visa lottery. >> we will get rid of chain migration. >> i started talking about chain migration. >> chain migration. >> chain migration is one of the disasters. chain migration is a disaster. >> a disaster. >> a total disaster. >> we have to end chain migration. we have to end chain migration. >> if you guessed chain migration, you would be correct. yet, chain migration is exactly
what led to melania trump's parents donald trump's in-laws, gaining their u.s. citizenship today. remember the first lady herself has only been a citizen for 12 years since '06. born and raised in slovenia, our first ever naturalized citizen first lady. her parents immigration lawyer admitted today that chain migration is the dirtier temple for what happened today. "the new york times" was more direct. their headline reads "melania trump's parents become u.s. citizens using chain migration trump hates." >> chain migration is bringing in.many people and often it doesn't work out very well. those many people are not doing us right. >> america has twos new citizens, the parents of our first lady who also happens to be an immigrant though most around him believe the president's campaign against chain migration will likely continue. thank you so very much for being
by the thousands still left. there's approximately 8,000 of those still left. and so we will not have a winner, we will not have a concession by a loser, in this race until all of those votes are counted by august 18th. that is tonight's "last word." "the 11th hour with brian williams" starts now. tonight, president trump calls the russia investigation an illegally brought rigged witch hunt but says stay tuned. while rudy giuliani puts the chance of a sit down with mueller at 50%. in the manafort courtroom, the judge tells the jury disregard my criticism of the prosecution. and nearly one year later are we getting closer to learning the truth. what really happened in the dark aftermath of hurricane maria in puerto rico. "the 11th hour" on a thursday night begins now. good evening once again from our nbc news headquarters here in new york. day 567 of the trump
presidency. meanwhile, rudy giuliani spoke with axios. they report, quote, there are two topics the president's lawyers want to rule out in order to agree to a trump sit-down with mueller. one, why trump fired fbi director james comey. two, what trump said to comey about the investigation of former national security adviser michael flynn. tonight, bloomberg has also spoken to giuliani and also reports that those two topics are off limits. according to bloomberg, giuliani said, quote, if asked the president would tell the special counsel that he didn't urge comey to stop investigating flynn and didn't fire comey to cut off his investigation into russian interference in the 2016 campaign, but the president's personal lawyer said trump's advisers think mueller wouldn't believe him and would side instead with comey. this might explain the concern on the part of the trump legal team. here now a sample of his comments on michael flynn.
>> my white house counsel came to me. they had i believe two meetings. and we ultimately fired, but we fired for a different reason. >> you're talking about general flynn? >> general flynn, yes. >> because of lying to the vice president? >> yeah, but everything plays in. everything plays into it. but we fired him because he said something to the vice president that was not so. >> did you at any time urge former fbi director james comey in any way, shape, or form to close or back down the investigation into michael flynn? and also -- >> no. >> i feel badly for general flynn. he's lost his house. he's lost his life. some people say he lied and some people say he didn't lie. really it turned out maybe he didn't lie. >> and here now, donald trump on james comey. >> all i want is for comey to be honest and i hope he will be and i'm sure he will be, i hope. he's a show boat. he's a grandstander. the fbi has been in turmoil. i was going to fire comey.
Brian Williams examines the day's top political stories and current political-campaign news.
jewel giuliani has framed this sit-down as something of a reality show leading up to a final rose ceremony, how must the feds view all of these moving parts, none of them having to do with them? >> right. and it's so hard to know how much of the discussion, discussion that we're hearing from giuliani, is even happening also with mueller, right? we don't know how much of this is a two-sided conversation or this is just giuliani, you know, spewing things to the public for us to hear his take, his side of it, his reality, as you say. he's created this completely false deadline and false reality. >> 60 days? >> yes, if i could explain that a little bit. there is doj guidance that generally obviously prosecutors should not use their power as prosecutors to impact elections. that's sort of it in a nutshell. the closer you get to an election, that means the more careful you have to be in how overtly you investigate or
but that was this thing that happened out of the blue and a lot of it was just sort of how he performed on camera. then he ran for president. his presidential campaign was basically a flop. he wasn't remembered for any great or powerful message or insights. since then his reputation has kind of taken a beating. he's made a lot of money basically influence-peddling. and his reputation has suffered. so, you know, there are people -- and i'm not saying people on this show here are doing this, they're not, but other people are sort of suggesting there is this brilliant strategy behind what he's doing, and it's putting mueller on the defensive. i see no reason to think that we should imagine that there's a strategy behind this unfolding. it's hard to discern on the surface level. and i suspect that mueller -- a lot of this, he may find it comical that giuliani is setting these deadlines and issuing what are in effect demands and orders. i just think mueller is doing what he's doing on his own time frame, has a huge amount of information at his disposal, is really the guy in charge here.
and there's something -- you know i could be completely wrong in the way this turns out, but from where i sit right now, there's something almost a little satirical, rudy raging at the dying of the light here, and i just don't think there's much to it. >> lisa, no judgment here because a number of us are, but the president is cable addicted. having established that, what are the kind of unique pressures? here he is on vacation, playing golf, as far as we can tell, every day, though our lenses are kept far, far away from his golf course. what are the pressures he is seeing and feeling? >> he's certainly seeing a lot of coverage of the manafort trial, which has not been particularly flattering either for manafort or rick gates or really the campaign. he's seeing what's going on with his former personal lawyer michael cohen and how the pressure is racheting up over there. and he's feeling the pressure of the midterms.
while he claimed a number of victories in the midterms this week, that special election in ohio was awfully, awfully close. we still don't have a conclusive winner. that's a district that trump won by 11. it really is a republican strong hold. it should not have been that close. he's feeling a number of legal and political pressures. but i think what his team is seeing that's making them feel like their strategy may be working, is the polling numbers. they're seeing that the longer they -- as you put it, the longer they delay, the more disapproval of mueller and the investigation seems to rise. but as you pointed out at the beginning of the show, we're only hearing 50% of the story. so while those numbers have been moving a certain way, the big question is what happens once the public starts hearing the other half of the story, do we see those numbers change. polling moves. >> mimi, another associate of roger stone is about to receive or has received a subpoena to come in and talk to the mueller team. this is now a line of
barrel trying to find something. i think he's going on because he keeps uncovering more and more evidence. >> i've wanted for months to see whatever whiteboard they have in his office. >> yes. >> hey, michael, part of your life's work has been studying and writing about foreign affairs. and so here we have russia. remembering this is all about russia's interference in our election. sanctions just put in place against russia. they called it unfriendly. just a quick reminder, with true north as our guide, how weird is the u.s./russia relationship as of right now? >> it's bizarre. i can't think, brian, of another example where you had so much distance between the commander in chief and his senior-most advisers on the subject matter. so in this case, the distance between trump and his top national security officials on how the united states should be
most part, with notable exceptions, some of the senators who traveled to moscow. it's bizarre, brian, i've never seen a divide on this level in our government. >> just thought i would ask. our thanks to all three of you, really appreciate it. coming up for us, as we approach our first break, it's something you don't hear often in a federal courtroom. what the judge had to say after a feisty exchange with prosecutors. there have been a few. and later, president trump has said it a lot, he only hires the best people. however, the list of trump associates with legal problems just keeps getting longer. i'll get it out. "the 11th hour" just getting under way on a thursday night.
it was a good day. >> an attorney for president trump's former campaign chairman paul manafort sounding confident. day eight of the manafort trial. today's testimony focused on charges that manafort lied and committed bank fraud to qualify for bank loans. the more notable moment may have come before any witnesses even took the stand this morning. it was in the form of a rare mea culpa from this judge, who has clashed frequently with the special counsel's team, the government prosecutors. referring to a tense exchange the day before over whether an irs witness should have been allowed to testify after having been allowed to be in court, judge t.s. elliott told the jury, quote, it appears i may well have been wrong. he went on to say, this robe doesn't make me anything other than human. i sometimes make mistakes.
paul manafort, a reminder, facing bank tax fraud charges, charges he denies. this is his first trial as a result of the investigation by mueller's office. with us tonight to talk about it, we're so pleased to have chuck rosenberg back, former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of virginia, who has spent his fair share of time in that very courtroom where the trial is being held. he also happens to be a former senior official with the fbi. and eric tucker is back with us, justice department reporter for the associated press. he was in court for today's proceedings. chuck, i've thought of you so many times because, in plain english, you were u.s. attorney where this trial is taking part. you've had your fair share of time to watch this judge. what do you make of all of it? i've heard straight down the middle reporters say kind of straight up that he has been prejudicial, he has clearly and provably been tougher on the prosecution.
>> you know, brian, i've seen him be tough on the prosecution. i've seen him be tough on defense counsel. but there i think is a better way to do it, right? i mean, if a judge has something she needs to say to counsel, defense or prosecution, she can call them to the bench. she can excuse the jury. she can even yell at us, that happens too. but it should be done in private, because judges have so much authority in their courtroom. and the jury listens carefully to what they say. the concern i have is if he's angry at one side or the other, even if he's right, the fact that he yells at them, berates them, castigates them in front of the jury can tip the scales and the judge has to be so careful never to do that. >> i was going to say, chuck, i've covered my share of proceedings in federal and state courts. and so often have seen a judge say, counsel approach the bench, and kind of covers the microphone and has a little bit of a sidebar discussion. >> and that's happened to me
too. i told a story earlier today where i accidentally, and it wasn't a crime against humanity, came back from lunch with a piece of chewing gum in my mouth and a federal judge in the eastern district of virginia asked me to come to the bench, handed me a tissue and politely and discreetly we took care of the problem. he wasn't happy with me, but like i said it wasn't a crime against humanity. he didn't do it in front of the jury. these judges have to be so careful. the government has no appeal. for the defendant, it's a matter of liberty or even life. the notion that you would put a finger on the scale, even accidently is a big one. >> i'm so glad we finally have something on you. it's really unfair that the judge goes by t.s., but it's ellis, not elliott. that one is on me, i apologize. what do you make of the room, of the dynamic, and the reporters
who have been saying today that he's unmistakably tough on the prosecution, do they have it about right? >> look, there's no question, brian, it was an extraordinary moment for everyone coming into the courtroom this morning for the judge to basically tell the jury to put out of their minds something he in fact had said yesterday and offer a semi apology. the one thing that i think we should definitely not lose sight of, though, is what precipitated this, which is actually a government request last night and early this morning where they said to the judge, respectfully, your honor, if you review the transcript, you actually permitted this witness to be in the courtroom, you are incorrect and as a matter of fact we would actually like for you to alert the jury that you're mistaken. and that's really unusual. and one could read this one document, this one filing from the government, as actually sort of a broader request of the judge to say, there are many
things that the judge has said that hopefully in the government's mind, the government would like to see undone or unwound. >> and chuck, something you just said has me going back to this, especially if you're in your line of work, if you've ever been on jury duty, if you've ever watched the trial, the judge is really your conduit. he's your -- almost your father figure during the proceedings. he turns and addresses members of the jury. he's your go-between. you often see a trial in his or her lens. and so it is critical, i would love to be able to watch the jurors as they visually relate to this judge. >> that's right. and look, for most people serving on a jury, it's probably the only time, brian, they've ever had that experience. they don't know what courtrooms are like, they don't know what prosecutors or defense attorneys are like. they certainly don't know what judge ellis is like. so what he says goes. i mean, not just as a matter of
law but as a matter of fact. and if he's mad at the prosecutor, for instance, then maybe they are, too. and so that's why a judge has to be so very careful. remember, both sides are entitled to a fair trial, not just one, but both sides are entitled to a fair trial. i think judges that remain cognizant of that throughout the proceedings are really doing both sides a favor. look, i like judge ellis. he's a very smart judge. but sometimes he ought to just call balls and strikes and not try and play all nine positions on the field as well. >> and a civics reminder for all our viewers, federal judges have an awesome responsibility. it's why they have to be nominated by the president, approved by the senate, and then they are seated for life. eric, one final note. otherwise, prosecution had a very good day? >> yes. so i would say that today got really back to the meat and potatoes part of this trial. we really saw the building blocks of the fraud, the bank
fraud allegations that make up a significant portion of this indictment. you'll remember, brian, that obviously the last several days have been focused on rather salacious allegations. there's been discussions of extramarital affairs involving rick gates, who is the government's star witness. he had a fairly challenging cross-examination. today there was none of that. this really got to the core of the government's case, and prosecutors really, i think, made some significant inroads in being able to establish that when paul manafort applied repeatedly for mortgages, for loans on his new york properties, he made what appeared to be false statements and in one instance, for instance, he alleged that this property was owner occupied when in fact they found it being listed as a rental. and so right away, manafort had an issue. so yes, i would say today was a fairly good day for the government. >> we are thankful for two of the very best guests to explain all of this as the manafort
trial churns on. gentlemen, thank you both. coming up for us, with a couple of this week's elections yet to be decided, republicans look to november. but do they all see the same thing about now? when "the 11th hour" continues. oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (vo) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles.
do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (vo) ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you.
those tuesday elections. trump-endorsed candidate kris kobach lost half of his already narrow lead today in that kansas gop gubernatorial primary. "the washington post" reports that according to a vote-tallying error, kobach's lead over the incumbent governor jeff colyer is now just 91 votes. kobach acknowledges the lead could change but he intends to start campaigning for november immediately as if he'd won. a reminder, he happens to be secretary of the state of kansas. that means his office would oversee any possible recount. and tonight on television kobach said he would be happy to recuse himself in that event, although he reminded all of us, recounts are county by county affairs. you may recall he led president trump's now-disbanded commission on election fraud.
we are also still following that special election, the ohio 12th congressional district. that race remains too close to call. if you were with us that night watching, steve kornacki's coverage, you understand how that could be. republican troy balderson is leading by less than 1 percentage point. and after republican new york congressman chris collins was arrested on insider trading charges yesterday, now new york's 27th congressional district could be up for grabs. big area of real estate upstate. collins, who pleaded not guilty, says he'll be staying in that seat and his name will be on the ballot come november. so it's a lot to talk about. michael steele, former chairman of the republican national committee, that's why he's smiling, i said "former." and shannon pettypiece, white house correspondent for bloomberg. michael, i'm coming right at you. >> yes. >> if you had your old job, other than looking for a new job, if you had your old job as party chairman, how worried would you be tonight?
>> you see this? >> you had a full head of hair. >> exactly. it would be like that. i would be very concerned at this stage. we are coming out of the summer, you know, doldrums, if you will, where folks don't pay attention to politics and it's a little bit of a wasteland even though you've got primaries and all that going on. the fact of the matter is, from a party perspective, in terms of setting up the november campaign, you want the kind of momentum that's going to energize your base, get those dollars flowing, and really put in place the messaging that you want to bring it home, right? it connects all those pieces. i call it the messenger, the message, and the money. and that combination is one that works to empower the base to go out and deliver that vote. >> shannon? >> i was going to say in this
case, the fact that you have a red district like this that is that close, that the president won by 11 points in 2016, is a real problem. it will impact the money. it will impact the message. and it certainly will impact the messengers around the country who have to make that delivery. >> and forgive me, michael, shannon, pick up right on what michael just said. you've got this barn burner of a race in ohio that should be done and dusted, safe republican district, right into that we have the arrest of collins, 27th district of new york. it can't look good. tell us about the folks you've been talking to. >> well, i mean, within the white house, and within president trump's outer circle, they are certainly aware that this does not look good. it is no shock to anyone that the ohio 12th district, as michael was explaining, if that is up for play, well, there is about 70 other house seats that are up for play, too. and the democrats only need 23.
and it is certainly not lost on the president or anyone in his inner circle of what a democratic-controlled house means to them. it means investigations on everything from russia to the emoluments clause. it means the risk of impeachment which his lawyer rudy giuliani raised today with me, the fact that if there is something referred to mueller in a democratic house, that probably means impeachment. the president is very aware of this. what they're going to do is still a question, because there's still a debate about whether or not the president is the greatest tool in the republicans' toolbox, or, you know, their worst enemy. >> michael, as bumper stickers go, if you had to design the gop bumper sticker to be used universally around the country in all 435 districts for the midterms, what would your terse message be to the voter? >> who, me? >> oh, man. you're on fire tonight. >> that would be it.
because that sums up the state of the party right now, a party that has not really defined its relationship with the american people. it has clearly defined and continues to define its relationship with the president. and that is the problem. this has got to be about how the american people view -- now, look, you don't have to go back that far in history, brian, to understand what this election looks like. it looks like 2006 in many respects. it's got elements of 2008 to it. it's got all of these pieces from the past where the party has dropped the ball, where it has not clearly defined itself with the american people or has defined itself in a way that the american people summarily reject. i said in 2006, running for the united states state, that it was like running with a scarlet letter "r" on your chest, and it was. and we took a big drubbing. that scarlet letter "r" is back
on our chests and like the american flag in a time of crisis it's upside down. >> we're going to have all these republicans on these ballots, are they all kind of ad libbing their association with the guy at the top of the ticket for republicans, being a part of the trump era gop? >> i mean, they're really in a difficult situation. because they need that trump base as a republican, you need that trump base to turn out. but that's not going to be enough to get you to beat the democrat on the ticket. you also need to get moderates and independents as well. i mean, that's what everybody across the country is struggling with. and i mean, to this point michael was just making about 2006, i hear a number of people referencing that. and with this indictment of chris collins, it again looks more like 2006 because if you
remember then, there was this wave of scandal seats that opened up, that people were able to move into. and there is a sense there's going to be more of these scandals bubbling. now this party is not just associated with trump, but people's questions or this taint in their mind about corruption and concerns about what's going on in the republican party. >> we'll have you both back to talk about this very same thing with our great thanks. michael steele, shannon pettypiece, we appreciate you both coming on. as our guests just mentioned, 12 years ago democrats accused republicans of this culture of corruption and took over congress. why one conservative said today this is the age of corruption and cruelty. that when we come back.
>> that got our attention today. corruption and cruelty. that's the conservative author and radio talk show host charlie sykes, a friend of this broadcast, coming up with those two words that, again, he predicts will define this administration and this era at a point where we're able to look at it in the rearview mirror. one illustration of this era was posted on twitter by aaron blake, senior political reporter over at "the washington post." he wrote the following. quote, list of people charged with and pleading to crimes. trump's second campaign manager. trump's deputy campaign manager. trump's national security adviser. trump's foreign policy adviser. trump's first campaign manager, battery charges later dropped. trump's first congressional endorser. for all of it let's bring in walter isaacson into our conversation. a distinguished fellow of the aspen institute, if you ask me
he's a distinguished person of any kind. biographer of franklin, einstein, kissinger, jobs, and da vinci and professor of history at tulane in his spare time. welcome back to our studio. what do you make of his choice of those who words, corruption and cruelty? >> they're very simple words. they're very true. and they go to the heart of what's going to be a problem for this administration, because it is a lot of corruption. just people at the trough, for money, simple corruption. and it gets -- you know, sleazy, congressmen on the white house lawn, getting phone calls to dump stock when he had insider information. and then you have cruelty, a country that is intentionally cruel to people. and just character, a lot of people lying to us. >> our friend steve schmidt sees
this as a lack of rigor, a lack of standards in all tiers of the trump operation. >> you know, when you set out to destroy norms, norms get destroyed. we have norms in our society, which is, you know, you don't sit at the trough trying to take money and being greedy and being corrupt. that's why people voted for trump at first, they thought he was going to drain the swamp. the clintons got in trouble because they seemed greedy and there was a taint of corruption to the clinton foundation. so a lot of people voted against her, voted for trump. and you have him now and his whole administration, his family, trying to make money off of the presidency. and then you have that unnecessary bullying and cruelty. and here is what i think -- i think it will get to the heart of the problem because americans deep down inside, they're not cruel people. we're not corrupt people.
and we try to at least feel we have some character. and so i think most americans, you know, certainly most republicans aren't cruel, they aren't corrupt, yet they're watching this happen. and you're starting to see the support seep away, i think. >> we're very proud of calling ourselves the most generous nation on earth, in fact. 44 years ago today, richard nixon lifted off the south lawn for the last time. >> the helicopter. >> yes, and gerald ford talked about our long national nightmare. do you see, do you entertain any echoes of anything nixonian in what we're witnessing now, as a historian yourself? >> oh, absolutely. i mean, history never repeats itself, but as you know, twain said it rhymes, or perhaps you can say it echoes. the corruption now is sort of different.
it's sort of money grubbing, greedy corruption, to make money, emoluments as they call it, to make money out of their office. you see the same type of coverups and, frankly, lying. when somebody who is the president of the united states says things that aren't true, that should still unnerve us a bit. and trump is much different from nixon, he kind of does it in public, which is try to obstruct justice. but it's still very unnerving that you're breaking down the rule of law, especially when republicans had always been strong about the rule of law, always been strong against corruption, always, you know, been strong on character, which is the most important issue when we select our leaders. >> do you think, in 30 seconds or less, seeing this stuff in plain sight, is harder for us to discern in the public realm when the president tweets something that he couldn't possibly have meant that. well, of course he does. >> that's a really good point, it's hiding in plain sight. it's a coverup that's not a secret coverup.
it's being done in plain sight. and it's weird how our own immune system to this types of thing gets a little bit jangled when people do it in plain sight. >> thank you. great to see you. those parents watching, send your kids to tulane, they'll get to sit in his class. walter isaacson with us here in new york. coming up, there has been a big change in the death toll. would you believe over a thousand dead in puerto rico as a result of hurricane maria? it certainly now matches what the people on the ground there have been seeing and saying. we'll explain when we come back.
you didn't cut off the light. the teachers, they would call us the energy patrol. so they would be like, here they come, turn off your lights! those three young ladies were teaching the whole school about energy efficiency. we actually saved $50,000. and that's just one school, two semesters, three girls. together, we're building a better california. if you look at a real catastrophe like katrina and you look at the tremendous hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people that died, and you look at what happened here with really a storm that was just totally overpowering, nobody's
ever seen anything like this, what is your death count as of this moment? 17? >> 16, 17. >> 16 people certified. 16 people versus in the thousands. you can be very proud of all of your people, all of our people working together. 16 versus literally thousands of people. >> that was the president early on, eager to diminish a humanitarian crisis. eager to point out that while still sad, the loss of life in puerto rico was relatively minimal. well, the new death count by the government of puerto rico has leaked out today. of course, it's staggeringly high. over 1,400 people are now believed to have lost their lives as a result of hurricane maria. way higher than the official death toll of 64 lives lost. how else to explain a minimal loss of life when so many towns and villages and homes were cut off, not just in terms of
electric power but completely cut off from the rest of the island, from humanity. in the months since the storm, fema has admitted to being under-prepared for the storm. power, would you believe, still not completely restored on the island. one in ten health centers still running on generators. just getting street lights up and on and operating was a huge struggle especially in parts of san juan. after the storm, some in the media wondered aloud if the president initially understood that puerto rico was a u.s. territory and that all puerto ricans are u.s. citizens. he was eager to rate his own administration's response as 10 out of 10. yes, there have been other death toll estimates, one as high as 4,000. but this new government estimate of 1,400 seems closer to the truth given the size and scope of this disaster. but this is interesting.
asked about the government's new death toll estimates, the mayor in puerto rico rolando ortiz told nbc news the updated figure still doesn't match what he lived. "the numbers from the government seem low to me still but the reality is that the people who died died and it's painful because those are human lives, but this is evidence of the government's inability to tell the truth. that's the most terrifying news." another break for our broadcast and coming up, it's something the president has campaigned against loudly. today it came to the rescue of his own in-laws when we continue.
from the very beginning ... it was always our singular focus, a distinct determination. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. specialists focused on treating cancer. using advanced technologies. and more precise treatments than before. working as hard as we can- doing all that we can- for everyone who walks through our doors. this is cancer treatment centers of america. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. treating cancer isn't one thing we do. it's the only thing we do. expert medicine works here.
learn more at cancercenter.com cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now.
parents donald trump's in-laws, gaining their u.s. citizenship today. remember the first lady herself has only been a citizen for 12 years since '06. born and raised in slovenia, our first ever naturalized citizen first lady. her parents' immigration lawyer admitted today that chain migration is the dirtier term for what happened today. "the new york times" was more direct. their headline reads "melania trump's parents become u.s. citizens using chain migration trump hates." >> chain migration is bringing in many, many people and often it doesn't work out very well. those many people are not doing us right. >> so to recap america has two new citizens tonight, the parents of our first lady who also happens to be an immigrant. though most around him believe the president's campaign around
Brian Williams examines the day's top political stories and current political-campaign news.
Brian Williams examines the day's top political stories and current political-campaign news.
elections is something that actually the fcc should be looking into. they're preparing for impeachment and they're trying to win hearts and minds. >> ken, they did so, i imagine not being a lawyer but a layperson, at some professional peril. listen to what mimi rocah said. "i suppose it could attract some attention, american bar association type stuff." does the base need that much bolstering that these guys have to dog and pony it across xm radio? >> brian, it's very much a part of the pr strategy that the president himself has led and set the tone for, and it just shows frankly how far rudy giuliani has come from when he first started on the legal team and famously was sort of chastised by donald trump for not having his facts straight on the stormy daniels payment, the $130,000 hush payment to stormy daniels. now you see him very much channeling the president, talking about a witch hunt, suggesting that there needs to be an investigation of mueller's
team, and we do see that strategy having some effect. if you look at the polls. it's not just the base, it is numbers rising of folks who are skeptical of robert mueller and therefore might be less inclined to accept the results of his investigation. that i think rather -- although it may be partly what frank was saying, a preparation for impeachment, but it's certainly also a preparation to try to undermine any adverse findings that robert mueller might come with in his report. >> annie, have we ever seen anything like this? you've got the fox news involvement with sean hannity handing off to two lawyers for the president of the united states. >> i mean, it goes -- it speaks more to the odd role that hannity is playing too, that hannity is a white house adviser, and the interchangeability between -- i mean, it's one thing to have these guys on his show as guests and another thing to actually hand over the reins as hosts, ac taking calls from listeners.
the lines are blurred between all the roles here with lawyers playing the role of spokespeople, tv hosts playing the roles of advisers. they're all on the same team at the bottom line, and that's what we saw here today. >> let's not forget sean hannity, michael cohen client. hey, frank, let's talk about the signs that things are tightening around roger stone and tell us where you expect this to be going. >> roger stone is going to turn out to be a bigger fish than many people realize. we've all been focused on manafort and the trump tower meeting and gates, but while we're focused on that mueller's been ratcheting up the effort on stone. and why is he doing that? because i believe that stone can put the crime in the collusion concept. by that i mean the mysterious connections between stone, wikileaks, julian assange, and the hacking into the dnc and the release of those e-mails. mueller is focused on that like
ken, given what you know and talk about what stone has called his 40-year friendship with donald trump and the kind of damage a guy like that can do. >> yes, i also think that roger stone, frank used the phrase, "trip into," roger stone has made a long career of sort of exaggerating this role and his significance in some of these episodes of dark arts and dirty tricks. all the way back from watergate, where he was just the tiniest bit player in the nixon operation but has managed to make a whole career out of this sort of personification of himself as a dirty trickster. and i think this ends up being a little bit of careful what you wish for. it's true that he was sort of a bit player by the end on the trump campaign but that he also continued to try to insert himself in ways that were sort of at the margeins and that he did interact with an internet
persona, this guccifer 2, that mueller one of his recent indictments has revealed was in fact operated by russian intelligence. so he sort of by almost by accident became the very sort of character that he portray himself as and ultimately be his undoing. >> annie, i have been reading and following you all day. i need you to perform a service on a friday night in august, we send them off into the good night knowing everything there is to know on all of the stories out there. that's where you come in and you get to tell our audience everything they need to know about this new book by omarosa including but not limited to a scene where the president is eating paper and the fact that she gave an npr interview apparently that conflicted with a tale in the book about the president's alleged use of the n word. have at it. >> it's a lot. so omarosa was fired from the white house last december, and
she -- she gets the prize for being the first tell-all memoir out of this white house. and it's a weird one because there's questions about omarosa's credibility, what is true. her allegations are serious. she claims first out of the gate that she calls the president a bigot, a misogynist, all the bad words she says that he used the n word and she has tapes to prove it. this is where she couldn't rah dictated herself. in the book she writes that she has not heard the tape of him calling the n word but she has confirmed its existence. in the npr interview she claims that she heard him say it herself. i think that's what it is. she claims that he ate a piece of paper when michael cohen i think was walking into the office to hide it from his lawyer, he ate it. she claims that ivanka trump, the first daughter, was responsible for ordering up the list of leakers in the white house who would be fired. this like apparently, ivanka tries to stay -- or project a
persona who was above the fray and cares about women's empowerment only. omarosa portrays her as cutthroat as her father. as her father in a wig. so the allegations are tremendous. where this falls on the credibility matrix with michael wolff's book suffered from some questions of credabilities and what's real and what's not. how do you judge omarosa's book is a big question. but she certainly has a nice runway on a nice august weekend to have the news cycle to herself. >> all the kids watching, don't eat paper if you're seeing this at home. this from the generation that thought it was a good idea to eat paste in school. can't thank you guys enough 37 frank figliuzzi, ken vogel, annie karni, our omarosa correspondent for just tonight. thank you all so very much. have a great weekend. coming up for us, what we think might have been happening behind the scenes during that lengthy and unusual delay in the manafort trial today.
and later, preparing for a tense weekend in charlottesville on of course the one-year anniversary of that fatal confrontation. and then in washington, where white supremacists and counterprotesters will square off, some of them within earshot of the white house. "the 11th hour" on a friday night just getting under way. booking a flight at the last minute doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go... for the best savings on flights,
go to priceline.
provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it's the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome. it was a mysterious and rather dramatic ending to week two of the manafort trial with the president's name coming up in court again today. before the day could even begin proceedings came to a screeching halt. with the jury out of the room the judge and attorneys spent much of the day huddled in private conversation and in recess officially with no explanation as to why. transcript of what went on has been placed under seal. at the same time the prosecution is once again asking the judge to revisit comments he made in front of this jury. this time they were unhappy with
what the judge said while prosecutors were discussing a loan that they say manafort fraudulently applied for but did not receive. in the motion they argued, "the court's statement that the government might want to spend time on a loan that was granted misrepresents the law regarding bank fraud conspiracy, improperly conveys the court's opinion of the facts, and is likely to confuse and mislead the jury." well, when witnesses finally did take the stand, jurors were told that manafort may have used his position to dangle possible trump administration jobs including some big ones in exchange for massive bank loans. with us to talk about all of it we welcome back danny cevallos, a veteran criminal defense attorney, and we welcome chad day, an investigative reporter for the associated press. he was inside court today for all of these proceedings, or lack thereof. danny, i heard chuck rosenberg on this network earlier tonight. he was u.s. attorney for this district at one time. he was theorizing that this
could be one juror who came in today and said your honor, i looked at a device, i saw television coverage, someone talked to me, i talked to another juror, which would still take a lot of time to churn through, correct? >> absolutely. could have been a juro juror ri on the subway or seeing a newspaper or glancing at if or a juror overhearing another juror. but either way, this is a process that takes a long time. they have to take the juror aside in the presence of counsel, remove the other jurors, ask that juror, hey, what did you find out? and a lot of the time gets burned up as the attorneys huddle in their corners and decide not really so much whether the jury did or didn't do something but how can we spin this to our side's favor? do we like this juror? because there may not even be a consensus on the team whether they like that juror. one attorney for the defense may say that's a good juror for us and the other might say no, we've got to get him out of there. and that's why this can take so long, because it is a lot of back and forth just because a
juror might have flipped on the tv at the wrong time. >> so chad, you were there. what was it like -- again, we don't know what it is you witnessed. but what was it like witnessing it? >> right, so we expected the prosecution to come in and rest their case today. instead we were greeted by a 20-minute huddle between the attorneys and judge ellis and like you say there wasn't any kind of explanation for why there was a delay. he recessed until the afternoon. we did get a couple of things to kind of back up what danny is saying is that the judge at one point actually left the courtroom toward the jury room and then later on when the proceedings actually started he admonished the jury several times to not discuss the case amongst themselves, not discuss the case with anyone else. and even kind of cracked a joke about don't even comment on the attire of the witnesses. so i think all signs are kind of pointing toward thbing some kind of jury issue. but like you say, the transcript is under seal and we won't know for some time. >> danny, we get into your line of work. the defense goes to work.
they're under no obligation to call any witnesses. what work do they have to do, and what do you think they'll do? >> many times you're right, many times the defense calls no witnesses at all, they rely on just attacking the government's case. in a case like this there are not many defenses in such a paper-intensive case. but here's what the manafort team needs to do. they need to focus on gates, that the orders came from gates. they need to focus on that which the bank employees, when they testify, they don't have a dog in the fight, they're not biased witnesses, they're not cooperating witnesses. some of them, they just have to -- defense has to point out that this isn't necessarily fraud. he may have put it this way and air bnb has another policy that allows this and that's not really inaccurate and at least if it is inaccurate it's not intentionally so. so the defense has a lot of work to do because this has been a paper-intensive quas with a cooperating witness who got up there on the stand and for all his sins pointed out the
defendant and said that's my former cohort, he done did it. >> hey, chad, i love covering trials. if only to test all the theories that people have. like among journalists and lawyers you often hear people say if you watch the jury, a jury that has just cleared the defendant is going to come in and make strong eye contact. they're proud of what they did. a jury that has just nicked him or her, found them guilty-s going it avert their eyes. stuff like that that we journalists watch the jury box for. having said that, what's the dynamic with the jury which i know you've been watching sitting there? >> right. so i know i've been in the trial the last two weeks. the jury seems to really have been paying attention. there have been some times where the subject matter's gotten quite dry. we have seen the jury kind of maybe not nod off but not be paying thatch attention. rick gates' testimony definitely got their attention and i think they've really been keying in on a discussion of the lavish lifestyle and also really following the tax case.
the prosecution put on an expert witness who was testifying about how much money, $16 million that he says should have been reported on his taxes, and i could tell that they were taking notes and they were keeping up with that testimony and so it's a complex case but these are really kind of simple charges. did you report offshore bank accounts on your taxes? did you pay your taxes, pay enough taxes that you were supposed to, and did you lie to get loans? so i think that so far they've really been keeping one what the prosecution's been putting in front of them. >> $16 million on a tax return, sooner or later you're talking about large amounts that might attract? attention. can't thank you gentlemen enough after a long week, after a long final day of that week, and this trial which is stretching into what, week three. danny cevallos, chad day, really appreciate it, gentlemen, thanks. coming up, security tied around the university of virginia and the streets of that town as well. one year after the violent protests with white supremacists. we are live in charlottesville. we'll have that when we
continue.
ahead of this anniversary. many streets are closed. no protest permits were granted by the city. and this weekend w5shd washashi d.c. is bracing for a march organized by that same alt-right group. that march plus several counterprotests expected in d.c. on sunday. some of it in lafayette park right across from the white house. with us from charlottesville virginia is our own cal perry. there is really no other question except to ask you what it feels like tonight. that is, we're all imagining it feels quite haunting. >> yeah, very much so. you can see the outer edge of the security cordon behind me. it is not subtle at all. it is not designed to be subtle. it is designed to send a message that people should stay out of charlottesville. the eight to nine blocks in front of me are going to be completely shut down. no vehicle traffic. pedestrians only. but by way of geography, listen, charlottesville is a blue dot in
a sea of red. this is a liberal town in a conservative part of the country, in a conservative part of the state of virginia. and so for that reason you have a statue of robert e. lee just 500 meters in front of me that was supposed to be gone by now because in the heated aftermath of what 457d a year ago of course it was decided that statue was going to be removed. but not so easy when you start hearing from other voices, especially around the state of virginia. there's a long list, brian, of prohibited items that you're not going to be able to bring into this area. hairspray, bottles. but you can bring guns. people are open carrying tonight in downtown charlottesville. they're making that point, that it is their second amendment right to carry weapons. but a lot of people are questioning the police and why it is that that's allowed to happen at the state assembly line. all of that is to paint a picture that charlottesville is a microcosm of america and all of issues that this town is going through, that it has not healed from, is what america is talking about. as we stood outside, brian, today in this area, a number of people asked us to leave. they said the media is not helping, we don't like the
media. they're not allowing this town to heal. and it's a town that just has not healed. so to answer the question that you started with, i think the police have done a great job in sending that message that they understand they did not handle the situation well a year ago. the mayor is gone. the police chief is gone. so they are letting people know if you you want to protest you are going to do it in washington, d.c., homefully not here in charlottesville, brian. >> thank you for that report on that summation from charlottesville, virginia. cal perry on the scene for us tonight. with us to talk about all of it and where we've been and where we're headed clarence page, veteran journalist and columnist for the "chicago tribune," and jon meacham is with us, pulitzer prize-winning author and historian. importantly his latest book is called "the soul of america: the battle for our better angels." paging our better angels. hey, john, what is the year later damage assessment from charlottesville? >> well, there's obviously the
memory of heather heyer who stood as civil rights activists did throughout the long and tragic jim crow era, stood for what we should be. not necessarily what we are all the time. and so i think that's perhaps one of the most important things to take a moment and realize that someone gave her life trying to protest against the neo-nazis and the klansmen who gathered there a year ago. i think that when the history of this era is written the president's reaction to charlottesville, the events of august 11th and august 12th, will loom pretty large because that was the first moment -- maybe not the first bay significant moment where the president seemed to have a very hard time figuring out whether he stood with people like heather heyer, who argued that we had to be part of our -- and side with our better angels, or did he stand with david duke and others. and david duke said that weekend
in charlottesville a year ago that this is why we elected donald trump, was to protect statues like the robert e. lee statue, to protest in the way they protested, and when the president of the united states abdicates his moral leadership so decisively and so decidedly, then that set a tone for the ensuing year, and we're still living with those aftershocks. >> clarence, you get to write history in real time on a daily basis. is it possible that when we look back at 2018 part of the subplot is going to be we had both racism and activism both as concurrent growth stocks? >> that's a good way to look at it because it was quite a clash, quite a wake-up call i would say that many of us had a year ago that race relations had gotten this bad only a few years after the optimism that sprung up from barack obama's successful pain. remember that phrase post-racial society, brian? i never used it but a lot of
people were questioning whether that would happen. and i realized how much my spirits had been lifted and my optimism had gotten inflated until the tragedy hit in charlottesville a year ago. i have to say as one who remembers the summer of kent state 1970, four college students killed in kent state, ohio on campus while protesting the war, killed by national guard troops, another situation that didn't need to happen, people weren't ready for things to escalate like that. the same kind of thing happened in charlottesville, where the police really underestimated what would happen when the protesters -- i should say the unite the right, far right-wing factions, clashed with antifa and led to violence there in the streets. they weren't prepared for that. now charlottesville has got hundreds of state troopers who are at the ready. they're in a state of emergency already. here in washington that's a little more accustomed tond this kind of disruption, things are
pretty quiet like august in washington usually is. but i expect they're going to be a lot noisier between now and sunday. >> charlottesville is known for anything but being home to one of the great universities in our country. just part of the conversation. both gentlemen, clarence page and jon meacham, have agreed to stay with us over this break. we'll take this break. and when we come back, coinci coinciding with the start of the nfl preseason, the president renews his dispute with protesting pro football players and further adds most don't even understand why they're outraged. we'll talk about that on the other side.
the national anthem. or you shouldn't be playing. you shouldn't be there. maybe you shouldn't be in the country. you have to stand proudly for the national anthem. >> well, pro football is back. preseason at least under way. and someone must have alerted the president bright and early this morning president trump shared these thoughts. "the nfl players are at it again, taking a knee when they should be standing proudly for the national anthem. numerous players from different teams wanted to show their outrage at something that most of them are unable to define." he adds, "be happy. be cool." and this warning. "stand proudly for your national anthem or be suspended without pay. league policy is still unclear on how to address those players who protest." but as eli stokels of the l.a. times reports, "the new nfl season brings trump an opportunity to heighten attention to his ongoing feud with the african-american players, a wedge issue that animates a number of his white voters heading into the november midterm election."
still with us, clarence page and jon meacham. jon, i've got to say i missed football. i was excited for last night. my beloved giants didn't skip a beat. they lost just so we wouldn't feel any shock overt end of last season and the beginning of this season because they care about their fans. and then this happens. >> we need certitude in these times. >> what is going on with the president and the national football league? other than the league's kaleidoscopic inability to deal with this challenge from the president. >> i think the piece you just read from is exactly right. it's an elective feud that the president has undertaken, an elective battle, and he's -- this is absolutely for the base. it's kind of 101 old southern strategy. i say that as a southerner. but everybody knows what he's talking about when he talks about these people shouldn't be
in the country. and it works with the base. i think. that 30%, 35% or so of the country that seems to be inclined to follow trump anywhere, including into a sphere of our civic life that a lot of us think should be above and beyond politics. but if it becomes about politics it becomes about players who are exercising their first amendment rights. an amendment written by a man who lived not far from charlottesville, james madison. so i think it's pure old-fashioned unattractive and divisive politics and it's the kind of thing where the president's playing to fear, not to hope, and he's going to pay a high price for this if not in the short term certainly in the long term of history. >> clarence, fox news again today proved it's always an interesting place. i heard dana perino, and i'll paraphrase her, say that -- questioned a rich white guy asking about freedom of speech
of rich black guys. and then we're just coming off the following from laura ingraham, well known to many in the media world, former supreme court clerk, long-time lawyer. she said this, and we've attached her attempt at a cleanup the next night. >> in some parts of the country it does seem like the america we know and love doesn't exist anymore. massive demographic changes have been foisted upon the american people. and they're changes that none of us ever voted for and most of us don't like. now, much of this is related to both illegal and in some cases legal immigration that of course progressives love. >> the purpose of last night's angle was to point out that the rule of law, meaning secure borders, is something that used to bind our country together. and despite what some may be contending, i made explicitly clear that my commentary had nothing to do with race or
ethnicity. >> all right, clarence page. what do you think's going ton here? >> let me say i've known laura ingraham for a couple of decades since she was fresh off the campus and i advised her quite some time ago that one ann coulter is enough and she doesn't really make a good look for her to come off as a far right anti-immigrant xenophobe, if you will. i think it's kind of a ratings grab just like i think donald trump's little fiasco with the nfl started out as an attention getter, even if it meant stepping on his own message. he has some more important issues going on at the time. but he becomes obsessed when people defy him in anything. and i think this whole nfl protest which began with kaepernick would have faded away on its own had trump not kept pumping it up like he's still pumping it up. and it's not helping him.
it's not helping the nfl. i don't think it's helping his numbers really because what's his base? largely white males who love the nfl. i don't think he's going to change their minds in any kind of a way that's going help him at all. but this is the kind of fiasco that we have stumbled into. >> well, gentlemen, this is why we have smart guys like you on the broadcast at times like this. our friends clarence page and jon meacham. jon, please keep those better angels on speed dial, will you? a lonely nation is asking. >> it's in our contacts. >> all right. thank you both. really appreciate it. have a good weekend. and coming up for us, does the u.s. military need a sixth branch? can the nation afford it right now? what else is out there that may compete more urgently for our time and attention right now tonight and around the world? ahh... summer is coming. and it's time to get outside.
pack in even more adventure with audible. with the largest selection of audiobooks. audible lets you follow plot twists off the beaten track. or discover magic when you hit the open road. with the free audible app, your stories go wherever you do. and for just $14.95 a month you get a credit, good for any audiobook. if you don't like it exchange it any time. no questions asked. you can also roll your credits to the next month if you don't use them. so take audible with you this summer... on the road... on the trail... or to the beach. start a 30-day trial and your first audiobook is free. cancel anytime, and your books are yours to keep forever. no matter where you go this summer make it better with audible. text summer17 to 500500 to start listening today.
i had a great meeting with putin. we discussed everything. i had a great meeting. we got along really well. by the way, that's a good thing, not a bad thing. >> just one week ago president trump was telling supporters just how good his relationship with putin of russia is. now facing more sanctions from the u.s. russian leaders are striking a decidedly different tone. according to reuters, the prime minister dimitri medvedev offered this warning. if the new sanctions impact russian banks, "it would be possible to clearly call it a declaration of economic war and it would be necessary to react to this war economically, politically or if needed by other means." at least that sounds closer to normal over the years. with us tonight retired
four-star army general barry mccaffrey, former battlefield commander in the persian gulf, former drug czar for this country, and these days an msnbc military analyst. general, take them on one at a time, please. and that is, what are russia and north korea and their leaders trying to game from this country? >> well, i think they've got a clearer understanding of their own objectives, which i think we lack in the united states. by the way, i'm still very much convinced and confident in secretary jim mattis at d.o.d. and mike pompeo is an extremely capable person over at state, and gina haspel's very professional, knowledgeable person. and secretary of the treasury is first-rate. having said that, the president's reaction to many of these situations, i hate to say this unkindly, borders on fantasy. when it comes to north korea,
they're still producing fissile material. they're still producing their icbms, which are not yet fully tested. there is zero chance they're going to denuclearize. they're trying to escape sanctions. they're trying to get us out of south korea. and to some extent the president's public rhetoric is helping them. that's a problem. when it comes to the russians this statement by medvedev was very unsettling. one thing we shouldn't do is overstate the threat from russia. they've got a lot of nukes, a lot of oil. a minor strategic force in terms of naval power, air power. an army that is not a significant threat to western europe. it is to the baltic states, poland. you know, the ukraine. is they're batting way above their weight average. i remind people that the economy of russia is less than that of italy, less than that of
california. this is not a major player. it's run by -- by the way, the roar of that crowd behind the president is what unsettles me. >> that is something new for our times. >> this guy's a thug. he murders journalists, he murders the opposition, he murders people overseas. he has eliminated most of the democratic beginnings in the russian federation. he's a bad guy. >> general, i've. wanting to ask you about this space force idea. of course we already have the u.s. air force space command which is a large part of the u.s. air force with a task and a mission. what do you make of the space force notion and its chance at success? >> well, look, the threat is real, particularly from the chinese and the russians. but the threshold to threaten our communications satellites is pretty low. i mean, a modest country can build an attack capability. we're spending a lot of money
right now and a lot of science on trying to harden it and protect it. space operations is baked into every service. the army can't ornament -- smart weapons don't work without space communications. so the space force concept is a separate service is one of those intellectually attractive ideas widely debated that's a thoroughly stupid idea. i don't think it's going to get fundsed by congress. would be a 10 to 15-year struggle to disentangle every one of those elements and stick it under a new service with new uniforms. civilian secretary, a new chief and -- i don't think it's going to happen. but it's not a very good idea. it's an organizational fix to a functional challenge that i think mattis is addressing right now minus new legislation. >> give us your one-minute summation of this president's
behavior he. and i've heard you put it this way. what if he were a combatant commander in the military? >> i said actually a battalion commander. over at fort bening all day today with these unbelievable experienced war fighters now that are running the army, air force, navy, marines, coasties. the president is -- personally, brian, i've been involved with three white houses fairly closely. i've got a lot of years now doing with business, 15 years. i've been in civil government. i've never seen this level of illogical behavior, anger, impulsiveness, rudeness to the international leadership, never mind his domestic opposition. this is not the correct behavior for a senior executive at any lefshl level, never mind president of the united states. >> strong words from an experienced man. general, always a pleasure to have you on. barry mccaffrey with us on a
friday night. coming up, we remember a friend of ours, a patriot and a warrior and a scholar and an enemy of terrorists everywhere. when we come back. from the very beginning ... it was always our singular focus, a distinct determination. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. specialists focused on treating cancer. using advanced technologies. and more precise treatments than before. working as hard as we can- doing all that we can- for everyone who walks through our doors. this is cancer treatment centers of america. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. treating cancer isn't one thing we do. it's the only thing we do.
expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now.
within his own government, sheehan became frustrated at the lack of action. in looking back on his life as a soldier, statesman, and scholar "the new york times" this week quoted sheehan as asking his colleagues at the time, what is it going to take to get them to hit al qaeda? does al qaeda have to attack the pentagon? of course that was just one of the targets on 9/11 and sheehan helped secure the other, new york city. he ran the then brand new nypd counterterrorism bureau, and he turned it into a world class organization in its field, rivaling federal agencies. mike was born and raised in new jersey. i always thought the reason we got along so well was we shared an exit and neighboring towns. we both grew up just off exit 117 of the garden state parkway. 114 if you want to go the back way. mike left the jersey shore for west point, then ranger school, then special forces as a green beret, where one hostage rescue
mission got the attention of the new york papers. he later earned two masters degrees. he was chief of counterterrorism at the state department. he oversaw special operations at the pentagon and peacekeeping at the u.n., which he was proud of. mike sheehan, our friend and former colleague, was 63 years old. he fought multiple myeloma as hard as he fought terrorism during his lifetime. we of course send along our condolences to his family. that is our broadcast for this friday night and for this week. thank you so very much for being here with us. have a good weekend, and good night for all of us here at nbc news headquarters in new york. i'm dara brown in new york. we're following breaking news out of seattle where a small commuter plane carrying no passengers crashed after a so-called unauthorized takeoff from seattle's airport.
Exploring issues that affect leaders in the U.S. and around the globe.
penalties are even higher, the evidence is even more volume nous, or will he cut his losses, cut a deal and tell what he knows if anything about potential collusion between donald trump and the russian election interference effort? >> let me bring in the panel now. i want to get to my legal experts, more of my legal experts. by the way, a little more breaking news, the cohen hearing is officially over. sentencing is scheduled for december 12th for his guilty plea at 11:00 a.m. he's out on $500,000 bail which was co-signed by his wife and a second person. we're going to go there. but donald fryman is is on air force one on his way to west virginia to prepare for a rally for the west virginia senate race. how is he feeling? >> we think he's emotionally and politically in as much of a corner psychologically as he's been since he's become president of the united states. he's worked very hard to get at
least some n. some polls his popularity polls up, get him a sense of confidence. he's going to west virginia tonight which is a state that gave him -- >> i think it might be -- >> the two coal states. it was wyoming and west virginia. he's kind of going to his mountain retreat. >> yes. >> where the citadel, the psychological citadel exists, where he's going to go before this rally and he's i'm guessing going to denounce mueller. he's going to denounce the thugs. he's going to denounce brennan. he's going to denounce the deep state. he's going to do all of those greatest hits of his core that will try to buck him up. but even donald trump, as he's speaking in front of that cheering crowd in charleston, has got to be thinking that the walls are closing in. one other quick point. everybody says robert mueller is not a political prosecutor. but he's a psychological prosecut prosecutor. and what he's going to donald trump psychologically as he works his way from the outside in and from the bottom up is
nothing short of torturous to this man. >> and he had some tough times in the white house but probably nothing like this as a staffer where this has got to be rattling to the staff. it's admitted felon and convicted felon on the same day. >> it's very rattling to the staff. in particular anybody who in the campaign may zhsomehow have interacted with michael cohen or had a working relationship with paul manafort. paul was largely tried on his own former business dealings. his next trial of course is going to be more aligned with what's been talked about in this russian investigation. i think if you're a staffer who's been active in this campaign during this period where cohen was active and manafort was active you're wondering what particularly cohen, what does this mean for me. >> we've got live pictures here, we're seeing -- this appears to be new york city. we're i think preparing to see michael cohen leave the building. yooij, i know we're going to get an official statement from the
trump legal team. but i think the big question, is he going to defend manafort? does he end up trying to dangle a pardon and does that matter? >> i think he'll defend manafort if he believes manafort's still going to protect him. we have new supporting that cohen said that his actions were at the direction of the candidate. he did not name the candidate. but it's the candidate. and so we know that trump was supposedly afraid that cohen was going to turn on him. and if that is what ended up happening we can see him turning on cohen and we can expect many among his base, not all trump supporters, to go in the direction of the -- >> courthouse to courthouse here. this is donald trump's presidency right now. a new york courthouse and an alexandria, virginia courthouse. >> on the cohen manafort sort of side by side. you can see this president based on what we know about him to look at manafort, who didn't put up a defense, who sat there stone-faced, took it. >> up from's going to like that. >> and trump's going to say he
looked strong, this whole case is a fraud, he shouldn't be up for these charges, whereas cohen looks like a rat today and he looks weak and he's in the courthouse emotional. i think that will play into how donald trump reacts. >> paul manafort playing not for a hung jury, for a pardon. and he's kichbconsistently play that role. >> let me go to two of my legal experts here. gene rossi, former u.s. attorney in virginia. you got this conviction as the prosecutor. do you -- how open would you be if manafort says could we cut a deal? >> i would take it in a heartbeat. and i've had this happen -- yes, i would. and i'll tell you why. mr. manafort is not a good man. he's now a greedy and convicted man. and having said all that, as a
prosecutor you want cooperation. and i've had times where somebody went to trial and they were found guilty or they pleaded guilty during trial. i always wanted cooperation. number one. and number two, if he cooperates he's going to waive all appeals. i want to do a shout out to one of my old bosses, chuck rosenberg. we don't like appellate work. trial attorneys don't like appellate work. and chuck will agree with me. if you get a person to cooperate, they will waive all appeals, and that is a big deal. just ask the trial team for governor bob mcdonnell, the prosecutors there. if mcdonald had cooperated after his conviction, they wouldn't have that supreme court case. so yes, i would take cooperation in a heartbeat on this type of case. now, if you have a violent gang member or a serial murderer, i prosecuted a guy who killed 35 people, i don't want his cooperation. i want him in prison. so yes, i would accept his cooperation.
but it's not -- >> all right, gene. let me go to your boss. your former boss here. chuck rosenberg. how much you know you're going to put manafort on trial again in the district. you know he's going on trial again in a few weeks. so if he's coming for a deal how much hardball do you play? >> well, you have a lot of leverage now. and gene is right. this is the type of case in which you would take cooperation even after a guilty verdict. and there's another factor here too, chuck, which i think is important. mr. manafort didn't testify at trial. meaning i think he didn't testify falsely. meaning i think that he's still potentially valuable as a witness. he didn't concoct a false story. he didn't commit perjury on the stand. he remains silent. of course that's his right to do so. but from a prosecutor's standpoint, if he has information we want it. particularly if he's going to tell it to us truthfully and
fully. >> let me ask you this -- all right. now we're going in. this is the attorney for mr. manafort. >> -- of not getting acquitals all the way through or a complete hung jury on all counts. however, he would like to thank judge ellis for granting him a fair trial, thank the jury for their very long and hard-fought deliberations. he is evaluating all of his options at this point. thank you, everyone. >> that was super quick. chuck rosenberg, let me pick back up. you just eared, he's reviewing all options. the fact they don't immediately say they plan to appeal to me says a lot. i feel like in previous -- any other trial, somebody that feels emphatic that they were wrongly convicted they immediately start talking appeal. there was no talk of that. >> it's hard to know if they're just trying to catch their breath, chuck, or keeping the door open. i would hope they're keeping the door open because the notion that you can run the table in
the district of columbia, get acquitted on all of the charges there, then get all of the charges on which you're convicted in virginia overturned on appeal is approaching absolute zero. so if he's keeping his options open i think it's a wise thing to do but it may be just a throwaway line. >> what do you do with the pardon issue as a prosecutor? that that's sort of hanging up there. not many clients that you successfully convict, you know, have a pardon they might be able to pull out of their back pocket pretty quick. >> i would say there's almost nothing you can do. you have no control over it. it's the unfettered right of the president to pardon whoever he wants to pardon whenever he wants to pardon them. and so while you know it's in the background it's hard to control things you can't control, chuck. i would put it aside. >> we are i think about to move -- we are awaiting a press conference in new york city on
the cohen thing. gu guys, are we ready to move over to that? let's move over to that courthouse now. press conference split screen day. >> with me is bill sweeney, assistant director in charge of the new york field office of the fbi, and james rodna, who is the supervisory agent in charge of the new york office of the irs. also with me are the prosecutors from the united states attorney's office in the southern district of new york who prosecuted the cohen matter. i'm going to have a brief statement and will not be taking any questions. today as you heard, michael cohen pled guilty to eight felony charges. five of those dealt with tax evasion for the years 2012 through 2016 in which he failed to report approximately $4.1 million in reported income. approximately 2.5 of that money was from interest payments from a personal loan that he failed
to report. approximately $1.3 million of that money was from the operation of his taxi medallion bips approximately $100,000 of that money was from brokerage commissions. and over $200,000 was from consulting fees. that's over $4.3 million over a five-year period, which translates into a loss to the united states treasury of approximately $1.3 million. in addition, in count 6 mr. cohen pled guilty to making false statements to a financial institution in connection with an application for a home equity line of credit. in that application he failed to disclose more than $14 million in debt that he will, and as a result of that concealment he obtained that $500,000 line of credit which he would not have been entitled to had he been candid and honest.
in addition, mr. cohen pled guilty to two campaign finance charges, one for causing an unlawful corporate contribution and a second one for personally making an excessive personal contribution, both for the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. in addition, what he did was he worked to pay money to silence two women who had information he believed would be detrimental to the 2016 campaign and to the candidate and the campaign. in addition, mr. cohen sought reimbursement for that money by submitting invoices to the candidate's company which were untrue and false. they indicated that the reimbursement was for services rendered for the year 2017 when in fact those invoices were a sham. he provided no legal services
for the year 2017 and it was simply a means to obtain reimbursement for the unlawful campaign contribution. a couple of points i'd like to make, first these are very serious charges and reflect a pattern of lies and dishonesty over an extended period of time. they are significant in their own right. they are particularly significant when done by a lawyer, a lawyer who through training and tradition understands what it means to be a lawyer, to engage in honest and fair dealing and adherence to the law. mr. cohen disregarded that training, disregarded that tradition, and decided that he was above the law and for that he's going to pay a very, very serious price. with respect to the campaign finance violations, the campaign finance laws are designed to prevent the use of illegal money in elections and to maintain the integrity of those elections.
mr. cohen made guilty pleas for those campaign violations, and those are core violations. and what he did was these pleas remind us that it is illegal for corporations to make contributions to candidates and it is illegal to make contributions in excess of the amount that congress set for individuals. that is a strong message today, and we will not be -- we will not fear prosecuting additional corporation -- campaign finance cases. lastly and perhaps most importantly, this case is unique in many ways. just witness the gathering of all of you here today. and in other ways it's unique as well. but in really important ways this case is not unlike many cases that my office, the united states attorney's office, brings, that the entire department of justice brings and
that the law enforcement agencies do as well including the fbi and the irs. is this case has more in common with all those cases because they all share the same message. and that message is that the rule of law applies and that for law enforcement, all all of whom are gathered here, it is our commitment that we will pursue and vindicate those who choose to break the law and vindicate the majority of people who live law-abiding lives, who follow honest and fair dealing and live lives of lawful behavior. the message is that we are here, prosecutors are here, law enforcement is here, the department of justice is here, the law enforcement agencies here. we are a nation of laws and the essence of this case is about is justice and that is an equal playing field for all persons in
the eyes of the laws and that is a lesson that mr. cohen learned today and it is a very harsh one for him. thank you very much. >> who is the candidate you're talking about? >> one other thing. i'm sorry. i'd also like to introduce -- sorry. my fault. i really want to thank mr. sweeney and james robned of the irs and the agents who work for them. we do many cases with them. and their determination and their fair dealing and their vigor with which they pr suh their cases is really inspirational. to the prosecutors in my office, i cannot express the gratitude for the hard work they did in this case. assistant united states attorneys andrea griswold and nick roose and tom mckay as well as the deputy chief of the public corruption unit and russell capone, the chief of the public corruption unit. for all of these people, i could
go on and on about their many virtues and fanlts talentalents are satisfied with simply being known as public servants, prosecutors and law enforcement agents who are doing their job. thank you very much. >> that was robert kazami. he is the deputy u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york there. you heard him lay it all out. but there's a big sort of meatball hanging out there on the plea deal. we all know what michael cohen -- what the government has essentially offered not to do now and what michael cohen has offered in exchange for this plea deal, but let's try to break it down. i've got the same panel here. i've also got danny cevallos, one of our legal experts who's been in new york following the cohen plea all day. so danny, let me start with you. you're a long-time defense lawyer. what did michael cohen do today and what is he getting out of it? because i still am not clear on
that. >> well, what's very significant is probably what we didn't hear the u.s. attorney's office say today, and that is this. we should be very careful not to conclude right now that there is zero cooperation because it often is the case that a defendant will enter a plea and there will be not one mention of a cooperation agreement and there will be not one mention in open court even at the sentencing of a cooperation agreement. instead that reference will be at sidebar, out of the ears of the public. and the reason for that is the cooperation agreements are often kept secret. for a couple of very important reasons. one, publicity of a cooperation agreement could scare off other big fish. and it's for the safety of the cooperator because they want to avoid snitches getting stitches. so in this case there may be cooperation but there may be no way for us to know that. these plea negotiations go on in
secret. we will never know the words that were exchanged in reaching this final agreement. we may get the plea in open court but the cooperation may pour now remain a mystery. >> danny, stick with me here. i've got mimi rocca on the phone, a former u.s. attorney in the southern district of new york. all right. i know speculating you don't want to speculate too much, but give a sense of what's likely, what kind of cooperation has been agreed to. you've seen what he's agreed to plea to and as howard fineman points out to me, he's pleading already to cooperation. he fingered the president. so in some ways we get what the prosecutors -- some of what the prosecutors got out of this. but mimi, what do you think is happening behind the scenes? >> well, chuck, i think danny's right. when we see the documents, if and when we see the documents, the plea agreement, we'll know a lot more in the sense of is it formal cooperation, which i know there had been some reporting that that wasn't happening.
and formal cooperation would mean that once he pleads guilty in his agreement cohen is agreeing to give information and be a witness whenever the government asks. if sounds like from that reporting that won't be what this plea agreement is going to be but we won't know until we see it. but i think just as important is, again, as danny pointed out, he's being cooperative in the sense that he allocuted under oath, it's not just anymore what mike cohen says through something, gossipy. this is under oath. this is serious. he knows, especially with a lawyer like guy petrillo, that he really can face serious consequences if he lied. sew has now said under oath that these campaign finance violation payments were at the direction of what everyone understands to be donald trump. and that is huge. now, that statement alone cannot be used, that sworn statement
cannot be used against someone else, the guilty plea, but it makes it more possible now for prosecutors to do something they don't normally like to, do which is subpoena a witness who isn't a cooperating witness. >> and mimi, what about -- >> that is a possibility now too. >> what about the other stuff? the other stuff in this case of michael cohen includes the at&t, the novartis, all that -- the pay to play investigation portion. is that -- are we to assume that's just not been dealt with yet or that's -- with michael cohen there is a lot of sort of rivals. >> you make a really good point, chuck. i think there's a couple of different options and we just don't note answer yet as frustrating as that is. one is this is a plea to certain charged in a certain area and they're going to deal with the rest of it later. that may signal that he's going to start offering and talking to the government in a more extensive way but they wanted to get this done now and sort of put their stake down on this.
and he can keep working with them and resolve those other charges later. it could mean he got immunity for some of those charges in his plea agreement. you asked what's he getting out of this. when we see the documents, which we just haven't seen yet, one thing so look at is what does he get immunity for, is it just what he pled to or is it other conduct? and i don't know that. and the third option i think is that he's done this guilty plea but then he will be talking to mueller and his team. this is the southern district and maybe this closes the chapter of what they were dealing with and maybe mueller is looking at the other stuff and possibly contacting him about that. ? daniel goldman, you had something you wanted to quickly chime in on. you have the political panel back. >> i have the plea agreement here. >> well, then go for it. give me the plea agreement. >> i wish i could send it over immediately. but it is a standard plea
agreement. it is not a cooperation agreement. there is no agreement that michael cohen will cooperate with the southern district going forward. though mimi mentioned something about whether he gets immunity for any conduct that he did not plead guilty to. there is one sentence about a credit decision from sterling national bank which he was not charged with but which he gets immunity from. ordinarily, if this were just a simple place holder that michael cohen would be pleading guilty to the charges that are -- to the investigative charges that are public, it has been reported about the campaign finance fraud, the bank fraud and the tax fraud which he pled guilty o'and then they were going to work through the cooperation at a later date, i'm a little surprised to see that he would get immunity. in addition, the parties did not agree on the sentencing range. that all indicates there's some contentiousness or some disagreement among the parties -- well, no, they could be done. that actually to me indicates
they are done. if this is a place holder they're going to put this down as a place holder and deal with it later. that's not to say they can't deal with it later but it is a little surprising to see there is immunity for something he's not charged with and that they do not agree on the sentencing guideline range, which means this is a negotiated plea agreement, so to speak, which ordinarily happens when there is not cooperation. >> very interesting. all right. sarah fagan. >> you know what's most odd about all this to me is that the southern district attorney didn't use trump's name either. it makes me wonder was that part of an agreement, that cohen didn't use trump specifically? it's odd you that refer to him as a candidate. but then why would the attorney come out and refer -- >> do any of the four of us -- i don't have a law degree. law degree? when is the last time you practiced it? i want to ask our legal experts about that. >> i think it has to do with what was said earlier about
leaving leeway for things that michael cohen can still testify about. in other words, he has -- what he pleads to can't be used specifically in another venue but if they leave it vague enough it will help give leeway to mueller and others to allow cohen to be used as a witness in other places. >> but it almost smells to me like here is a lawyer who is now a rat according to trump. those weren't his words but you can insinuate. the way he's talking about other lawyers. >> and he may say that at some point. >> tonight. >> it's that he's still worried about his approval. he's still worried about putting his name out there in connection -- it is the oddest thing he doesn't name him in this. >> eugene, i've got to bring up something here. this is an important contradiction. the campaign lied to the "wall street journal." when the "wall street journal" broke the story about the nchk nnk essentially doing the catch and release on karen mcdougal,
one of the two people he's pled guilty to, they agreed to pay 150,000 fds they didn't publish, it right? hope hicks, a trump campaign spokesperson at the time, is this is in 2016, said of the agreement with miss mcdougal, we have no knowledge of any of this. she said miss mcdougal's claim of an affair with donald trump is entirely not true. this is what michael cohen is contradicting. >> since then we've seen the president lose confidence in michael cohen. we've seen the changing attitude and tweeting that he has taken on since that time -- it has been report thaed sees cohen as getting weak and getting less secure and less confident in his relationship with trump. we haven't seen cohen say he'll take a bullet for trump in quite some time and that's because we've had reporting saying that cohen's concerned about his kids, cohen's concerned about money. these are things manafort has to worry about in terms of having young kids. >> i'm confused about the novartis at&t, that whole aspect
of it. although they may be not done with it. >> i think for reasons i can't entirely figure out i think the whole prosecutorial team here, and you have to assume that mueller and the southern district know what the other hand is doing. they decided, the prosecutors decided they wanted to lay down a marker with cohen. i don't think they're finished with cohen by any means. >> that's what it feels like to me. >> i think you're right to some extent also that cohen might be und error the illusion or self-delusion that somehow he's still standing -- this is like smoke signals going up between mueller and trump here. mueller's saying this is just the beginning and trump is worried it's just the beginning. >> mimi roca, you want to jump in here. >> i want to make one small point on the reason why cohen or the prosecutors didn't mention trump by name.
there's actually department of justice guidelines and rules about that. you're not really allowed to name a person who's not charged as a defendant. there are some exceptions to that. but generally speaking. and 245s why especially here. i just don't want anyone to get the wrong impression as to why someone wasn't using anyone's name. >> this is the u.s. attorney's decision to keep his name out, not michael cohen's is what you're saying. >> absolutely. absolutely. the u.s. attorney used the language that's in the -- i take it it's in the information. maybe dan has that as well. the charging document. but i think the u.s. attorney isn't going to use his name in a formal document or proceeding and mike cohen was likely told he's not allowed to. >> so far we're still awaiting word from the white house or the president's legal team. kristen welker's standing by from the white house. it's one of those days i remember you stand, stand, we're all waiting. it's one of these rolling crazy news days as we've been going from courthouse to courthouse
along the eastern seaboard here. kristen, what do we have? anything yet? i know you're a frequent communicator with mr. giuliani. >> we're also checking our phones every few minutes, chuck, and so far nothing. but but i have been told the legal team is going to be putting out a statement in short order. as soon as i get that i'll bring that to you and to our viewers. i know the president has just landed in west virginia. he has sort of saved by the rain. it was pouring when he departed. we didn't have a chance to ask him questions about all of this but obviously as you pointed out he was watching on air force one. the pool within the press pool vague they have access to fox news, that was on so, we know they were watching this unfold in real time. and obviously this is something that quite frankly is terrifying the administration. president trump was asked recently if he was concerned about michael cohen flipping on him. he said "no, i'm not worried because i did nothing wrong."
at the same time he's really amped up his attacks against cohen. and sort of the split-screen strategy here in terms of dealing with cohen versus manafort. because when he was asked if he was planning to pardon manafort just last friday he said i don't talk about that, i think the whole manafort trial is very sad. so showing some compassion for paul manafort, not disputing that a potential pardon's on the table. but let's remind everyone where we started the day. with this remarkable statement by president trump to reuters overnight saying i could run it in reference to the russia investigation. we're trying to figure out wla specifically he meant and what that would look like. i think the real question mark becomes does this rhetoric we have seen become increasingly eated from the president as it relates to the special counsel investigation turn into real action? as you know there's some real concern about him potentially either getting rid of rod rosenstein or trying to defang robert mueller. i think that's where it heads next. >> let me do a quick reset and
remind you, the magic number is'll today, by the way. mike cohen pled to eight counts in his guilty plea, in his various pleas, including fingering essentially the candidate, which we know to be donald trump, in ordering him to do the campaign finance violations they made. and then a jury in alexandria, virginia -- you could say it's coincidental it happened in the same 30-minute period. convicted paul manafort of 8 of 18 counts he was on trial for, mostly of tax and bank and wire fraud. here we are. political fallout. fascinating. john cornyn. well, on the cohen plea deal, if it implicated trump. i don't think it implicates him at all, particularly with the russia investigation. there is a little bit of spin that i've noticed in republican circles going. well, where's russia? max slap. i don't see the words russia here. is that something that they should feel good about? >> well, chuck, a source and friend of mine who's very close
to the white house -- the white house legal team took pity on me after i attempted to explain why trump's name wasn't mentioned. so he's calling in real time. it is in fact -- >> that's why we have mimi rocca. >> it's generally not done. but he added a political twist here. because he said it's not appropriate for a prosecutor to malign someone who is not before them. this is an effort tonight anti-comey. to not shoot your mouth off and be political but to play this spriktly by the book. that's what the prosecutors were doing there, they were being restrained. >> the president has tweeted. "just landed in virginia. big crowd." you're seeing him walking down now. shelley moore capito. look forward to seeing the big crowd. and hashtag maga. it's going to be an epic night from the president we think. >> absolutely.
there's no reason to believe if won't be based on how he's handled rallies in the past and especially considering everything everyone's talking about including on fox news which has a track record of not even address some of these types of -- >> i think they couldn't have avoided this -- like today fox couldn't do one of their oh, look, there is something else, there's a shiny metal object of medium being denied something. >> but i think your point to senator cornyn and matt schlapp's comments on this it's valid and -- >> hang on. sorry, sara. >> a lot of different people over the years. i think sad about that. i feel today it's a sad thing that happened. it has nothing to do with russian collusion. this started as russian collusion. this has absolutely nothing to do. this is a disgrace. this has nothing to do with what they set out looking for russians involved in our campaign. paul manafort.
he walked for bob dole. he worked for ronald reagan. he worked for me. many people. and this is the way it ends up. it was not the original mission. it was something very much different. so it had nothing to do with russian collusion. they continue the witch hunt. thank you very much. >> it's what he did not talk-b sara, that to me was the biggest tell of them all. he felt terrible for paul manafort. sort of reinforces what you said. he respects someone who took the bullet. he had nothing to say about cohen. but that also is a tell. cohen today implicated him. >> cohen implicated him. and also there's a quite -- a decent possibility that there's going to be more investigations, more trials, more interviews because of all of this. so now every comment, a good lawyer is telling donald trump don't say a word.
>> do you think he actually took legal advice there and that's why he didn't say anything about michael cohen, realizing michael avenatti's on speed dial with any court in the country that will take his case? >> i'm trying to watch this -- watch that through the eyes of paul manafort, who i've known since the early '80s. >> he's sad for him. >> he's sad for him. he left the door open there. >> i thought ajar. i didn't see a pardon. >> and he said it's sad, it has to end this way. the word "end" is not something paul manafort wants to hear in this context. >> he might get a commutation. i don't think he gets a full pardon. scl he's got that other trial he's facing in september. and as others have pointed out that's a z c. jury. another difference is it's not a northern virginia jury. >> that's a big difference anymore? >> it's a d.c. jury. >> it's a d.c. jury. >> you're from northern virginia. >> both of these guys on the pardon question it has more to do with their re-elect than it has to do with whether donald
trump is re-elected than -- >> i agree. after the re-election. it is worth pointing out, lindsey graham's been asked this. today's conviction of paul manafort today means -- this is what graham said. he's more likely to talk. then he added "i can't think of what mr. manafort has done to deserve a pardon." i think that's lindsey graham sending a message saying if you go down this road, you know, i have your back sometimes, i'm not going to have your back on this one. >> to trump we've seen in the past what deserves a pardon is loyalty. that's why joe arpaio got a pardon. so the reality is whether or not graham sees reason for manafort to get a pardon or not it's kind of irrelevant, especially when trump is in a position where he's really concerned about the faithfulness and loiflt people who've worked very closely with him. >> my theory on the trial was having spent a lot of time there if they only came back with one or two kind of judging kofrkss on the 18 that would have given the president a lot more room to
maneuver politically and rhetorically. i was impressed by the fact that he was fairly subdued on this thing. >> let's stay on manafort here because you had the best possible judge you could have asked for. you probably had the best possible jury instruction you could have asked for. manafort, your lawyers are probably telling you, sara fagen, this is probably as good as it gets. >> yes. >> you better start thinking about how you want to spend the rest of your life. >> i think that's absolutely true. and that gets to the conversation we had earlier on the show, which is is there still a deal to be had here? does manafort look at this next trial and think how do i reduce this sentence? because if you're right and the sentence comes after the next trial he has a very big card to play yet and that is whether he cooperates, whether he cuts a deal. >> there is one thing, eugene, that i -- because -- the question is how much does paul manafort have to offer?
he was in the trump tower meeting. that matters. >> absolutely. and that's why we're still looking to see what happened. the whole idea that none of this has anything to do with russia implies this whole situation is over. and we know it's just beginning. >> well, this trial didn't have anything to do with russia. and i think, you know, to the conversation you started earlier before the president -- >> jumped in. >> -- interrupted us, it's a very valid point in the eyes of many -- >> of voters. >> voters and americans who say, you know, yeah, maybe you found something on somebody who did something in this their business but that's not what this was about, and this feeds trump's argument that this is a witch hunt. >> well, it does have something to do with russia, though. because of all the money he collected from the ukrainians who were close to the russians. >> well, that's the next trial that starts connecting this. >> the stormy daniels stuff, even though the investigator is
bound by duty to refer, you know, illegal activity to the justice department, the average voter in my mind looks at that and says that has nothing to do with russia, trump's right. >> gene rossi, i want to ask you about question about -- and whether you agree with my point of view that if you're manafort's lawyers you have this conversation with him. you have the most friendly judge you could have expected, could have ever gotten. the best jury instruction you could have asked for. everything -- you caught every break and you're still staring at 20 years. >> chuck, you brought up a good point. judge ellis, that first week, he didn't use a vefls hammer, he used a sledgehammer with nails. for appeal purposes when the appellate panel sees that they're going to say that defendant got a great trial, a fair trial, though it was very one-sided against the prosecutors. the other thing, you're right about the d.c. juries. i tried about seven jury trials in d.c.
a little different than northern virginia. over the last 20 years the nova juries have changed, but d.c. is not friendly territory for mr. manafort. and i've grot to tell you this. mr. greed. they have to tell mr. manafort, if you want us to fight and go to trial, take your appeal in virginia to the 4th circuit, that's going to cost money. and unless he's hiding money in the cayman island, we don't know, but mr. green is going to have to show up soon because attorneys have to get paid. i'm a criminal defense attorney. you know, that's just the reality. >> eventually you want to get paid is what you're saying? you do this stuff for fame only for so long? >> we can't do it pro bono. but some law firms do. i do think there's a 50-50 chance he may cooperate because chuck, i don't think he's going to get a pardon. i think he's going to get a commutation. but it may not come until after he's sefshrved a couple years. >> lindsey graham pointed this
out. you've got to earn a pardon. he goes last time i checked you should serve time, know you've learned a lesson. as you said, that isn't how the president defines pardoning. it's arbitrary. >> absolutely. you could argue i guess arpaio suffered some and some of the other people he dealt with suffered some, but in terms of what the president thinks is sufficient we don't have proof of that yet. >> you can also point out there's something else besides the meeting that's more important that manafort knows about i think. and that does go back to this trial. because of this financial and political releaseship were all of the pro-putin ukrainian activists in russia -- in ukraine over the period of a decade it isn't, or tths it's at least worth investigating and knowing how much he understood about the role of russia in the campaign. in other words, it isn't necessarily credible to think that paul manafort spent four or five months in the campaign
without knowing anything about the activities of russian operativ operatives. that's where this whole thing i agree now politically it doesn't make sense that they're going after him for this. >> by the way, we've got a little color in the courtroom here on michael cohen. this is according to our reporters that were in there including tom winter. michael cohen got choked up when the judge asked him if he was aware that being convicted of a felony waives his right to volt and to participate on a jury. petrillo comforted him on the back. it came after the judge asked cohen a series of perfunctory questions kofrping he was ware what his plea entitled. the judge confirmed he could be sentenced separately on each of the eight counts and the judge could require cohen to serve those sentences consecutively or concurrently and if served con sectively the judge noted he could serve up to 65 years in prison. of course of note the plea agreement does recommend much less. this is danny cevallos. does this tell you -- what does this tell you -- this seems to be more of a severe plea agreement -- cohen pled guilty
to some serious crimes here. i guess i'm still trying to figure out, he did all this, is he just hoping that mueller doesn't come at him on the pay to play stuff? the novartis, the at&t -- this other aspect hanging over on another part of this investigation? >> well, it's important to understand that yes, the plea agreement indicates that there may be no agreement, there may be no cooperation, but often cooperation is not mentioned in open court. in fact, defendants can even cooperate after they are sentenced under a different rule. cooperation can come very, very late in the game even after sentencing. but it's important to think about probably the judge with the least exposure that cohen pleaded to today was the campaign finance law. but yet that is the one with the most serious political implications. the other ones, at least the
bank and tax issues, those of course can result in the most -- the higher sentences. but i think the takeaway from today with this plea is that michael cohen at least the way we'll know the most is in several months from now, if the government moves to continue the sentencing to adjourn the sentencing to another date. that will be a signal that maybe there's more behind this plea that meets the eye and that more could be cooperation. >> sarah fagan, i was told by somebody who is close to the president who said karen mcdougal scared him more than any other story that was hanging, and this is the former play boy model. this is one of the two people that were bought off, because everything about the karen mcdougal story, stormy daniels -- she's an opportunist, too. >> right. >> that was a real relationship as far as karen mcdougal was concerned and that is the one they thought is politically the most lethal to the president. what do you think?
>> i don't know it's more lethal than stormy daniels. it was probably more lethal to his family relationships potentially and, you know, on the terms of the timing of it. >> right. >> in terms of the fact, you're right, it was a real relationship, it was long-term, long-term for trump in terms of relationships assuming all of it is true. you know, so from that vantage point, you know, somebody who is emotionally wounded is more likely to say very damaging things at press. >> howard, the president is accused of being a liar by his long-time personal lawyer. is the country surprised? >> no. >> does this -- what is -- we know what fall out would be in another era. i think we're all trying to figure out, is this guy immune to this? no other president could survive this. >> the laws of physics don't apply to politics. a pendulum starts swinging in real life, it slows down. but in politics sometimes, and
we're in that kind of period now, once the pendulum starts swinging, it swings more and more violently and erratically. that's where we are right now. i think the key is the base and republicans on the hill, when do they begin, if ever -- the republicans on the hill, almost everybody who looks at them say they're never going to abandon donald trump. you never use the word never in politics, as you know. so that's one thing to look at. the other thing to look at is the fringes of the trump movement, if you will. he calls it a movement. it is a movement. at what point do the facts and the narrative and the noise become so loud that even people who are putting their fingers in their ears because they like what trump represents are going to say, we just can't do it any more. we've asked that for two years and we're still asking it. >> this would be the time, based
on what white evangelicals defending trump repeatedly said. they said they gave trump a mull began. he said he didn't do t. we had people like franklin graham, the president of liberty university, jerry fall well. they believe trump because he said he didn't do it. michael cohen appears to be saying that he did it. at what level, at what point would they say this man that we have called evangelicals' dream president a nightmare? >> include them, absolutely. >> michael also said that trump didn't authorize him to do it. now, of course, you know, he said under oath today he did which is a very valid point by one of the earlier guests. however, you know, for people looking for justification, michael cohen said he didn't do it then he said he did do it to save his own neck. >> but donald trump, why is everybody around him, like when does it become a reflection on donald trump that he has nefarious characters who commit
bank and wire fraud like michael, manafort -- >> you're not getting an argument out of me. i'm just telling you it's easy for people who love trump, there is a very -- there's a good rationale to dismiss this based on the way michael cohen conducted himself. >> there is a good -- >> good if you believe in him. >> in terms of law and politics, we're going to get to see soon enough on msnbc live, i assume, donald trump giving his -- >> rebuttal? >> -- best effort to maintain the coalition that we're talking about. the weak republicans on the hill, the evangelical christians, the trump lovers who would practically need a corridor to stop supporting him. >> i think the bell tell all already, maybe it's legal advice, but the fact he only wanted to talk about manafort and he ducked all things cohen, if he does that at the rally tonight, that tells me that lawyers have gotten to him, number one, and two, he realizes
that's a losing battle. manafort, i can at least keep arguing. well, there's no collusion. >> his base will go with him. >> for tonight. >> absolutely for tonight. as they have before and they will trust him and believe that he has said what -- everything he said before now is true. but the reality is we have to remember that the base is not as large of a percentage of the electorate as people think. republicans themselves are only 27% of the electorate. these people who voted for trump, we've seen data suggesting that many of them were like first-time trump triers who aren't willing to give him another chance. >> this is what i've got to be thinking. it's not the trump base that i think republicans have to worry about in november with these stories. >> right. >> it's the, it's the person that held their nose and voted republican because they wanted neil gorsuch. it's the person that, like, i don't know if they're ready to vote democrat, but i don't know if they're going to vote in november. >> i think it's an excellent point. >> the stench. >> you see the democratic base
and we've seen it for months is more energized thanks for joining us republicans as a whole. and independents, you know, who voted for trump have thrown their hands in the air because they hoped for the best and got this. and, yeah, i think it hurts politically a lot. particularly for trump who -- >> can we doing? i think i have this graphic. i want to set you up here. these are all the people and it's sort of that have been about to be locked up or might be locked up. i mean, you hate to use that phrase, but they're the ones that kept using it as a campaign slogan. michael cohen has pled guilty. michael flynn has pled guilty. george papadopoulos pled guilty. manafort convicted felon there. that's quite the track record of a witch hunt. >> i'm thinking -- >> a lot of witches. >> what you're thinking of is suburban vote erdors who are ary pro life, for example, who voted
for donald trump because they were hoping to get neil gorsuch as you said, and brett kavanagh. >> who rationalized trump and say he gave me that. >> or suburbanits who wanted tax cuts. it's the people who held their nose for tax cuts, deregulation and abortion, those three issues. those people are going to look at this and they're going to say, okay, i got the tax cuts, first of all. we got gorsuch. and also we can't stand to be associated with this guy any more. we just can't stand -- >> is it worth the effort this cycle? >> are they going to go back? it almost doesn't matter how many of those people exist if the people who are against trump, people who are on the left are so much more willing to vote against him and mobilize. >> i just don't see that rank and halfticollege-educated republicans, if they're caught in traffic, i'm not breaking a
sweat for this guy right now. >> i think that's right, and i think unfortunately the fact that we're talking about this -- even if a bigger percentage of the electorate says this is washington, this is trump, surrounded with bad people, didn't know, they justified the whole thing. we have a booming economy. we have low unemployment. we have record minority employment. >> by the way, where would we be if -- >> he would be out of office, they would have impeached him. >> it's higher than ronald reagan, bill clinton and some of the boom years. based on historical trends, based on economic numbers, donald trump would get reelected today. >> except -- >> except we're sitting here talking about convictions. >> which is why so many of his people around him politically say, will you stop tweeting? will you stop fighting about this? and by the way, if you did nothing wrong, the whole original idea of getting it over with quickly so you could enjoy
the fruits of the great economy would be out there. but he's stepping on his own best story line at this point. >> he is. >> and he probably won't talk about that tonight in terms of the amount of energy he could put into what he's done right to remind people of why he should be reelected or at least supported. >> he needed a lump of coal to show how dedicated he is to the coal industry. >> i'm curious how much discipline he'll have. the exposure that's now there legally on all things stormy daniels and karen mcdougal do put him in a weird spot where he likes to fight back. what can he fight? if he fights back, myangeloicha avenatti has a civil suit. what do you think? >> and a lot of people showing up in iowa. i'm just saying. >> i have a lot of thank yous to get out before the orchestra starts. i hope i get them right. ken dilanian, daniel goldman,
good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. federal prosecutors in new york have accused the president of criminal violation of the federal campaign laws. they say trump directed -- that's the word -- michael cohen to cover up a campaign contribution in the form of payments with two women with whom he had sexual relations. this comes from the southern district of new york, not robert mueller, not the so-called 17 democrats the president says are working against him, not the deep state, not from a witch hunt. it's from one of the two sentencing memos filed in the case of trump's former lawyer, michael cohen, today, which are shedding new light on the president's potential legal exposure. as trump's longtime fixer, cohen pleaded guilty in august to campaign finance violations and making hush payments to two women on trump's behalf. and now, tonight's sentencing memo makes clear that "with respect to both payments," cohen acted in coordination with and at the direction of individual
one. that's the president. we're also getting new insight into what cohen has told the special counsel in the ongoing probe of potential collusion with russia. according to the filing from mueller's office, cohen not only provided information about the moscow real estate project trump tower over there that trump pursued during the election, but also provided information about attempts by other russian nationals to reach the trump campaign. according to the memo, quote, cohen spoke with a russian national who claimed to be a trusted person in the russian federation who could offer the campaign -- here's a phrase -- political synergy, in other words, working together, trump and russia against hillary. prosecutors say cohen provided useful information concerning certain discrete russia-related matters, according to its investigation that he obtained by virtue of his regular contact with company executives. that's trump company executives. that's how cohen got the information he's been using to try to save himself. and cohen also provided relevant
and useful information concerning his contacts with persons connected to the white house itself after january of 2017. however, despite cohen's assistance, prosecutors in the southern district of new york still recommended a substantial term of imprisonment for michael cohen, given the nature of his crimes. also tonight, prosecutors detailed how trump's former campaign chair, paul manafort, lied to them repeatedly while he was supposedly cooperating with them. what a news night. i'm joined by ken delanian, julie ainsley, a security and justice reporter for nbc news, barbara mcquade, former u.s. attorney out of michigan. mimi roca, former u.s. assistant district in the southern district of new york. i want to start with ken and focus on one thing first. i want to focus on the criminal violation of the campaign laws, this effort to cover up what is really a campaign contribution of $130,000, $150,000, adding it up to cover up these affairs
with these two women. the president directed that activity, according to this memorandum today. ken. >> yes, chris. and in fact, michael cohen already stood up in court and said that when he pleaded guilty to these charges in the southern district of new york. but what's different today is that the u.s. attorney's office, a representative of the united states of america, is endorsing that view in black and white in a court filing, that cohen acted in coordination with and at the direction of individual one, donald trump, who had become the president of the united states. now, the reason i've been told it's not accurate to call him an unindicted co-conspirator, butt there is still an issue of criminal intent. the way the campaign finance law is written, prosecutors have to prove for a violation that you had an intent to violate the law. normally you hear ignorance of the law is no excuse. in this case, ignorance of the law can be an excuse. if donald trump was told by a lawyer, hey, this payment is okay, it's not a violation of the campaign finance law, that
would be clearly a defense. but the facts outlined here suggest a scheme, suggest people who knew what they were doing was wrong, particularly cohen. and clearly, if a president of the united states was able to be indicted, this is a case prosecutors would pursue to the last document, to the last witness, chris. >> and just to make your point again, the prosecutors in this case in the southern district of new york, the federal prosecutors basically nominated and confirmed by this republican senate. these people say that michael cohen had criminal intent. they said he knew the law, that he had worked in politics. >> absolutely. >> he knew this was a cover-up. julia, your thoughts on that, that cohen, directed by individual one, the president, is accused of knowing what he was doing. is it possible or plausible to assume that the guy who told him what he was doing didn't know it was a criminal act, the president? >> yeah, chris, before i came out here, i saw that individual one was the number one trend on twitter, at least in this region, and it's because individual one is named in both of these sentencing memos we've
seen tonight from the southern district and from the special counsel. in the mueller memo, individual one is the owner of the company, the real estate company that cohen worked for. that would be trump organization. that would be donald trump. and he is the one who, i'm reading here, would have conferred with cohen about reaching out to the russian government. then when you talk about the payments to the women, the individual one goes on to become the president of the united states. pretty clear that's donald trump. and that he also worked with him, talked to him about the payments to those women. so, in a lot of ways, it cannot be underscored that these memos really aren't about cohen. i mean, they are about cohen, but they really point to the president in a way we hadn't seen before and point to this administration, not just the campaign, but what's going on inside the white house. >> let me go to barb on this, because i think the language was very strong. i was really impressed by the spirit of the prosecutors' language. they talk about how people go door to door in politics, they lick envelopes, they do all of
the work of politics in an open, transparent way because that's what the law and our democracy is all about, is transparent politics. and this skulduggery, this middle of the night going to that magazine, getting them to catch and kill, getting them to kill the story about these affairs, all this done purposefully and deliberately and intricately to cover it up, to make it nontransparent. they really threw the book at this. they took this campaign violation as dead criminal activity. >> one of the things that a prosecutor is required to do in a sentencing memorandum is describe to the judge the nature and seriousness of the offense. and here they describe this as a very serious offense. the whole purpose of campaign finance laws is to provide transparency and who's paying for things and how they're being run. and in fact, they used the word cloud, that michael cohen and individual one went out of their way and took deliberate steps to cloud that transparency by making these payments to hide the truth from the public so that they could cast aine formed vote. when we have a democracy, it's based on the ability of voters
to cast an informed vote. and when you're hiding the truth from the american people, then democracy breaks down. that's a serious crime. >> well, on tonight's multiple court filings, they appear to indicate that president trump himself could be facing new legal exposure, including implications in a federal crime. the president, or individual one, as he's called here, responded tonight with a show of confidence. he tweeted "this is outlandish. totally clears the president. thank you!" well, that's just crazy talk. let me go to mimi on this. you know what's interesting how character and morality all come to play here, that you know, sometimes progressives play this game and sometimes conservatives play this game and trump-ites, whatever you call him. they say personal behavior doesn't matter. it's about politics and ideology conforms to the candidate and it doesn't matter who the person is. here we are talking about a guy and his affairs and the way that his character shows him having the affairs and his character showing him covering up the affairs and how he uses his lawyer to do it and how he uses his money to do it, and now it's
all about protecting his chance to hold public office. it all integrates together. that's what i find faci -- and the prosecutors talk like that. they hit the guy morally. that's the way i read the document. it wasn't a cold, secular document. it's saying this is what brings the toxicity into american politics, these affairs being paid off, women being paid off, power being used to snuff out the truth and not enlightened democracy, but to deny the truth to democracy and the voters. your thoughts. >> absolutely, chris. and look, this is a typical southern district. and frankly, any u.s. attorney office type of document where you talk about the purpose of the laws and the spirit of the laws, and that's important, as barb said, to explain to the judge in terms of sentencing. and judge polly is a judge who takes those laws very seriously. i think it's important to point out that there was a phrase used in the southern district memo
about the evidence against cohen being, quote, overwhelming, and that he didn't cooperate out of sort of the goodness of his heart or spirit, but because he was really caught red-handed. so, for trump to say that this clears him, we don't know that all of the evidence that is, quote, overwhelming against cohen, but i'm willing to go out on a limb here now and say that given what the southern district has put in black and white, in writing, about the president's actions, i'm willing to bet that there is good evidence that trump had the requisite intent to commit this crime as well. >> and i'll go out on a limb and say this is the biggest act of self-delusion since baghdad bob, who said they were winning the war. i want to bring in ari melber, who's been brilliance on this tonight, msnbc's chief correspondent as well as host of "the beat." ari, i love the way you put it up and i want to go back to a deeper question. when trump got away for a while, for a few weeks, with the "access hollywood" tape that everybody said was going to kill
him, reince priebus was going to walk over it, smart republicans, decent republicans said this smells too terrible to withstand, to survive. and here we have a president basically being charged by the federal district of new york up there with basically covering up a couple affairs with money and power and doing it in a way that i can get away with this crap. this is stuff i can get away with. i've got this fixer lawyer here, cohen, he does this crap for me. i've got a magazine that's going to buy this crap and kill it for me. i've got it all wired. i can get away with it, just like he said in the "access hollywood," i can get away with it. i thought it was interesting the way you talked about it tonight. >> well, you laid it out, chris. that attitude that was caught on tape was not just bragging about sexual assault, which itself is potentially felonious conduct. it was also, as you just put it, his belief that lets you get away with it. well, that's not how those people felt, because many of them spoke out. that's not how the prosecutors in new york have deemed the conduct. and they say michael cohen had that same mentality. if you want to call it the trump
organization mentality, it is we'll just get away with it, the rules don't apply. i mean, this was a two by four striking michael cohen in the head over and over today. and this is someone who went out there and did media leaks and tried to say he was doing it both ways or he was going to do this because it was for the good of the country, or he said he wasn't taking a pardon, as if this was something for him that's sitting around on a silver platter, i mean, the privilege of that. and this is the federal prosecutors, as you're alluding to, saying no, it doesn't work like that. you're busted. that's why you're in trouble. you're busted. that's why you're sort of cooperating. and it still wasn't good enough, so you should do hard time. that comes against another thing i think's going to royal the city you're in, the manafort filing, which is getting attention, although it's partly redacted. chris, it says in here on page nine -- we only dealt with this briefly on my hour -- paul manafort authorized people to speak with the administration on his behalf and then lied to mueller about it. paul manafort was in contact with, quote, administration officials in 2018. who are they? did they lie about it? are there other people inside
the white house who are on the hook in these implicated crimes? >> let's talk about your interesting way of putting it together, street corner cop. you said there's the good cop, the bad cop. you basically said the new york prosecutors were the bad cops. the good guys were the mueller's crowd in washington. talk about how that worked, because it seemed to work against michael cohen. new york thought he's a sleazeball, basically said you're as bad as trump. you're as bad as trump because you're a fixer. you help guys like him. you're an enabler. you help bigshots get away with crap nobody should get away with, buying off women, empowering yourself at the expense of other people's powers and dignity. and then we're going to screw you! but down in washington, they can stay nice to you because you've been whispering in their ear for a couple of months, and they're going to be nice to you, but you're going to serve time. looks like real time. >> i think there's a strategy here. remember there was talk from pinned pu pundits about when sdny got involved -- mueller hand off the case? no, he never handed it off in
that sense. he referred things jurisdictionally, but he's a by-the-book guy, but he never gave up control as he said under penalty of perjury to the russia probe. so mueller's the good cop, saying give us what you've got, we'll take it in and try to award people who cooperate, but sdny is the bad cop, saying this isn't cooperation, this is crap. you didn't fully cooperate. this isn't going to be treated under the legal jargon as technical total cooperation, which gives him the sentencing guidelines benefits. and by the way, you only did it because you had to. so, what does that tell us? it tells us you've got folks who are quite independent up at sdny. it stands for southern, but your panelists know some people refer to it as the sovereign district of new york, and that's the place that produced james comey, ma mary jo white, rudy giuliani, preet bharara. >> tell me about that culture. rudy giuliani was up there. what is it about the southern district that they're so tough, they suddenly look like dick tracy? what are they about? they seem to be the tough guys
of the government, not the deep state in d.c., that nonsense, or the 17 democrats. these look like -- what do they call them, the g-men. they're going to get the bad guys, the fbi. >> you definitely have a pride and attitude up there that this is the most important district, this is the only district with its own foreign policy, just like people say about the new york city mayor's office is different than being the mayor of boise, idaho. no disrespect to idaho. and so, i think there's an attitude that they patrol wall street, they patrol weorld trad center, they deal with things on a national-international level, and that feeds that attitude. and again, to not lose the threat as we talk about what mueller got out of this, he got his cooperation from cohen. he tells the story through the footnotes of his filing here, that michael cohen came in and thought he was smartest guy in the room, tried to volunteer a little bit in his first meeting with mueller's team but lie about trump tower. they said we already know about trump tower moscow, so you just screwed yourself. then they brought him to the next meetings and got him to flip and turn.
meanwhile, up in new york, prosecutors are saying that's fine, but what we're doing tonight -- and again, chris, this cannot be overstated -- what we're doing tonight is stating that the sitting president directed a campaign crime because he thought it would help him win an election, which through the electoral college he did win. that's where we are. >> that's my lead, too. thank you, ari. go ahead. >> why is cohen not getting credit for cooperating with the southern district? they say in the document because he refused to answer questions about other crimes they were investigating and past criminal conduct, which is bizarre, because he seems to have fully cooperated with robert mueller, but for whatever reason, he would not -- he only met with the southern district prosecutors a handful of times and he refused to answer their questions about manners they cared very much about, and that's why they're bringing the hammer down him and he's facing 3 1/2 years in prison. >> we're also receiving a sentencing memo in the case of paul manafort, who as we learned last week, you got all big three tonight, allegedly broke the deals of his plea deal by lying to prosecutors as well. and the sentencing memo on
manafort says he lied about his contacts with his russian business partner who mueller was previously described as someone with ties to a russian intelligence. more significant is the filing states that the evidence demonstrates that manafort lied about his contacts with trump administration officials, which he had denied. "for instance, in a text exchange from may 26, 2018." that's this year. manafort authorized a person to speak with an administration official on manafort's behalf. furthermore, a review of documents recovered from a search of manafort's electronic documents demonstrates additional contacts with administration. mimi, i want to talk to you about this russia thing and what we're learning here. it wasn't just the trump tower business. it was going on right through the campaign. in other words, trump was working for money while working for votes, anything but a conflict of interest. but the idea there were russians. and this is the whole thing about the russian thing, all the time these spooky russian figures reaching out like tentacles, trying to establish relations with trump against hillary clinton, at the same time the trump people are either
grabbing onto those tentacles or trying to send their own tentacles back to mass cow. they're both sides trying to hook up, to use a modern term, and it's getting out into the public information now. your thoughts. >> absolutely. i mean, in some ways, we've all been focused on a sort of narrow scope of this. you know, russia hacked the election, hacked the e-mails, you know, did anyone within the trump campaign know about that or help that? and i think, again, we still don't know the definitive answer to that, though it's looking more and more like the answer to that question is yes, from these filings. but i think it's much broader than that. it's about -- the word synergy is really perfect, right? it's not collusion as much as people working, coordinating together towards a common goal, which also sounds a lot like conspiracy. that's pretty much the definition of conspiracy, if that goal is criminal. and here we know the goal for the russians was criminal. and you know, i think there's a very good chance -- not chance, but i think the evidence is starting to pile up more and
more that trump and his team were also working towards that criminal goal, which was to swing the election in illegal ways to get a trump tower business deal out of it and other things that i think we don't know about. and one point i want to come back to about what you read about manafort's lies. you know, these guys, over and over again, they lie, and they keep getting caught by evidence. and i mean, it shouldn't be shocking me because i've seen it with defendants before. i'm sure barb has, too. you know, they keep getting caught and then they try to change the story to fit the evidence that they're confronted with. manafort did it. cohen apparently did it. and i think people are still doing it to this day, like stone and corsi. and that's why you just can't take things at face value that they say. >> you know, we were in catholic school about 1,000 years ago, they used to have the milk bottles. they said the white bottle was clean, so the dark milkshake was the sin and you were evil. look at the three different
examples we've got. flynn goes completely clean this week. he's apparently going to walk. cohen couldn't decide when to do. he would give some information up but not enough to get sprung. and this other guy, manafort, is just being hard-nosed. he's just a hard guy. >> it's not too late for cohen, though. he can still cooperate with the southern district and get credit for that later. >> what was your key on that? i heard you earlier -- what indicates to you he's still in play, if he comes out with more information against trump, for example. does he have a chance to get lesser of a sentence? >> well, clearly, factually, there's information the southern district is interested. they basically said that, right, by saying that he wouldn't cooperate on past, other criminal areas, other areas which i am inferring relates to the trump organization and other dealings, you know, not necessarily related to the campaign, or maybe related to the campaign. you know, remember, cohen implicated the trump organization, essentially, as part of that criminal scheme. so, i think the information -- he has the opportunity, he has
things that are of value to the government. you know, the government would be obviously leery of still cooperating with someone who's lied, but he has enough also truth-telling on his side on the mueller side, and there's specific mechanisms in the criminal, federal criminal rules that allow for a defendant to get cooperation credit after being sentenced. so, i think the opportunity's still there. >> mimi, you've been great all night tonight. i've been watching you all night. thank you for helping all our shows. you're the pros. stick with us, tonight's bombshell report is highly explosive. incredibly damaging to the president's claim that the special counsel's investigation's a hoax or a witch hunt. this is coming out of new york. this is a home game for him. the feds up in new york are going after him, accusing him of directing, which is basically directing a crime. in fact, new york federal prosecutors believe the president of the united states did direct michael cohen, according to today's paper, their memo, to direct two federal offenses by paying two women -- we know who they are, stormy and mcdougle -- for their silence about alleged affairs by
what's called catch-and-kill. again, federal prosecutors write that cohen admitted with respect to both payments he acted in coordination -- and here's the word -- and at the direction of individual one. that's donald trump. in addition to the special counsel's filing seems to undermine president trump's claim that he had nothing to do with russia. according to page four of the special counsel's filing tonight, michael cohen made false and misleading statements concerning outreach to russian officials. cohen had, in fact, conferred with individual one, believed to be president trump, about contacting the russian government before reaching out to gauge russia's interest. in other words, they decide to get together, trump and manafort, to get together with the russians. the meeting ultimately did not take place. joining me is congressman ted lou, democrat from california, house judiciary committee, patricia bertrand and david is washington bureau chief with mother jones. congressman, thank you for joining us. a lot of paper here tonight, but the one thing that jumped out at
me was president of the united states, individual one, directed a crime. >> thank you, chris. when you look at what the prosecutors did in the southern district of new york, they allege that donald trump directed two campaign finance violations. these are felonies. and you can infer intent by looking at a defendant's statements. so, i'm a former prosecutor. and if you look at what donald trump said, he did not say, hey, i made these payments to kara mcdougle and stormy daniels because it was perfectly fine. he denied doing it at all, because he knew it was illegal. now we have a president who committed two felonies while running for president. >> it's so intricate, congressman. if you look at the document today, the memorandum, the amount of paperwork and phony shell organization creation, everything, it seems like they know that there's criminal intent here. >> absolutely. individual one, who is donald trump, was mentioned over 20 times in these documents, and it's very clear donald trump was intimately involved with a lot
of these decisions, or a lot of things that michael cohen was doing, and prosecutors are basically laying out that michael cohen brazenly violated the laws and donald trump directed him to do so. >> what about impeachment here? when you look at this, is this enough to bring charges? is this enough for hearings? is this enough for committee hearings by the house judiciary committee on this president's behavior? >> so, i'm on the judiciary committee, and my view is that impeachment, like the power to declare war, is one of congress' gravest responsibilities. it should never be our first option. i think we need to wait for the special counsel investigation to conclude. these were court filings that were done for sentencing purposes. we don't know how much special counsel mueller knows about what's going on with russia and these other related activities, specifically at donald trump. we should wait for the investigation to conclude and make a decision then. >> when do you think that would come? give me a time frame right now. here we are, right before the holidays. congress is going to be in the third of january. >> right. >> you're ready for business
pretty early. when do you see the judiciary committee getting started and looking at these charges? >> we get subpoena power january 3rd. there is something very telling in the michael cohen sentencing filing by special counsel mueller's office. they state that he gave information on russia-related matters core to their investigation. that means special counsel mueller understands full well that his core investigation is russia collusion, that these other things like obstruction of justice, perjury, campaign finance violations, they're tangential, but he would not have said that if he didn't intend to deliver on his core mission. i think that will happen sometime next year. >> congressman lieu, thank you for joining us this friday night. according to the memo just discussed, cohen spoke with a russian national who claimed to be a trusted person in the russian federation, who could offer the campaign, what a phrase, political synergy. collusion is another word for it. prosecutors say cohen provided useful information concerning certain discrete russia-related matters core to its
investigation that he obtained by virtue of his regular contact with company executives during the campaign. i want to bring in david on this and natasha. david first. we're talking here about cohen's relationship with trump executives, the family members, the people at the top, working on russia stuff, but this phrase, synergy, sounds to me like a synonym for collusion! >> well, it could be. they claim that that conversation didn't lead to anything. but the second quote that you just cited from i think is the most significant thing on the russian front in all these filings. we've got to take it slowly. that cohen provided mueller with useful information, certain discrete russian-related matters, plural. so we're not talking just about the moscow tower project that we know about. russian-related matters core to its investigation. trump keeps saying there's nothing about russia here. mueller is telling us core to our investigation -- >> hacking? >> i don't know what it's about, but the other part, that cohen
obtained because of this contact with trump organization executives. so, here you have the trump organization being tied to russian-related matters that mueller says are core to my investigation. you know, trump told us -- >> trump turned his company over to his kids. >> well, kids? could be the kids -- >> well, they're the top people. >> it could be trump himself because he's still running the company. there's been no real distance there. but during the campaign, this all happened during the campaign. there was something going on between the trump organization and russia, or russia-related issues, beyond the moscow project, that we don't know about, and it blows out of the water, which has already been blown out of the water, the claim -- >> who's this russian we're hearing about that is a trusted official, meaning close to putin who was reaching out to the trump organization? >> well, that person has not been identified. i know that i and other reporters will be on this trying to figure this out. >> it's not the tower -- >> probably not -- >> papadopoulos connection. >> but we see again and again and again, whether it's in skia,
papadopoulos, whether it's the maltese professor, whether it's carter page talking to people. again and again we're coming up with dozens or over a dozen points of contact between the trump clan and russia during the campaign, let alone trump contacting putin's own office for help on a project that any filing says would have earned trump hundreds of millions of dollars. hundreds of millions of dollars. that's real money. >> even here. let me go to natasha now. your thoughts about the russian piece of this tonight, because i see two leads in the paper tomorrow morning. that's the way i still look at things. one lead is the president basically directing campaign violations at a very high level, lots of money, hundreds and hundreds of thousands to catch and kill stories about his affairs. then this russian thing, picking up information from the cohen memo and the manafort memo. there's people coming in from the dark, from moscow, who want to connect with russia, create some synergy with his campaign. and of course this financial
thing that went all the way through. according to cohen, it never stopped, and that's in the filing today. the campaign never caused the money-making effort on the part of the trump people to stop. >> yeah, and mueller also revealed something else really interesting about trump's interests in fomenting a relationship with vladimir putin during the campaign. he revealed that trump and michael cohen were having conversations in the fall of 2015 about reaching out to the kremlin to try to connect trump and putin while putin was in new york for the u.n. general assembly in september of 2015. so that indicates that whether or not trump at that point was pursuing the trump tower moscow deal, there seemed to have been an interesting on his part to get in touch with vladimir putin that early on in the campaign, which is absolutely remarkable. i mean, he had just announced a couple months earlier that he was running for president, and now he's eager to meet with vladimir putin, one of the first world leaders he's eager to meet with is putin? i mean, that just raises so many questions in and of itself. then of course, the fact that not two months later you have
another russian offering to make this connection between trump and putin is also extremely suspicious. but i have to agree with david here. i think that the most pivotal point in that mueller filing about michael cohen is the fact that he has information related to the core of the investigation. does that have to do, for example, with michael cohen potentially going to prague to pay off russian hackers as the steele dossier said? remember, that put cohen at the center of these efforts of potential conspiracy between the trump campaign and russia. so i think that that right there just means that there's so much more left to cohen's cooperation, even though the southern district of new york is very unhappy with the extent to which he's cooperated with them, which may indicate that cohen is more reluctant, perhaps, to throw people associated with the trump organization under the bus. he does not seem to be shy about detailing the efforts between trump and the rest of the campaign to coordinate with the russians during 2016. >> thank you, natasha. let me go back to kent. it seems to me the wall -- was
the wall too high to climb in terms of criminality? in other words, as much as cohen tried to help nail trump, as much as he tried to help on the russia front, the business end and the synergy, all that stuff, it wasn't enough to make up for his own crimes, so he's still going to have the book thrown at him. or is he still able to climb that wall and get out of this thing? >> i think it's not about that he didn't give them trump, because he clearly did. look, if donald trump wasn't the president and was able to be indicted -- remember, justice department policy says you can't indict a sitting president -- it's pretty clear that he would be the target of an investigation about illegal campaign donations related to these payments of women, based on what cohen has given him. i think he didn't get the deal because had he refused to answer questions about his past criminal dealings. and you know, there's been rumors about ties to organized crime. who knows why he didn't want to answer questions about certain things. he's had a long and colorful business history. >> right. >> but i just want to go back to one thing natasha and david were just saying. donald trump in his first presidential news conference was asked five times whether he was
aware of any campaign officials or himself personally was in touch with the russian government or russian officials, and he flatly denied it. and this footnote you've been referring to in this mueller document completely refutes that. had says he conferred with michael cohen about reaching out to the russian government. we shouldn't forget that. i know we're used to donald trump not telling the truth, but this is a major deal. he adamantly denied any ties to russia and these documents suggest there was outreach to russia, and that michael cohen has told the special counsel a lot about it. >> okay. how much underworld possibility is there here? because we talked a couple days ago about manafort and something brilliantly said, i think susan page, said there are worse things than imprisonment. when you deal with russia and ukraine, these are frightening people. if there is a connection with the mob, there are threatening possibilities to everything in your life. does that make sense to you, because you just alluded to it? is there a notion that these guys have a darker context in
which they have to survive? >> well, in terms of manafort, i've always resisted that idea because the russian mob, the russian government, mob-connected people don't tend to bump off americans in the united states. but he may be worried about it. you know, you can't discount it. with cohen, i think it's a little darker situation and we're not clear about his past business ties and who he's got relationships with in new york. and i'm not discounting that that could be a motivation for him, because it's really strange. like, why would you not -- you're cooperating with robert mueller. you're telling him everything he wants to know, but you won't answer basic questions from the southern district of new york, won't even meet with them about your past history and they're going to lock him up. why not? >> because they've had a lifelong mandate to fight the mob and it's possible they would like to get a kill there. barbara, last thought on that. is there reasons you have experienced in your life as a prosecutor that there are people who are more afraid of other forces than they are of the law? >> well, sure, there are other things. sometimes what's going on is they're protecting someone else.
there's a loved one, there's a family member or someone that they fear that they want to protect. so, that's the kind of thing, because it's in michael cohen's best self-interests to be fully cooperative. everything he tells them they're not going to used against him, they're going to use in the prosecution of other people. so the conclusions that come to my mind are either someone he wants to protect or there's someone he fears. >> well said. thank you, natasha bertrand, david and ken dilania nnk and barbara mcquade and ari melber for joining us from "the beat." much more on today's breaking news. senator richard blumenthal with the senate judiciary committee, will join us next to discuss the court filings and what we learned today about russia, about criminality, about a president who's been, well, he's got his name mentioned. he's called individual one. and according to that filing from the southern district of new york, he directed the criminality in that campaign violation. in another big story today, trump has his eye on a new attorney general whose history includes criticism of the mueller investigation. big surprise. and his sweeping view of
wide-ranging executive powers. we've got the older kavanaugh coming i guess for ag. go figure. this is "hardball," where the action is. when i say, "drivers who switched from geico to esurance saved an average of $412," you probably won't believe me. but you can believe this, real esurance employee
nancy abraham. look her up online. esurance, it's surprisingly painless. a peaceful night sleep without only imagine... frequent heartburn waking him up. now that dream is a reality. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day, all-night protection. can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn? discover card. i justis this for real?match, yep. we match all the cash back new cardmembers earn at the end of their first year, automatically. whoo! i got my money! hard to contain yourself, isn't it? uh huh! let it go! whoo! get a dollar-for-dollar match at the end of your first year. only from discover. with my bladder leakage, the products i've tried just didn't fit right. they were too loose. it's getting in the way of our camping trips. but with a range of sizes, depend fit-flex is made for me.
with a range of sizes for all body types, depend fit-flex underwear is guaranteed to be your best fit. unstopand it's strengthenedting place, the by xfi pods,gateway. which plug in to extend the wifi even farther, past anything that stands in its way. ...well almost anything. leave no room behind with xfi pods.
simple. easy. awesome. click or visit a retail store today. we're continuing to follow the breaking news tonight. boy, is it big. in three separate filings, federal prosecutors have provided a number of new bombshells tonight. federal prosecutors up in new york say trump directed lawyer michael cohen to cover up a campaign contribution in the form of payments to two women with whom he had sexual relations. we're also getting new insight into what michael cohen has told the special counsel in the ongoing probe of potential coalition, well, sinnynergism w russia, they call it. according to the filing from mueller's office, cohen not only provide information about the moscow real estate project over there that trump pursued during the election but also provided information about attempts by other russian nationals, trusted nationals, they're called, to reach the campaign and set up a sort of synergy between the trump people and the campaign
against hillary. so, it's russia and trump against hillary. separately, prosecutors detailed how trump's former campaign chair, paul manafort, lied to them repeatedly while he was supposedly cooperating with them. for more, i'm joined by u.s. senator richard blumenthal of connecticut, who sits on the judiciary committee. senator, a lot tonight. how do you react to the southern district of new york's report that the president directed the criminal violation of the campaign laws to cover up his affairs with susan mcdougle and with stormy daniels? >> the sentencing memorandum, first of all, is a bombshell in showing why prosecutors in the southern district of new york, independent of the special counsel, believe that donald trump committed a felony that enabled him, or at least helped him to become president, and covering up those payments was part of what was done, part of
the conspiracy of which president trump is an unindicted co-conspirator. think about it for a moment, unindicted co-conspirator. and the further information in this bombshell memorandum shows facts in evidence that link that conspiracy to russian collusion with the trump campaign and potentially obstruction of justice. so, the pieces of the mosaic or the puzzle are coming into place and the walls are closing in on donald trump and his inner circle, including his family. >> well, the president said in that infamous "access hollywood" tape that he could do what he wanted with women because he's a celebrity, he could get away with it. is he right or is he caught? is he caught now because he was basically charged by the federal prosecutors up in new york, not here in washington, but up there, charged with campaign violation and a campaign violation being payments to shut people up, to pay them off, and to kill the story?
>> there's a basic tenant of the american rule of law that no one is above it. no one is above the law. that was the lesson of watergate. i hope it will be the lesson of this dark period in our history, too. remember that those government prosecutors who have in effect named donald trump as an unindicted co-conspirator, so far unindicted, are not in this special counsel's office. they're in a separate office and they will survive any effort by the president to shut down the special counsel. but all the more important now to ensure the independence and integrity of the special counsel. because as the walls close in on donald trump, he is going to be more desperate, more destructive, and potentially more damaging, and that's why i am going to demand of this new nominee, william barr, as
attorney general, that he commit specifically and unequivocally to protect the integrity and the independence of this special counsel. >> by the way, on that topic tonight, because it is emerging as a big story between now and the next year, the republicans still control the senate with 53, 54 seats. they can get a majority vote and get this guy confirmed. how do you as a democrat stop that, if you want to do so? >> i'm going to be asking tough questions and i'm going to be demanding specific commitments. for example, that he will commit to approving any subpoenas issued by the special counsel. >> i see. >> approve the budget, approve the indictments that may be handed down and avoid constricting the authority of the special counsel. i think my republican colleagues are going to be very, very interested in those answers. i think they want this investigation to be completed, and their fear is that there's
an attorney general who will, in effect, commit another saturday night massacre, even if it's a saturday night massacre in slow motion, which is the danger from the acting attorney general, matt whitaker. and remember, william barr has cast dispersions on the prosecutors in bob mueller's office. he has said that hillary clinton and uranium one are worthier of investigation than collusion between the trump campaign and the russians or obstruction of justice, and i want specific, definition commitments he's going to protect the special counsel. i'm going to press for legislation that will require full disclosure of any findings in evidence from the special counsel, including a report. and i think those kinds of commitments are absolutely necessary. >> okay. >> and democrats as well as republicans can unite about them. >> before you leave tonight, i want to get your thoughts up in the tri-state area, up there in new york, the new york southern district of new york has basically pointed out, they have said charge the president with
directing a political activity, the cover-up of that campaign contribution in great, intricate fashion, according to that memo today, about how michael cohen really went around to try to create the paperwork to make it look like something it wasn't. they say in that memo today, in that sentencing memo, that michael cohen knew what he was doing. he's a lawyer. he was politically sophisticated enough to know he's breaking the law. and proof of that was the way in which he was covering it up, with such intricate effort. do you believe it's possible or plausible that the president of the united states, who was directing him to do so, didn't know he was doing so to cover up a crime? >> i believe it is totally implausible that the president had no idea there was a cover-up ongoing here, if he knew the facts, as apparently, the southern district of new york believes that he did. it seems both impossible and implausible that he didn't understand the motive and the criminal intent here as well as the actions. and one more thing.
this hammer over michael cohen, the recommendation for additional time i think is a point of leverage and we'll see more coming from michael cohen. >> knowing what you know of the law as former attorney general of connecticut, sir, all those years, longer than you've been a senator, much many more years, do you think that the reason the president wasn't indicted is because he's president and that's it? that otherwise, he's guilty? >> i happen to believe the president could be indicted. i may be in a minority in that opinion, and the trial could be postponed until after he finishes his service. i think that there are legal obstacles to such an indictment, and the special counsel or the southern district of new york is going to have to convince itself and the american people, and ultimately, a judge, that those obstacles can be surmounted. but the report, i think, will be extraordinarily damning, whether
or not there is an indictment. >> when he leaves office, he gets an indictment. that's certainly reason for your democratic party to find a nominee who can defeat him this next election. thank you very much, senator richard blumenthal. great to have you on. up next, president trump says there's nothing to see in the court filings tonight. he's clear! he's clean as a whistle! there's nothing here. he is baghdad bob. he's not seeing what's happening on the war front here. you're watching "hardball." her. take your razor, yup. alright, up and down, never side to side, shaquem. you got it? come on, get back. quem, you a second behind your brother, stay focused. can't nobody beat you, can't nobody beat you. hard work baby, it gonna pay off. you got this. with the one hundred and forty-first pick, the seattle seahawks select. alright, you got it, shaquem. alright, let me see. and then, more jobs robegan to appear.. what started with one job spread all around.
because each job in energy creates many more in this town. when the guy inown front slams on his brakes out of nowhere. you do, too, but not in time. hey, no big deal. you've got a good record and liberty mutual won't hold a grudge by raising your rates over one mistake. you hear that, karen? liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges. how mature of them! for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty mutual insurance. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ if your moderate to severeor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough
it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio®, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio® works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract, and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio® may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio®. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio®. entyvio®. relief and remission within reach.
welcome back to "hardball." we're continuing to follow the big news tonight of the three separate sentencing memos regarding trump's former lawyer, michael cohen, and trump's former campaign chair, paul manafort. we're getting new insight into what cohen has told the special counsel in the ongoing probe of potential collusion with russia, or as the russians call it, synergy. and in manafort's sentencing memo, we're learning manafort lied about contacts with his russian business partner as well as his contacts with members of the trump administration when they were in office. but donald trump tonight is claiming that he's not worried. he tweeted, "totally clears the president. thank you!" let's bring in tonight's "hardball" roundtable, adrian elrod, former director of strategic communications for hillary for clinton -- hillary for clinton! hillary for america. that was not intentional. for america. sher michael singleton, political consultant and sam stein, politics editor with "the daily beast." sam, let's go through the first
one. i'm struck by trump's resolute denial of reality. >> you're struck by it? i'm not struck by that. >> the prosecutors up in new york, not the 17 democrats he talks about, not the witch hunt, all that stuff, the deep state. feds up in new york said, >> they said definitively he directed his lawyer to break campaign laws. he directed the commission of a crime. unlike you, i'm not struck by him denile reality, this is how he exists to build an alternate reality in which he is clean and innocent and above it all. at some point, facts are stubborn things. in this case it is very clear that tweet he put out is erroneous. it's a lie. he's in serious potential legal jeopardy here and what they lay out is a case in which he deliberately went out of his way to pay hush money payments to people because he knew specifically, specifically that it would have a bad campaign
impact, a violation of the campaign finance laws. >> i thought it was very direct. as i said earlier, it was almost like a sermon for the prosecutors. people like you, who work in legitimate campaigns, working for people like hillary, working very hard all the time. in the daylight, everybody knows what you're doing. knocking on doors, position papers. here's this sneaky business of paying off these two women, violating campaign laws, it's a campaign contribution. you're working a publisher to catch and kill and it's all done intricately to avoid being caught. >> that's what i've been thinking about a lot today, while we were slaving away at hillary clinton's campaign, writing policy papers, really focusing on the nuances in these health care proposals she was putting out, these guys were in trump tower conspiring on how to implement the moscow project -- the contrast between the two campaigns, the motivations he had to run for president were so different. that's what i keep thinking about today. >> i wonder the idea of winning is everything, doesn't look too good. >> it doesn't. john edwards, that was a walk in the park in comparison to what's going on now. the fact of the matter is, we're
going into january, chris, the president is going to have to answer for this. democrats are going to have oversight. i suspect that michael cohen will likely be subpoenaed. >> any of your guys likely to break loose, marco rubio, anybody that might say enough is enough? >> i don't foresee that happening until there is a dig isn't decrease in support for this president. i don't see that happening. >> having a beer, talking about this, yeah, they got him -- the new york guys got him, big deal. is that what they're going to say, big deal? >> we were talking about this before the break. the issue is, so many people have in some ways become de sensitized to this stuff. the american people should be concerned and freaked out about what's going on with the president of the united states. >> to the point, i think that what happened in watergate is actually very informative here.
there were dead enders, but they weren't a small group. they're a fairly large group of nixonian dead enders up until there were tapes. when the tapes came out, it was hard, tangible proof. >> george wallace, people like that? >> yeah, and once you see something or hear something that cannot be refuted. that changes things. we have documents and allegations and testimony. he can dismiss by saying these are disgruntled ex-employees, angry democrats. all the media conspiring against me. once we actually see primary evidence, that is a game maker. >> what is the primary evidence? what makes you think that's going to change? 35% of republican voters? >> what hit me was new york feds, new york state officials -- the state governments, virginia's going to go after him, everybody who sees crime is going -- president trump dropped major hints this morning that he was anticipating something big coming. he's right.
just before dawn preponderate launched a preemptive strike in a series of angry tweets, many with typos and misspellings, proving they're his, lashing out at his special counsel. among other things, robert mueller and lying james comey are best friends. throughout his tirade, he attacked john brennan and james clapper, hillary clinton and justice department officials including his own deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. he never gets tired of hillary, does he? >> she's always the foil, the one he goes to. it's a common thing among republicans, by the way. >> when you test that with republican voters, that -- hillary clinton and nancy pelosi are two individuals -- >> two strong powerful women. >> fog machine, when they were afraid trump was going to lose the second debate, they said we're going to unleash the fog machine. that's forget the evidence, forget everything, just remember, what side are you on? what side you on? and just remember where you are and go after trump. >> the problem with trump,
though, is that he's reducing his own side. it's not just the -- >> is he? >> he's not going after the hillary clintons of the world. today he spent time going after his old secretary of state, rex tillerson and calling him dumb as a rock. >> why did he do that? >> because he said something about him earlier in the morning. >> dumb as a rock? >> it's odd, he appointed him secretary of state. >> it's fifth grade. >> it sounds crazy. but four republican voters, they look at tillerson's comments and they say you're not loyal to the president. the president has a right to critique you and fight back. i don't agree with that, but -- >> explain this behavior by your kindergarten class. here's the president going after his very recent secretary of state. watch. >> it was challenging for me, coming from the disciplined,
highly process oriented exxon mobil corporation to go to work for a man who is pretty undisciplined, doesn't like to read, doesn't read briefing reports, doesn't like to get into the details of a lot of things. i'd have to say to him, well, mr. president, i understand what you want to do but you can't do it that way. it violates the law. it violates a treaty. i think he grew tired of me being the guy every day that told him you can't do that. >> nobody wants to be trump's hall monitor. anyway, trump responded this afternoon with a tweet calling tillerson dumb as a rock and said he couldn't get rid of him fast enough. he was lazy as hell. nice way to treat your recent major employee. >> i mean, but look. we do know he's exactly right. i remember during the campaign, when donald trump, i want to say, that he made it very clear he loves reading "people" magazine and the new york tabloids. that's what he likes to read.
he doesn't like complicated policy papers or read the daily intelligence briefing. that's been -- those are facts we've known for a long time. >> sometimes it's worth stepping back and recognizing what just happened here. the former secretary of state said he had to stop the president from breaking the law. that's crazy. i mean, that is just crazy. and we just sort of take it because it's, you know, every day in trump land. >> speak for yourself. i brought this up because what's noteworthy though is the manner in which they talk to each other. >> we're talking about the president of the united states of america. the expectation is that this is someone who's objective, has discernment, approaches things from all sides, all issues, spending long hours reading through the briefing papers, not someone getting oral briefings. that's absurd to me. >> i don't think we've ever thought that was happening with donald trump. as president. >> we shouldn't stop or seize our expectations. >> nbc news reported the
president's outgoing chief -- not really an outgoing personality, but he's outgoing, john kelly answered a narrow set of questions from the special counsel earlier this year, questions related to potential obstruction of justice. a person familiar with the matter says kelly was asked about a conversation he witnessed between the president and former white house counsel don mcgahn who spent over 30 hours testifying before the special counsel. in that conversation the president asked mcgahn to publicly refute, that he the president ordered the firing of the special counsel, robert mueller. according to "new york times" mcgahn did refuse trump's order to fire mueller in 2017 and never issued any denial that he had done so. sam? just think about it. the president -- talk about obstruction of justice. he fires the fbi director, then fires the guy named to go after him and that's not obstruction? >> no. it's all happening like right in front of us and sometimes we are just like can't keep track of it all. i go back to the moscow tower meeting arranged with don jr., a massive deal. let's say we didn't know about
it and it came out tomorrow, it would be cataclysmic. but it's now baked into the cake. a lot of stuff is just baked into the cake. >> i think the sun is going to pay here. just pass -- we forget so quickly, yesterday they buried, down in texas, college station, they buried a former president. i thought the public tribute, while it didn't reflect all national opinion, there's a lot of populist attitude out there, i think it reflected a lot of nobility in the american government. a lot of people -- i watched those people, joe biden, al gore, a lot of people paying tribute to that man that was real on both sides. >> absolutely. we had a true moment. i think it was not just yesterday, it was this week where we saw both sides come together to honor such an incredible former president and now we have today where it seems like all of that is -- >> the clintons were there too. there was chatty stuff going on there. a niceness there. and then the weirdness happened. he hands it to an attendant, like he's god, and they didn't treat him with a lot of warmth. >> it felt like, you know, there was a politics where we knew we
good evening once again oum our nbc news headquarters here in new york. day 404 of the trump administration brings a major shakeup for the west wing and jared kushner president trump's son-in-law in senior advisor has been stripped of his high level security clearance cutting off his access to highly classified information like the presidential daily brief. nbc news has learned that kushner who has been working under the highest level interim clearance for all this while, more than a year learned about the downgrade in a memo on friday. the decision comes as white house chief of staff john kelly moved to overhaul the white house security clearance process after the resignation of staff security rob porter amid allegations of spousal abuse on his part. tonight a senior official told our kristen welker that had the president quote, has faith in this son-in-law and his senior advisor to continue to work at the level he has from the beginning to continue to make progress in his major pieces of his portfolio, a sentiment the president also emphasized just days ago. >> jared's done an outstanding job. he's a high quality person. he works for nothing. >> when it came to the issue of allowing his son-in-law to keep his access to the nation's deepest secrets trump seemed happy to let his chief lieutenant make that call. >> that'll be up to general kelly. general kelly respects jared a lot, and general kelly will make that call. >> a spokesman for jared kushner issued a statement that reads in part. "as to his security clearance mr. kushner has done more than what is expected of him in this process. no concerns were raised about mr. kushner's application as general kelly himself said, the new clearance policy will not affect mr. kushner's ability to continue to do the very important work that he be been assigned by the president." that work has meant a broad port foalo shall we call it for the 37-year-old jared kushner. has no government experience prior to this. his portfolio has included dealing with the peace process in the middle east, handling relations with china, japan and mexico as well as domestic issues including but not limited to opioids, infrastructure, government efficiency, the economy and trade. >> serving the president and the people of united states has been the honor and privilege of a lifetime. i am so grateful for the opportunity to work on important matters such as middle east peace and reinvigorating america's innovative spirit. every day i come to work with enthusiasm and excitement for what can be. >> but his involvement in some of the president's key domestic and foreign policy decisions, his work on the trump campaign and his one-time involvement in that family real estate business may have made him something of a liability in this administration. "the washington post" as we mentioned earlier reports tonight that he was targeted by foreign governments and that quote, officials in at least four countries have privately discussed ways they can manipulate jared kushner, the president's son-in-law and senior advisor, by taking advantage of his complex business arrangements, financial difficulties and lack of foreign policy experience according to current and former u.s. officials familiar with intelligence reports on the matter. among those nations discussing ways to influence kushner to their advantage were the united airborne emirates, china, israel and mexico. "the post" goes onto say white house officials were quote, concerned that kushner was naive and being tricked in conversations with foreign officials, some of whom said they wanted to deal only with kushner directly and not more experienced personnel. let's bring in our lead off panel for a tuesday night broadcast. jeremy bash, former chief of staff at the cia and pentagon. robert costa, national political reporter for "the washington post" and moderator of "wash week" on pbs, and kimberley atkinson for the boston herald. mr. costa, i understand you are just off the phone with some folks and can speak to just how bad a day this was for jared kushner. >> a very rough day for jared kushner. talking to officials inside the white house tonight, brian, they say he has lost not only his security clearance, at least that high level access to classified information downgraded to a secret status. he is losing his top aide inside the white house. not a well-known presence nationally, but inside the west wing, inside of washington known as a real keen operator. he's leaving the west wing. and you also have kushner struggling with general kelly, the chief of staff. these tensions about the skocop of his role, all of it culminating today with this new clearance announcement. >> jeremy bash, if homeland or any number of broadcasts were doing this, they would establish a meeting in the situation room where they would have to pause and they would say i'm afraid to continue we'll have to and you to leave. in the real world, in a practical sense what does this mean jared kushner will no longer be able to see or hear or handle and who's the enforcer? >> he won't be able to read the president's daily brief and get access to intelligence about some of things in his portfolio like the israel palestinian peace process or relations with china. that information will have to be ripped out from under his desk. i've talked to officials current and former throughout the evening and none of us can remember a single west wing staffer who was able to remain in his or her job with merely a secret clearance. with the exception of people who deliver the mail or the exceptional sailors who deliver the white house mess. he cannot do the job the president has asked him to do with merely a secret clearance. >> kim, let's agree for the baseline of this conversation if an organic talent search has been launched to find a senior advisor to the president of the united states no one would come back and say there's this guy named kushner, he's 37 in real estate in new york, he'd be perfect. but presidency and elections have their perks and consequences. the president wanted him there. do you think what we've witnessed today is the revenge of two generals named kelly and mcmaster perhaps wanting to exert a little bit more control over the west wing? >> i think that's absolutely that. i mean i think there is this struggle that's going on. you have people who are there who want this to work properly. look, this is a textbook example of why we have security clearance requirements for people in high ranking positions in the white house. this isn't just a story of white house intrigue. it's a matter of national security when we're dealing with friends and foes who are both trying to manipulate a top white house official in order to gain some sort of leverage. that's a major problem. this would be disqualifying for anyone not relate today the president. and i think that is the tension here. you have someone who you can't -- john kelly even if you wanted to fire him, how can you fire the president's son-in-law? but it's presenting a major problem, ongoing problem that doesn't seem to have a major solution so long as he's in there. now jared kushner can't fully do the job and in doing the job he's a liability to the white house. >> robert, i want to know if you'll go as far as two people you and i both know on kushner's security status being reduced. zeke miller and jonathan lemere write quote, the news setoff rampant speculation among trump allies that kushner's days in the white house might be numbered. this dove tails with what jeremy just said. >> the clock has been ticking for two week. general kelly we reported at "the post" he has this memo, if you have this interim clearance you will not be able to continue working in the white house. that was widely seen inside the white house as a direct message to jared kushner. those days were over. it was put out in a memo that's basically policy inside the white house. and then you had rod rosenstein the deputy attorney general call the white house counsel don megan and say there are ongoing concerns with his background investigation, didn't give any details as far as we know. but you have the head of the mueller investigation telling the white house that. this latest development is just the tip of the spear in the sense of all these things that have been happening. and if the kushner wing of the white house faces a tough question tonight. how does he move on if he does stay? what is that portfolio? are they willing to accept a narrow scope in that portfolio? >> i'll and two hypotheticals. was kushner naive enough when another government says we want to deal with you personally to accept that at face value, be flattered by that. and was he naive enough to ever raise business, the kushner family business with these foreign relations that he came into by dint of his west wing knowledge? >> if you take the president at his word this young fellow has good judgment so you would think he'd know better. i think probably from "the washington post" reporting what concerned the fbi wasn't so much that foreign countries were trying to manipulate him. i think there must be something much more significant. because the bar for denying security clearance for a senior advisor for the president is pretty high. and the fbi is going to go after that issue and dig in it better be for a darn good reason. and i don't think it's merely because foreign officials thought they could work jared kushner. >> and kim, let's talk about real life and the way people live. the president has the authority behind closed doors, family dinners to repeat or pass on whatever he wishes to his son-in-law? is that correct? >> that's absolutely true. and as "the washington post" reported there hasn't been enforcement of how this information is disseminated and shared. that's something general kelly is trying to get ahold of right now. so there's nothing to really stop the president from giving or telling jared kushner what he wants him to have or know. and keep in mind we've said before the president can put an end to all of this by granting jared kushner full security clearance. he has the ability to do so, but so far right now he's letting general kelly take the lead on this and an indication he might be willing to let him go despite the close family ties i think it's possible. >> to our knowledge the trump agenda did not advance a wit today. any other bold faced names who might have security clearances pulled we might read about in the next 24 hours? >> jared kushner is the most prominent in the white house who has had problems with security clearance. it's the constant cloud of the russia investigation. hope hicks, one of the other president's confidants questioned today on capitol hill all as kushner deals with security concern issues. it continues to be russia, russia, russia, security clearance and russia every day. >> and jeremy, when you remember the fact this is a subject because of the porter matter, because of allegations of spousal abuse, ball it all up for me. what have we learned or what have we reinforced about this administration? >> well, we learned the team that came in with the president in january 2017 was inexperienced, many unqualified and did not have the proper credentials and the ability to get the credentials. but i think robert is pointing up to the larger issue, which is two weeks ago that republicans in capitol hill and now realizing the white house were trying to go after bob mueller and undermine the investigation. i think the gate plea, the plea deal from the lawyer, the superseding indictments from manafort have basically washed all that away. >> around these parts if you want things to look dramatically different wait a week. our thanks for starting us off on a tuesday night. and coming up the warning from one of america's top intelligence chiefs about russian meddling in our elections and how he's proceeding without a direct order to stop it. and later we mentioned this earlier, what hope hicks has admitted to doing for her boss, the president. according to "the new york times" account of her testimony just out tonight. "the 11th hour" just getting started tonight. today, you're recognizing two promotions. mom: "hey, kids, i'm home. what do you want for dinner?" hers to manager and yours to grown-up. with blue apron, any night is a chance to see what cooking can do. 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. ♪ it was quite the scene inside today's senate armed surfaces committee hearing on the u.s. cyber command. there was mike rogers, the u.s. navy admiral who runs the nsa, the national security agency. he made a number of stunning admissions about the u.s. response or the lack of it following the russian interference in our elections. while admiral rogers revealed he hasn't requested additional authority to stop russian cyber attacks he also said president trump has not ordered him to do so. >> you said that president trump has never ordered cyber comm to take any action to thwart russian attempts to meddle this fall, is that correct? >> i said i've never given permission to take additional steps. >> no one from the administration has asked you to take any additional steps? >> haven't been granted any additional authorities, capacity, capability. no, that's certainly true. >> well, from there things got heated. democrats on the committee became increasingly angry with what they were hearing from admiral rogers. >> i'm going to try to channel a woman who came up to me at the grocery store not too long ago. she asked me are we strong enough and smart enough that we can keep them from doing this again? >> yes. >> okay. so then the next question she asked me and i said the same thing. the next question she asked me -- are we doing that right now? >> we're taking steps but we're probably not doing enough. >> okay, so she wants to know and i want to know why the hell not? what's it going to take? >> i'm an operational commander, ma'am. you're asking a question that's so much bigger than me. >> the notion you've not given a mission to stop this from happening this year is outrageous. >> i believe that the president and putin have come to the conclusion there's little price to pay here. >> bingo. >> everything i say on the nsa and cyber commander side this is going to continue and 2016 won't be viewed as something isolated. >> that gets your attention. and this marks the second time this month we've heard from our intelligence officials. you may recall february 13th we got a stark warning that moskow's chiefs would be back to meddle in this year's u.s. mid-terms. and chris ray was asked directly if the president had instructed him confront russia. >> has the president instructed you to take direct action on the russian activities that are ongoing? >> we're taking a lot of specific efforts to blunt russian efforts. >> have they have been directed by the president? >> not specifically directed by the president. >> with us to talk about all of it tonight frank montoya. he played a role in establishing the national cyber investigative joint task force. and fillip rucker is back with us a white house chief for "the washington post" and an msnbc political analyst. frank, how did it make you feel to hear that? putting their heads down, continuing to do their jobs and considering for the first time in your adult life, your life's work is under attack by the president? >> well, i definitely felt mike's pain. you know, this job is hard enough when there is a plan, when there is a policy. when there isn't one, it's near impossibility. the challenges are many. i think what you saw here in his testimony is a frustration he feels in terms of what he can do, what he can't do. the fact that some of it probably is having some good impact, but there are more things that can be done but there's got to be a whole government approach to this and that's not happening. >> philip rucker, i wrote this on the air when you wrote and i'm going to read it again. "trump has never convened a cabinet level meeting on russian interference and has resisted to hold moskow to account such as additional penalties imposed last august. there has been an unspoken understanding that the president would see raising the russia matters a personal affront." philip, in your view is it getting harder and harder to say nothing to see here? >> absolutely. this is why you saw admiral rogers at the capitol testifying putin has little price to pay here for the interference is very likely to do it again because the president of the united states, donald trump, is unwilling to engage in this topic and fully and forcefully acknowledge that russia did in fact interfere in our elections and unwilling to direct his administration to take actions. remember congress passed additional sanctions last year which trump had opposed. he spoke out against them in a notice after those passed the congress, and then he's done very little to enforce them. he's tried to block them within his administration. so this is not an issue where the president is willing to show leadership. >> frank, this may call for a judgment on your part, but from where we sit you have more judgment than some of the people we've seen in washington these days. why doesn't trump act? >> that's the million dollar question, and it's a range of possibilities. one, if it's just ego that's a great shame. if it's because there are concerns ability his relationships or possible relationshipwi relationships with the russians in the overview or in the shadow of this russia investigation that may be part of the problem, too. i do know that, you know, inside the community there's a ton of frustration because there are things that we can do. there are things we should do because the interference was indisputable. the fact is the russians, they ate our lunch in the course of this intelligence operation. and we're itching to do something to fight back. the question is where is the policy, where is the directives that will give us the opportunity to unleash some of the technology we have to counter this? >> so, philip, you know where this leaves us and that is in november election night for the mid-terms. i imagine you're going to be part of our coverage. what if we're sitting, it'll happen in this very studio. and we get weird numbers, a ground swell in colorado's second district, in virginia's third, new york's fourth and whatever it is. and the numbers look different to us as they can on election nights. is there always going to be that cloud? >> i think there will be. and brian, it's important to point out some of the states are actually taking action to tie to shore up their election systems. we've seen state legislators, governors, board of elections see what they can do to make their systems stronger and protect against this. but it's been in the absence of national leadership from the president to try to direct the full force of the federal government to protect our democracy. that's really what thus is about. and so potentially this cloud could hang over the mid-terms. who knows we may be talking about that. >> remember those words, to protect our democracy. philip rucker as he often does, gets the quote of the night. and our thanks to frank montoya and philip rucker. gentlemen, we really appreciate you taking part in our coverage. coming up for us two former assistant u.s. attorneys are coming to break down the headlines on hope hicks, rick gates, paul manafort and robert mueller. there are developments on all fronts. that is ahead after this break. e plaque psoriasis, 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 psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable after just 4 months, ... with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. 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. at the marine mammal center, the environment is everything. we want to do our very best for each and every animal, and we want to operate a sustainable facility. and pg&e has been a partner helping us to achieve that. we've helped the marine mammal center go solar, install electric vehicle charging stations, and become more energy efficient. pg&e has allowed us to be the most sustainable organization we can be. any time you help a customer, it's a really good feeling. it's especially so when it's a customer that's doing such good and important work for the environment. together, we're building a better california. white house communications director hope hicks spent over nine hours on capitol hill today being questioned by the house intelligence committee. they want to know what she knows about trump campaign ties with russia. hicks answered some questions about her time on the campaign and during the transition, but notably here she refused to talk about anything that happened after trump took office as president. "the new york times" tonight has some details about what hope hicks did have to say. citing three people familiar with her testimony the paper reports, quote hope hicks told house investigators on tuesday that her work for president trump who has a reputation for exaggerations and outright falsehoods had occasionally required her to tell white lies. but after extended communications with her lawyer she insisted she had not lied about materials to the investigations into russia's interference in the 2016 elections and possible interference. make no mistake hope hicks is a valuable witness. she knows a thing or two because she's seen a thing or two. the former model from gren which connecticut has stories to tell. she's enjoyed a meteoric rise within the west wing as communications directors. her boss, the president, did some communicating of his own today. and it was this, witch hunt in all caps. that's how he put it on twitter. a go-to phrase of his as he contends the russia matter is a hoax. we are so fortunate to be joined by two veterans both former u.s. assistant attorneys for the southern district of new york. jennifer rogers now executive director of the columbia law school center the advancement of public integrity and mimi roca at the pace university school of law. just the tweet, two words, witch hunt. from the view of a fed, if you're on mueller's staff and see that again this morning what does it do? >> i think this has been the refrain coming from the white house the entire time. this is a witch hunt. all this after the 13 indictments of the russians showing in fact it's not a witch hunt. but here he is trying to stir things up again. the other thing that happened since the indictment is the democratic response to the nunes memo, which also was a big hit for trump and his surrogates, so i think he's trying to get back to drumming up the support from his base on this because he's not finding a lot of support in the actual facts here. >> and mimi, when hope hicks admits to white lies, she's already been before mueller whom i presume reserves the right to preserve her, what's the legal fact to that when she admits to having told white lie snz. >> well, there are no white lies when you're talking about a grand jury investigation. what i think was interesting about what came out about what she said in her testimony she said white lies, but they weren't material to anything in the investigation. well, she doesn't get to decide that. her lawyers don't get to decide that. mueller gets to decide that. so, you know, to the extent that she is saying things that aren't true, mueller and his team are going to be the ones -- first of all she doesn't know all the facts so she can't possibly decide what's material and what's not. but that is one of the key jobs of a prosecutor and investigators to look at all the facts in the context and look at things, individual witnesses are saying and decide whether, you know, telling the truth. and if they're not, whether they're material. and in this broad of an investigation it's kind of hard to believe that these, quote, white lies would be as immaterial as they're trying to make it sounds. >> let's live in the real world. she works for donald trump. she's already been interviewed by robert mueller. he's not going to and what did they want to know and what did you want to tell them, and is she under any obligation to hold that back? >> well, she's not really under any obligation. show spoke with mueller's team voluntarily. she wasn't in the grand jury. she spoke with the committee today voluntarily. there's nothing really she can't tell the president. and as we know he demands things from people. he wanted to know from andrew mccabe who he voted for. things that are supposed to be secret he's asked about. so i'm sure he asked about what they wanted to know and in fact gave direction. there's no question that trump and the lawyers are in there basically instructing her what to do. so to me, you know, what happened today is almost immaterial to me. what really matters is what the mueller team is getting from her. and that's where we're going to see progress on this. we'll take a brief pause here. when we come back what led robert mueller to the rare move of dismissing some charges today against an important person in this investigation? this is food made to sit down for. slow down for. put the phone away, and use a knife and fork for. and with panera catering, it's food worth sharing. panera. food as it should be. and with panera catering, it's food worth sharing. we're all under one roof now. congratulations. thank you. how many kids? my two. his three. along with two dogs and jake, our new parrot. that is quite the family. quite a lot of colleges to pay for though. a lot of colleges. you get any financial advice? yeah, but i'm pretty sure it's the same plan they sold me before. well your situation's totally changed now. right, right. how 'bout a plan that works for 5 kids, 2 dogs and jake over here? that would be great. that would be great. that okay with you, jake? get a portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change from td ameritrade investment management. if yor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. this condition has not been reported with entyvio. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach. want us to do about what woulthis president?fathers i'm tom steyer, and when those patriots wrote the constitution here in philadelphia, they created the commander in chief to protect us from enemy attack the justice department just indicted 13 russians for an electronic attack on america. so what did this president do? nothing. he's failed his most important responsibility - to protect our country. the question is: why is he still president? anif you've got a lifee. you gotta swiffer you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. special counsel robert mueller moved to dismiss several charges. you don't hear that often. including tax and bank fraud against former trump campaign chairman rick gates today. charges are being dismissed because mr. gates has flipped. he's agreed to cooperate with the mueller investigation regarding quote, any and all matters. and they mean it. the special counsel deems relevant. he is instead being tagged with two lesser charges. gates also got more good news tuesday when a different judge accepted his request to take his children to boston next week. politico reminds us just how significant gates' cooperation could be hear. they write it this way, quote, he saw everything said a former trump campaign consultant who worked with gates and manafort and called him one of the top five trump insiders who mueller could tap as witnesses. mueller is scheduled to be arraigned tomorrow morning, his first of two court appearances this week. our two former feds are back with us. jennifer rogers and mimi roca. mimi please explain what it's like to be under the influence of a federal investigation. what has gates' life been like in the period they've been getting him to flip, and now to what agree do they own his life now that he's signed this deal? >> well, i'm sure it's been very intense for him. recently when the document was unsealed he was having some trouble deciding. and we know from manafort's statement it seemed they had an agreement spoken or unspoken, that they weren't going to cooperate. so this was a big, big deal what he did here. cooperating not just against the president but against manafort, assuming he has information. but against manafort and clearly they've been together for a long time through some interesting activities. so for him to do this is a really big deal. and it's obviously been kind of a roller coaster. once someone goes in court and actually pleads guilty in front of a judge under oath and says those words, there really is usually a shift in that they psychologically almost, it's a psychological evolution almost where they sort of come on team america in a more definitive way. so i think he might even be feeling a slight sense of relief, a change. and my guess is that, you know, the government will notice the people working with him will notice a different attitude with him over time where he's going to be cooperating, frankly. >> and let's talk about the recrusement effort to get mr. manafort to sign-up with team america. two court appearances this week, superseding indictment, more charges added. what other screws, what other tools of the trade does mueller and those others on his his team get manafort to see the light? >> it's seeing what gates is getting for being onboard. he now faces ten years maximum instead of dozens and dudsens of years. he gets to go on spring break with his kids now. so things do get easier when you come onboard, and manafort is seeing that happen with rick gates. i think also just more generally he's seeing this investigation speed up. he's seeing the indictment against the russians. we think more are coming in terms of what the russians have interfered in the state electoral process and e-mail hacking. and also the new york attorney general and some other attorneys general look at the stateside against him to warn off against the possible presidential pardon here. we'll have to wait and see whether they work. >> mimi, complete this sentence in 15 seconds or less. jared kushner should be especially worried tonight because blank. >> because i think olot of information is coming out about his foreign entanglements. certainly an ethical problem and could be a criminal problem. it's about foreign influence on american politics, and he's at the center of that. and clearly his entanglements are much more complicated than anyone thought. >> counselor, counselor, we are deeply indebted to our two former feds, two veterans of the u.s. attorney's office for the southern district of new york. jennifer rogers, mimi roca, thank you both. coming up, mired in the russia investigation trump has just named his campaign manager for the re-election campaign. when "the 11th hour" continues. in the modern world, it pays to switch things up. and when you switch to esurance, 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. our understood early that facebook was how donald trump was going to win. twitter is how he talked to the people. facebook was going to be how he won. i mean i think donald trump won, but i think facebook was the method. it was the highway in which his car drove on. >> amid all of the news today donald trump announced his 2020 campaign for re-election manager brad parscale. he drove the campaign's presence on facebook and twitter. you may have heard something about tat. of course we are still discussing all these months later given the fact that russia interfered in our election and given the fact he was asked to appear before the house intelligence committee last october, it makes parscale an interesting choice to be named as campaign manager for the next election while the last election is still under investigation. our friend ken vogel is with us tonight, political reporter for "the new york times." so, ken, for all of us, as someone who has studied us and him, why is this important? why is today's announcement important? >> well, the timing i think there's a couple of reasons it's important. number one, i think it's a bit of show of support for jared kushner or a bit of a power play for jared kushner who's extremely close to brad parscale but is embroiled in scuteany from mueller. and facing scrutiny in the white house where his security clearance was downgraded. and this move putting one of his close associates at the head of the re-election campaign shows jared kushner still has juice and will continue to have juice through the re-election. i also think this timing is usual because there were increasing rumblings that maybe trump would step aside, that all this pressure from mueller, from the house and senate intelligence committees and their investigations would finally get to him. this is sign that no, he is planning to run for re-election and well on the way to establishing his campaign infrastructure. >> kushner had a broad portfolio during the campaign which included story about some facility in the desert southwest. >> that was actually in the southwest because brad parscale's company was based in san antonio, texas. brad parscale didn't have a whole lot of experience in this world before this campaign. he came into the trump orbit because he was essentially a web site designer. he designed the web site for the trump golf courses, but he had the one thing that is the most important bit of currency in trump world, and that is loyalty. and up syou see the willingness trump and his campaign team to put that loyalty ahead of more traditional considerations, including a long resumé. donald trump is the president. he could get anyone he wants, including people who have vast experience in republican presidential campaigns to run his campaign. instead he chose a guy who is loyal to the family first and foremost and maybe secondarily has some experience running his last campaign, which of course was successful. i'm not doing anything to minimize what brad parscale did on that campaign. brad parscale, as you suggested, is very much a target of or attracting scrutiny from investigators looking into russian meddling into the election including social media. president trump could have found someone who was sort of a fresh face, who wasn't tainted by this investigations. again, he went with a loyal member of the inner circle. >> of all the headlines today on this front in this story, we have about 45 seconds left. which one stood out to you, which one did you find yourself personally doing a deep dive on? >> well, i do think it's interesting that jared kushner's security clearance was downgraded. as we look at the sort of palace intrigue and who's up and who's done, jared kushner had successfully staved off prior efforts to marginalize him by other players in the white house. this was something that maybe wasn't necessarily from a rival in the white house but from the intelligence community or the fbi that was in charge of the background checks. nonetheless, it shows that jared kushner is maybe not as much of an untouchable insider as we had initially thought. >> always one of the bylines readers should scan for, ken vogel, always a pleasure to have you here. thank you very much. >> thank you, brian. >> coming up, 50 years ago a night that changed the history of our business and made a history of its own across the country when "the 11th hour" continues. with advil's fast relief, you'll ask, "what pulled muscle?" "what headache?" nothing works faster to make pain a distant memory. advil liqui-gels and advil liqui-gels minis. what pain? advil liqui-gels and advil liqui-gels minis. hey, sir lose-a-lot! thou hast the patchy beard of a pre-pubescent squire! thy armor was forged by a feeble-fingered peasant woman... your mom! as long as hecklers love to heckle, you can count on geico saving folks money. boring! fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. jimmy's gotten used to his whole yup, he's gone noseblind. odors. he thinks it smells fine, but his mom smells this... luckily for all your hard-to-wash fabrics... ...there's febreze fabric refresher. febreze doesn't just mask, it eliminates odors you've... ...gone noseblind to. and try febreze unstopables for fabric. with up to twice the fresh scent power, you'll want to try it... ...again and again and maybe just one more time. indulge in irresistible freshness. febreze unstopables. breathe happy. you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. and butch.aura. and tank. and tiny. and this is laura's mobile dog grooming palace. laura can clean up a retriever that rolled in foxtails, but she's not much on "articles of organization." articles of what? so, she turned to legalzoom. they helped me out. she means we helped with her llc, trademark, and a lot of other legal stuff that's a part of running a business. so laura can get back to the dogs. would you sit still? this is laura's mobile dog grooming palace and this is where life meets legal. here he is, last thing before we go tonight is about something that happened 50 years ago tonight. it involved the best there ever was at this trade. during a very different time in our country and in our business. for starters, and while this may be hard to believe, there was a time when not everyone in the television news business expressed their opinion on a given story. in fact, aside from some quaint and clearly labelled commentaries by a few grizzlied veterans, television newspeople would never dream of expressing a personal opinion, nor could any of them envision a day when you could select a cable network based on the degree to which it agreed with your views. walter cronkite, the celebrated anchor of the "cbs evening news" was routinely called the most trusted man in america. he was an island of stability and credibility during the turbulent year of 1968. cronkite didn't scare easily. he'd been on bombing raids over dp germany in world war ii and had been in the battle of the bulge. cronkite came home from covering an unpopular war and shared his findings in a special broadcast and delivered a rare editorial that contained this. >> to say that we are closer to victory today is to believe in the face of the evidence the optimist who is have been wrong in the past. this suggests we are on the edge of defeat, to yield to unreasonable pessimism. they say that we are mired in stalemate. seems the only realistic yet unsatisfactory conclusion. on the off chance the military and political analysts are right, in the next few months we must test the enemy's intentions in case this is indeed his last big gasp before nextgotiations. but it is increasingly clear to this reporter the only rational way out will be to negotiate not as victims but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy and did the best they could. this is walter cronkite. good night. >> remember that lyndon johnson is president of the united states in 1968, and no president until donald trump has ever consumed as much news as lyndon johnson did. in what some considered a sacrilege, he had three tvs installed in the oval office along with two teletype machines from the ap and up wire services. both of them clanked away inside a soundproof box in the oval office. and in a story that may combine folklore and exact quotes, after hearing cronkite's remarks from night, the president said some version of if i've lost cronkite, i've lost middle america. of course 50 years ago tonight 1968 was just getting started. both martin luther king jr. and bobby kennedy were assassinated in a matter of months. lyndon johnson decided not to run for reelection, and the war in vietnam dragged on for another seven years. that is our broadcast for this tuesday evening. thank you so very much for being here with us and good night from nbcn headquarters here in new york. where do you want to start tonight? this is like you're used to having like an entree and two sides for dinner. no, tonight is pu no, tonight is poopoo platter. tonight you can choose from everything we have to offer. this has been another one of those days with one breaking news story after another. each one of them a big enough deal that in any other administration it would be the focus of months of attention and scandal and congressional investigation but in this administration it's all you can do to finish reading one of the huge scoops that broke this afternoon and this eveni
shakeup for the west wing and jared kushner president trump's son-in-law in senior advisor has been stripped of his high level security clearance cutting off his access to highly classified information like the presidential daily brief. nbc news has learned that kushner who has been working under the highest level interim clearance for all this while, more than a year learned about the downgrade in a memo on friday. the decision comes as white house chief of staff john kelly moved to overhaul the white house security clearance process after the resignation of staff security rob porter amid allegations of spousal abuse on his part. tonight a senior official told our kristen welker that had the president quote, has faith in this son-in-law and his senior advisor to continue to work at the level he has from the beginning to continue to make progress in his major pieces of his portfolio, a sentiment the president also emphasized just days ago. >> jared's done an outstanding job. he's a high quality person. he works for nothing. >> when it came to the issue of allowing his son-in-law to keep his access to the nation's deepest secrets trump seemed happy to let his chief lieutenant make that call. >> that'll be up to general kelly. general kelly respects jared a lot, and general kelly will make that call. >> a spokesman for jared kushner issued a statement that reads in part. "as to his security clearance mr. kushner has done more than what is expected of him in this process. no concerns were raised about mr. kushner's application as general kelly himself said, the new clearance policy will not affect mr. kushner's ability to continue to do the very important work that he be been assigned by the president." that work has meant a broad port foalo shall we call it for the 37-year-old jared kushner. has no government experience prior to this. his portfolio has included dealing with the peace process in the middle east, handling relations with china, japan and mexico as well as domestic issues including but not limited to opioids, infrastructure, government efficiency, the economy and trade. >> serving the president and the people of united states has been the honor and privilege of a lifetime. i am so grateful for the opportunity to work on important matters such as middle east peace and reinvigorating america's innovative spirit. every day i come to work with enthusiasm and excitement for what can be. >> but his involvement in some of the president's key domestic and foreign policy decisions, his work on the trump campaign and his one-time involvement in that family real estate business may have made him something of a liability in this administration. "the washington post" as we mentioned earlier reports tonight that he was targeted by foreign governments and that quote, officials in at least four countries have privately discussed ways they can manipulate jared kushner, the president's son-in-law and senior advisor, by taking advantage of his complex business arrangements, financial difficulties and lack of foreign policy experience according to current and former u.s. officials familiar with intelligence reports on the matter. among those nations discussing ways to influence kushner to their advantage were the united airborne emirates, china, israel and mexico. "the post" goes onto say white house officials were quote, concerned that kushner was naive and being tricked in conversations with foreign officials, some of whom said they wanted to deal only with kushner directly and not more experienced personnel. let's bring in our lead off panel for a tuesday night broadcast. jeremy bash, former chief of staff at the cia and pentagon. robert costa, national political reporter for "the washington post" and moderator of "wash week" on pbs, and kimberley atkinson for the boston herald. mr. costa, i understand you are just off the phone with some folks and can speak to just how bad a day this was for jared kushner. >> a very rough day for jared kushner. talking to officials inside the white house tonight, brian, they say he has lost not only his security clearance, at least that high level access to classified information downgraded to a secret status. he is losing his top aide inside the white house. not a well-known presence nationally, but inside the west wing, inside of washington known as a real keen operator. he's leaving the west wing. and you also have kushner struggling with general kelly, the chief of staff. these tensions about the scope of his role, all of it culminating today with this new clearance announcement. >> jeremy bash, if homeland or any number of broadcasts were doing this, they would establish a meeting in the situation room where they would have to pause and they would say i'm afraid to continue we'll have to and you to leave. in the real world, in a practical sense what does this mean jared kushner will no longer be able to see or hear or handle and who's the enforcer? >> he won't be able to read the president's daily brief and get access to intelligence about some of things in his portfolio like the israel palestinian peace process or relations with china. that information will have to be ripped out from under his desk. i've talked to officials current and former throughout the evening and none of us can remember a single west wing staffer who was able to remain in his or her job with merely a secret clearance. with the exception of people who deliver the mail or the exceptional sailors who deliver the white house mess. he cannot do the job the president has asked him to do with merely a secret clearance. >> kim, let's agree for the baseline of this conversation if an organic talent search has been launched to find a senior advisor to the president of the united states no one would come back and say there's this guy named kushner, he's 37 in real estate in new york, he'd be perfect. but presidency and elections have their perks and consequences. the president wanted him there. do you think what we've witnessed today is the revenge of two generals named kelly and mcmaster perhaps wanting to exert a little bit more control over the west wing? >> i think that's absolutely that. i mean i think there is this struggle that's going on. you have people who are there who want this to work properly. look, this is a textbook example of why we have security clearance requirements for people in high ranking positions in the white house. this isn't just a story of white house intrigue. it's a matter of national security when we're dealing with friends and foes who are both trying to manipulate a top white house official in order to gain some sort of leverage. that's a major problem. this would be disqualifying for anyone not relate today the president. and i think that is the tension here. you have someone who you can't -- john kelly even if you wanted to fire him, how can you fire the president's son-in-law? but it's presenting a major problem, ongoing problem that doesn't seem to have a major solution so long as he's in there. now jared kushner can't fully do the job and in doing the job he's a liability to the white house. >> robert, i want to know if you'll go as far as two people you and i both know on kushner's security status being reduced. zeke miller and jonathan lemere write quote, the news setoff rampant speculation among trump allies that kushner's days in the white house might be numbered. this dove tails with what jeremy just said. >> the clock has been ticking for two week. general kelly we reported at "the post" he has this memo, if you have this interim clearance you will not be able to continue working in the white house. that was widely seen inside the white house as a direct message to jared kushner. those days were over. it was put out in a memo that's basically policy inside the white house. and then you had rod rosenstein the deputy attorney general call the white house counsel don megan and say there are ongoing concerns with his background investigation, didn't give any details as far as we know. but you have the head of the mueller investigation telling the white house that. this latest development is just the tip of the spear in the sense of all these things that have been happening. and if the kushner wing of the white house faces a tough question tonight. how does he move on if he does stay? what is that portfolio? are they willing to accept a narrow scope in that portfolio? >> i'll and two hypotheticals. was kushner naive enough when another government says we want to deal with you personally to accept that at face value, be flattered by that. and was he naive enough to ever raise business, the kushner family business with these foreign relations that he came into by dint of his west wing knowledge? >> if you take the president at his word this young fellow has good judgment so you would think he'd know better. i think probably from "the washington post" reporting what concerned the fbi wasn't so much that foreign countries were trying to manipulate him. i think there must be something much more significant. because the bar for denying security clearance for a senior advisor for the president is pretty high. and the fbi is going to go after that issue and dig in it better be for a darn good reason. and i don't think it's merely because foreign officials thought they could work jared kushner. >> and kim, let's talk about real life and the way people live. the president has the authority behind closed doors, family dinners to repeat or pass on whatever he wishes to his son-in-law? is that correct? >> that's absolutely true. and as "the washington post" reported there hasn't been enforcement of how this information is disseminated and shared. that's something general kelly is trying to get ahold of right now. so there's nothing to really stop the president from giving or telling jared kushner what he wants him to have or know. and keep in mind we've said before the president can put an end to all of this by granting jared kushner full security clearance. he has the ability to do so, but so far right now he's letting general kelly take the lead on this and an indication he might be willing to let him go despite the close family ties i think it's possible. >> to our knowledge the trump agenda did not advance a wit today. any other bold faced names who might have security clearances pulled we might read about in the next 24 hours? >> jared kushner is the most prominent in the white house who has had problems with security clearance. it's the constant cloud of the russia investigation. hope hicks, one of the other president's confidants questioned today on capitol hill all as kushner deals with security concern issues. it continues to be russia, russia, russia, security clearance and russia every day. >> and jeremy, when you remember the fact this is a subject because of the porter matter, because of allegations of spousal abuse, ball it all up for me. what have we learned or what have we reinforced about this administration? >> well, we learned the team that came in with the president in january 2017 was inexperienced, many unqualified and did not have the proper credentials and the ability to get the credentials. but i think robert is pointing up to the larger issue, which is two weeks ago that republicans in capitol hill and now realizing the white house were trying to go after bob mueller and undermine the investigation. i think the gate plea, the plea deal from the lawyer, the superseding indictments from manafort have basically washed all that away. >> around these parts if you want things to look dramatically different wait a week. our thanks for starting us off on a tuesday night. and coming up the warning from one of america's top intelligence chiefs about russian meddling in our elections and how he's proceeding without a direct order to stop it. and later we mentioned this earlier, what hope hicks has admitted to doing for her boss, the president. according to "the new york times" account of her testimony just out tonight. "the 11th hour" just getting started tonight. it was quite the scene inside today's senate armed surfaces committee hearing on the u.s. cyber command. there was mike rogers, the u.s. navy admiral who runs the nsa, the national security agency. he made a number of stunning admissions about the u.s. response or the lack of it following the russian interference in our elections. while admiral rogers revealed he hasn't requested additional authority to stop russian cyber attacks he also said president trump has not ordered him to do so. >> you said that president trump has never ordered cyber comm to take any action to thwart russian attempts to meddle this fall, is that correct? >> i said i've never given permission to take additional steps. >> no one from the administration has asked you to take any additional steps? >> haven't been granted any additional authorities, capacity, capability. no, that's certainly true. >> well, from there things got heated. democrats on the committee became increasingly angry with what they were hearing from admiral rogers. >> i'm going to try to channel a woman who came up to me at the grocery store not too long ago. she asked me are we strong enough and smart enough that we can keep them from doing this again? >> yes. >> okay. so then the next question she asked me and i said the same thing. the next question she asked me -- are we doing that right now? >> we're taking steps but we're probably not doing enough. >> okay, so she wants to know and i want to know why the hell not? what's it going to take? >> i'm an operational commander, ma'am. you're asking a question that's so much bigger than me. >> the notion you've not given a mission to stop this from happening this year is outrageous. >> i believe that the president and putin have come to the conclusion there's little price to pay here. >> bingo. >> everything i say on the nsa and cyber commander side this is going to continue and 2016 won't be viewed as something isolated. >> that gets your attention. and this marks the second time this month we've heard from our intelligence officials. you may recall february 13th we got a stark warning that moskow's chiefs would be back to meddle in this year's u.s. mid-terms. and chris ray was asked directly if the president had instructed him confront russia. >> has the president instructed you to take direct action on the russian activities that are ongoing? >> we're taking a lot of specific efforts to blunt russian efforts. >> have they have been directed by the president? >> not specifically directed by the president. >> with us to talk about all of it tonight frank montoya. he played a role in establishing the national cyber investigative joint task force. and fillip rucker is back with us a white house chief for "the washington post" and an msnbc political analyst. frank, how did it make you feel to hear that? putting their heads down, continuing to do their jobs and considering for the first time in your adult life, your life's work is under attack by the president? >> well, i definitely felt mike's pain. you know, this job is hard enough when there is a plan, when there is a policy. when there isn't one, it's near impossibility. the challenges are many. i think what you saw here in his testimony is a frustration he feels in terms of what he can do, what he can't do. the fact that some of it probably is having some good impact, but there are more things that can be done but there's got to be a whole government approach to this and that's not happening. >> philip rucker, i wrote this on the air when you wrote and i'm going to read it again. "trump has never convened a cabinet level meeting on russian interference and has resisted to hold moskow to account such as additional penalties imposed last august. there has been an unspoken understanding that the president would see raising the russia matters a personal affront." philip, in your view is it getting harder and harder to say nothing to see here? >> absolutely. this is why you saw admiral rogers at the capitol testifying putin has little price to pay here for the interference is very likely to do it again because the president of the united states, donald trump, is unwilling to engage in this topic and fully and forcefully acknowledge that russia did in fact interfere in our elections and unwilling to direct his administration to take actions. remember congress passed additional sanctions last year which trump had opposed. he spoke out against them in a notice after those passed the congress, and then he's done very little to enforce them. he's tried to block them within his administration. so this is not an issue where the president is willing to show leadership. >> frank, this may call for a judgment on your part, but from where we sit you have more judgment than some of the people we've seen in washington these days. why doesn't trump act? >> that's the million dollar question, and it's a range of possibilities. one, if it's just ego that's a great shame. if it's because there are concerns ability his relationships or possible relationships with the russians in the overview or in the shadow of this russia investigation that may be part of the problem, too. i do know that, you know, inside the community there's a ton of frustration because there are things that we can do. there are things we should do because the interference was indisputable. the fact is the russians, they ate our lunch in the course of this intelligence operation. and we're itching to do something to fight back. the question is where is the policy, where is the directives that will give us the opportunity to unleash some of the technology we have to counter this? >> so, philip, you know where this leaves us and that is in november election night for the mid-terms. i imagine you're going to be part of our coverage. what if we're sitting, it'll happen in this very studio. and we get weird numbers, a ground swell in colorado's second district, in virginia's third, new york's fourth and whatever it is. and the numbers look different to us as they can on election nights. is there always going to be that cloud? >> i think there will be. and brian, it's important to point out some of the states are actually taking action to tie to shore up their election systems. we've seen state legislators, governors, board of elections see what they can do to make their systems stronger and protect against this. but it's been in the absence of national leadership from the president to try to direct the full force of the federal government to protect our democracy. that's really what thus is about. and so potentially this cloud could hang over the mid-terms. who knows we may be talking about that. >> remember those words, to protect our democracy. philip rucker as he often does, gets the quote of the night. and our thanks to frank montoya and philip rucker. gentlemen, we really appreciate you taking part in our coverage. coming up for us two former assistant u.s. attorneys are coming to break down the headlines on hope hicks, rick gates, paul manafort and robert mueller. there are developments on all fronts. that is ahead after this break. white house communications director hope hicks spent over nine hours on capitol hill today being questioned by the house intelligence committee. they want to know what she knows about trump campaign ties with russia. hicks answered some questions about her time on the campaign and during the transition, but notably here she refused to talk about anything that happened after trump took office as president. "the new york times" tonight has some details about what hope hicks did have to say. citing three people familiar with her testimony the paper reports, quote hope hicks told house investigators on tuesday that her work for president trump who has a reputation for exaggerations and outright falsehoods had occasionally required her to tell white lies. but after extended communications with her lawyer she insisted she had not lied about materials to the investigations into russia's interference in the 2016 elections and possible interference. make no mistake hope hicks is a valuable witness. she knows a thing or two because she's seen a thing or two. the former model from gren which connecticut has stories to tell. she's enjoyed a meteoric rise within the west wing as communications directors. her boss, the president, did some communicating of his own today. and it was this, witch hunt in all caps. that's how he put it on twitter. a go-to phrase of his as he contends the russia matter is a hoax. we are so fortunate to be joined by two veterans both former u.s. assistant attorneys for the southern district of new york. jennifer rogers now executive director of the columbia law school center the advancement of public integrity and mimi roca at the pace university school of law. just the tweet, two words, witch hunt. from the view of a fed, if you're on mueller's staff and see that again this morning what does it do? >> i think this has been the refrain coming from the white house the entire time. this is a witch hunt. all this after the 13 indictments of the russians showing in fact it's not a witch hunt. but here he is trying to stir things up again. the other thing that happened since the indictment is the democratic response to the nunes memo, which also was a big hit for trump and his surrogates, so i think he's trying to get back to drumming up the support from his base on this because he's not finding a lot of support in the actual facts here. >> and mimi, when hope hicks admits to white lies, she's already been before mueller whom i presume reserves the right to preserve her, what's the legal fact to that when she admits to having told white lies. >> well, there are no white lies when you're talking about a grand jury investigation. what i think was interesting about what came out about what she said in her testimony she said white lies, but they weren't material to anything in the investigation. well, she doesn't get to decide that. her lawyers don't get to decide that. mueller gets to decide that. so, you know, to the extent that she is saying things that aren't true, mueller and his team are going to be the ones -- first of all she doesn't know all the facts so she can't possibly decide what's material and what's not. but that is one of the key jobs of a prosecutor and investigators to look at all the facts in the context and look at things, individual witnesses are saying and decide whether, you know, telling the truth. and if they're not, whether they're material. and in this broad of an investigation it's kind of hard to believe that these, quote, white lies would be as immaterial as they're trying to make it sounds. >> let's live in the real world. she works for donald trump. she's already been interviewed by robert mueller. he's not going to and what did they want to know and what did you want to tell them, and is she under any obligation to hold that back? >> well, she's not really under any obligation. show spoke with mueller's team voluntarily. she wasn't in the grand jury. she spoke with the committee today voluntarily. there's nothing really she can't tell the president. and as we know he demands things from people. he wanted to know from andrew mccabe who he voted for. things that are supposed to be secret he's asked about. so i'm sure he asked about what they wanted to know and in fact gave direction. there's no question that trump and the lawyers are in there basically instructing her what to do. so to me, you know, what happened today is almost immaterial to me. what really matters is what the mueller team is getting from her. and that's where we're going to see progress on this. we'll take a brief pause here. when we come back what led robert mueller to the rare move of dismissing some charges today against an important person in this investigation? "i have antivirus, but my computer's still slow..." "that's not right..." "maybe if i reboot..." "what's with all the popups?" "why does it keep on crashing?" "this is taking forever." "i think it's time for the fixmestick." fixmestick is a plug-in virus removal device. it's the smart, simple, safe way to clean your computer yourself. with fixmestick you don't have to replace your computer. it helps you keep your files, and your privacy. fixmestick reboots your computer from a system on the stick, so that it can remove the malware that got past your antivirus software. it's the smart, simple way to clean an infected computer, with a whole lot going on inside the stick... [computers sound] "alright, this computer's powered down. " "let's reboot from the stick, and start scanning..." fixmestick contains 3 independent scanners, and connects to more in the cloud, for fast and effective detection of the latest threats. "i thought so - this one got around the antivirus software!" "not a problem." "we're on it." today's viruses sabotage the computers they infect, like a burglar who gets into your house, and deactivates your security system. once your computer is infected, it's far easier to clean it with an external device... that's what makes fixmestick so effective. "ok, i see spyware, trojans, keyloggers, and here it is, the rootkit!" the fixmestick is like having your own it department in the palm of your hand. and because it connects to the internet, it's always up to date. "coffee" we're going to need some more coffee down here... " "anyone," "coffee?" advanced technology in an external device has enabled people all over the world to get the upper hand against viruses and malware. try it for 30 days, and see for yourself why more than a million people trust fixmestick to keep their computer fast, clean, and safe." call us today or visit us online. special counsel robert mueller moved to dismiss several charges. you don't hear that often. including tax and bank fraud against former trump campaign chairman rick gates today. charges are being dismissed because mr. gates has flipped. he's agreed to cooperate with the mueller investigation regarding quote, any and all matters. and they mean it. the special counsel deems relevant. he is instead being tagged with two lesser charges. gates also got more good news tuesday when a different judge accepted his request to take his children to boston next week. politico reminds us just how significant gates' cooperation could be hear. they write it this way, quote, he saw everything said a former trump campaign consultant who worked with gates and manafort and called him one of the top five trump insiders who mueller could tap as witnesses. mueller is scheduled to be arraigned tomorrow morning, his first of two court appearances this week. our two former feds are back with us. jennifer rogers and mimi roca. mimi please explain what it's like to be under the influence of a federal investigation. what has gates' life been like in the period they've been getting him to flip, and now to what agree do they own his life now that he's signed this deal? >> well, i'm sure it's been very intense for him. recently when the document was unsealed he was having some trouble deciding. and we know from manafort's statement it seemed they had an agreement spoken or unspoken, that they weren't going to cooperate. so this was a big, big deal what he did here. cooperating not just against the president but against manafort, assuming he has information. but against manafort and clearly they've been together for a long time through some interesting activities. so for him to do this is a really big deal. and it's obviously been kind of a roller coaster. once someone goes in court and actually pleads guilty in front of a judge under oath and says those words, there really is usually a shift in that they psychologically almost, it's a psychological evolution almost where they sort of come on team america in a more definitive way. so i think he might even be feeling a slight sense of relief, a change. and my guess is that, you know, the government will notice the people working with him will notice a different attitude with him over time where he's going to be cooperating, frankly. >> and let's talk about the recruitment effort to get mr. manafort to sign-up with team america. two court appearances this week, superseding indictment, more charges added. what other screws, what other tools of the trade does mueller and those others on his his team get manafort to see the light? >> it's seeing what gates is getting for being onboard. he now faces ten years maximum instead of dozens and dozens of years. he gets to go on spring break with his kids now. so things do get easier when you come onboard, and manafort is seeing that happen with rick gates. i think also just more generally he's seeing this investigation speed up. he's seeing the indictment against the russians. we think more are coming in terms of what the russians have interfered in the state electoral process and e-mail hacking. and also the new york attorney general and some other attorneys general look at the stateside against him to warn off against the possible presidential pardon here. we'll have to wait and see whether they work. >> mimi, complete this sentence in 15 seconds or less. jared kushner should be especially worried tonight because blank. >> because i think olot of information is coming out about his foreign entanglements. certainly an ethical problem and could be a criminal problem. it's about foreign influence on american politics, and he's at the center of that. and clearly his entanglements are much more complicated than anyone thought. >> counselor, counselor, we are deeply indebted to our two former feds, two veterans of the u.s. attorney's office for the southern district of new york. jennifer rogers, mimi roca, thank you both. coming up, mired in the russia investigation trump has just named his campaign manager for the re-election campaign. when "the 11th hour" continues. our understood early that facebook was how donald trump was going to win. twitter is how he talked to the people. facebook was going to be how he won. i mean i think donald trump won, but i think facebook was the method. it was the highway in which his car drove on. >> amid all of the news today donald trump announced his 2020 campaign for re-election manager brad parscale. he drove the campaign's presence on facebook and twitter. you may have heard something about tat. of course we are still discussing all these months later given the fact that russia interfered in our election and given the fact he was asked to appear before the house intelligence committee last october, it makes parscale an interesting choice to be named as campaign manager for the next election while the last election is still under investigation. our friend ken vogel is with us tonight, political reporter for "the new york times." so, ken, for all of us, as someone who has studied us and him, why is this important? why is today's announcement important? >> well, the timing i think there's a couple of reasons it's important. number one, i think it's a bit of show of support for jared kushner or a bit of a power play for jared kushner who's extremely close to brad parscale but is embroiled in scrutiny from mueller. and facing scrutiny in the white house where his security clearance was downgraded. and this move putting one of his close associates at the head of the re-election campaign shows jared kushner still has juice and will continue to have juice through the re-election. i also think this timing is usual because there were increasing rumblings that maybe trump would step aside, that all this pressure from mueller, from the house and senate intelligence committees and their investigations would finally get to him. this is sign that no, he is planning to run for re-election and well on the way to establishing his campaign infrastructure. >> kushner had a broad portfolio during the campaign which included this huge data operation. i remember reading a story about a facility in the southwest. >> that was actually in the southwest because brad parscale's company was based in san antonio, texas. brad parscale didn't have a whole lot of experience in this world before this campaign. he came into the trump orbit because he was essentially a web site designer. he designed the web site for the trump golf courses, but he had the one thing that is the most important bit of currency in trump world, and that is loyalty. and you see the willingness of trump and his campaign team to put that loyalty ahead of more traditional considerations, including a long resumé. donald trump is the president. he could get anyone he wants, including people who have vast experience in republican presidential campaigns to run his campaign. instead he chose a guy who is loyal to the family first and foremost and maybe secondarily has some experience running his last campaign, which of course was successful. i'm not doing anything to minimize what brad parscale did on that campaign. brad parscale, as you suggested, is very much a target of or attracting scrutiny from investigators looking into russian meddling into the election including social media. president trump could have found someone who was sort of a fresh face, who wasn't tainted by this investigations. again, he went with a loyal member of the inner circle. >> of all the headlines today on this front in this story, we have about 45 seconds left. which one stood out to you, which one did you find yourself personally doing a deep dive on? >> well, i do think it's interesting that jared kushner's security clearance was downgraded. as we look at the sort of palace intrigue and who's up and who's done, jared kushner had successfully staved off prior efforts to marginalize him by other players in the white house. this was something that maybe wasn't necessarily from a rival in the white house but from the intelligence community or the fbi that was in charge of the background checks. nonetheless, it shows that jared kushner is maybe not as much of an untouchable insider as we had initially thought. >> always one of the bylines readers should scan for, ken vogel, always a pleasure to have you here. thank you very much. >> thank you, brian. >> coming up, 50 years ago a night that changed the history of our business and made a history of its own across the country when "the 11th hour" continues. but i'm not standing still... and with godaddy, i've made my ideas real. ♪ i made my own way, now it's time to make yours. ♪ everything is working, just like it should ♪ jimmy's gotten used to his whole yup, he's gone noseblind. odors. he thinks it smells fine, but his mom smells this... luckily there's febreze fabric refresher for all the things you can't wash. it finds odors trapped in fabrics and washes them away as it dries. and try pluggable febreze to continuously eliminate odors for up to 45 days of freshness. pluggable febreze and fabric refresher. two more ways to breathe happy. here he is, last thing before we go tonight is about something that happened 50 years ago tonight. it involved the best there ever was at this trade. during a very different time in our country and in our business. for starters, and while this may be hard to believe, there was a time when not everyone in the television news business expressed their opinion on a given story. in fact, aside from some quaint and clearly labelled commentaries by a few grizzlied veterans, television newspeople would never dream of expressing a personal opinion, nor could any of them envision a day when you could select a cable network based on the degree to which it agreed with your views. walter cronkite, the celebrated anchor of the "cbs evening news" was routinely called the most trusted man in america. he was an island of stability and credibility during the turbulent year of 1968. cronkite didn't scare easily. he'd been on bombing raids over germany in world war ii and had been in the battle of the bulge. cronkite came home from covering an unpopular war and shared his findings in a special broadcast and delivered a rare editorial that contained this. >> to say that we are closer to victory today is to believe in the face of the evidence the optimist who is have been wrong in the past. this suggests we are on the edge of defeat, to yield to unreasonable pessimism. they say that we are mired in stalemate. seems the only realistic yet unsatisfactory conclusion. on the off chance the military and political analysts are right, in the next few months we must test the enemy's intentions in case this is indeed his last big gasp before negotiations. but it is increasingly clear to this reporter the only rational way out will be to negotiate not as victims but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy and did the best they could. this is walter cronkite. good night. >> remember that lyndon johnson is president of the united states in 1968, and no president until donald trump has ever consumed as much news as lyndon johnson did. in what some considered a sacrilege, he had three tvs installed in the oval office along with two teletype machines from the ap and up wire services. both of them clanked away inside a soundproof box in the oval office. and in a story that may combine folklore and exact quotes, after hearing cronkite's remarks from night, the president said some version of if i've lost cronkite, i've lost middle america. of course 50 years ago tonight 1968 was just getting started. both martin luther king jr. and bobby kennedy were assassinated in a matter of months. lyndon johnson decided not to run for reelection, and the war in vietnam dragged on for another seven years. that is our broadcast for this tuesday evening. thank you so very much for being here with us and good night from nbc headquarters here in new york. this morning, an nbc news exclusive, multiple officials say the u.s. intel community had substantial evidence that send states had been, quote, compromised by russia prior to or during the 2016 election. plus president trump senior adviser and son-in-law jared kushner losing access to highly classified information. and white house communications director hope lihicks appearing before the how intel committee, but refuses to answer some questions related to the russia probe. good morning.