Begins now. As we start a new week, good evening once again in our headquarters here in new york. Day 109 of the trump administration. This afternoon we were live on air with what turned out to be a dramatic day in the u. S. Senate. At the center of it, a 27 year veteran attorney general named sally yates. A 27year Public Servant promoted along the way by republicans and democrats alike. Sally yates was the acting attorney general, running the Justice Department in transition, waiting for Jeff Sessions in effect to be approved as the new attorney general back in january. But there came a day during just the second week of the Trump Presidency when she called the white house and asked the president s lawyer if they could meet. She said she had something important to tell him. Now we know it was about president Trumps National security adviser at the time, retired general Michael Flynn. Sally yates told the president s lawyer that mike flynn was potentially vulnerable to blackmail and had been compromised by the russians. We began our meeting telling him that there had been press accounts of statements from the Vice President and others that related conduct that mr. Flynn had been involved in that we not knew not to be the truth. The first thing we did was to explain to mr. Mcgahn that the underlying conduct was problematic in and of itself. Secondly, we felt like the Vice President and others were entitled to know that information they were conveying to the American People wasnt true. And additionally, that we werent the only ones that knew all of this. That the russians also knew about what general flynn had done, and the russians also knew that general flynn had misled the Vice President and others. And that created a compromise situation, a situation where the National Security adviser essentially could be blackmailed by the russians. Sally yates was also questioned several times today about the reactions she got from all of this from whiteHouse Counsel,er. C. Lawyer don mcgahn. I guess i also want to go to the question, which keeping gnawing at me here that mr. Mcgahn asked of you. Is there anything wrong with one white house official lying to another white house official . To be fair to mr. Mcgahn here, i wouldnt say he said is there anything wrong. His question was more whats it to the Justice Department department if one official is lying to another official. In other words, why is this something that d. O. J. Would be concerned about. Thats when we went back through the list of issues and things that were troubling to us. The white House Counsel did not understand why the department of justice was concerned. To be fair to mr. Mcgahn, i think the issue he raised, that he wasnt clear on was why we cared that Michael Flynn had lied to the Vice President and others. Why that was a matter essentially i think thats clear. Within d. O. J. Jurisdiction. I think thats so clear. And we have mcgahn doesnt understand whats wrong with this . Yates was also asked about any evidence she may have seen that the Trump Campaign was colluding with russia. Miss yates, do you have any evidence, are you aware of any evidence that would subject that in the 2016 campaign anybody in the Trump Campaign colluded with the russian government or Intelligence Services in an improper fashion . And senator, my answer to that question would require me to reveal classified information. Sally yates wasnt the only one testifying today. She shared the witness table with the former director of National IntelligenceJames Clapper. During his opening remarks, clapper underscored, as fbi director comey did in his capitol hill testimony last week, the urgency and the depth of the threat posed by russia. And this got our attention. He said, quote, if there has ever been a clarion call for vigilance and action against a threat to the very foundation of our Democratic Political system, this episode is it. I hope the American People recognize the severity of this threat and that we collectively counter it before it further erodes the fabric of our democracy. And a reminder, the president has called this matter a total hoax. And four times in the last 24 hours, he has called the media out for being fake. Thankfully, our guest to start us off tonight are real. Lets bring in two gentlemen who have been of counsel to us throughout the day during our live coverage. Jeremy bash, former chief of staff to both the director of cia and the secretary of defense during the Obama Administration. Also former counsel to house intel. And matthew miller, former spokesman for the department of justice and the Obama Administration who along the way worked closely with sally yates, both fortunately, are msnbc analysts. Jeremy start with you. What else did we learn today . We learned that when sally yates went to the white house she did not provide a mere heads up, as has been stated from the podium. On three occasions, twice in person, and one over the telephone, she discussed with the white House Counsel precisely the nature of the department of justice concern. Namely, that the fbi had interviewed the National Security adviser, had found him to be lying, not just possibly to the bureau but indeed to the Vice President. And that he was possibly going to be the subject of blackmail, that this resulted in russia the russian federation, having leverage over the National Security adviser, and ultimately over the National Security of the United States. Matthew, start with your own knowledge. Who is sally yates to you . And put on your bipartisan hat. How did you think she conducted herself as a witness . Sally yates entire background is as a career prosecutor who eventually was appointed to a political job, not a partisan job but a political appointee. As u. S. Attorney. Her background really is prosecuting terrorists, prosecuting corrupt officials from both parties. And she eventually became Deputy Attorney general. I think what i saw working with her is what a lot of people saw today. Someone who is calm, someone who is resolute, someone who is fearless. The question she got in her confirmation hearing that i thought was relevant and came up again today. If you ever as the attorney general are asked to do something that is wrong, will you tell the president no . If you are ever faced with an issue thats tough will you go to the president and raise it . Thats what she did. And i think thats what people saw today. Probably notable that question was asked by then alabama senator and now attorney general Jeff Sessions. And the clip of that is fairly remarkable. It is. And i dont think thats the context he had in mind, obviously. He was thinking of president obama. But the principle is the same. And it is a principle that the people at the department of justice rely on and hold dear. You look at the facts, look at the law and do so without respect to partisanship. I think when you saw her lay out her concerns and the concerns of the Justice Department today and why she went and briefed the white House Counsel its because she had very real, very grave conference that the National Security adviser to the president wasnt being truthful and was being compromised. She gets these questions back to the white House Counsel, including but not limited to whats it to you if it happened over here . Then we get into explaining 18 days that go by until the former general separates, Parts Company with the white house. Talk about what we learned on that front today . First you would have thought that had the white house learned of mike flynns acts his feloous actions possibly compromising National Security that they would have fired him. Instead they fired sally yates, and they kept mike flynn in the position for 18 days. Over the course of those 18 days, mike flynn was involved in conversations with vladimir putin, prime ministers, other heads of state, dealing with all the covert action and National Security measures that come under the purview of the National Security council. It wasnt until the Washington Post revealed the nature of his deception that the white house turned around and fired him. Not because he was compromising National Security but because he had lied to the Vice President. In fact, he was, as sally yates warned a clear and present danger. Matthew, is there a serious case to be made that we still would not have known about this if 2 story hadnt leaked to the Washington Post, if that hadnt been the way it got out . I think there is absolutely no reason to believe based on what we know that the white house would have ever fired mike flynn. Its clear they only fired him once it became public. And now when you look and go back and reconstruct these events and look at the way they rolled out as she explained today. She had a meeting with don mcgahn on january 26th. She had another meeting with him on the 27th of january. They had a phone call on the 30th. That was the day she was going to provide him with the underlying evidence which we believe are the transcripts flynns call with the russian ambassador. Thats the same day she got fired. And that was before and had been led to believe and did believe she was fired because she refused to defend the immigration order in court. Now when you look at the fact she was an agitant calling for something to happen with mike flynn. The white house didnt want to do that, they fond a way to remove the agitant. You have to ask if the immigration order was an excuse. We were all together today. When he said it, we all looked at each other in realtime. We knew the quote of the day when we heard it. Were all patriots here. But by dent of your service at the pentagon and cia, where is the urgency . Where is the immediacy . If russia had attacked the allusion islands, attacked alaska, blown one of our bombers out of the sky, rammed one of our subs, yes it would feel like an act of war. Does the electronic nature of this make it more ephemeral . Or is outrage dead and gone . We shouldnt be deluded into thinking its more ephemeral. Anybody who cares about defending the country has to be seized with the warning that the former director of National Intelligence provided us today. He said this is among the most grave threats we face today. He said unless we stand up to it, defend our country from it we will yield to it and ultimately it will end us. That was the ultimate failing here of the new administration. They not only didnt stand up to it, they allowed the person responsible for that compromise to stay in that post. And also, matthew, there is this other component, and that is the president on twitter today kind of fighting the other angle. And 109 days of kind of forced or at least attempted normalization of all things russia and putin. Weve gotten inured to some of the things the president says on twitter. He said something tonight as remarkable. He talked about this investigation as being a waste of taxpayer money. It is an investigation of people who ultimately work for him. The director of the fbi, the who he can fire if he wants to, the Deputy Attorney general, who he can also fire. These are people conducting investigations of which the president s associates are subjects, maybe targets. The president is out on twitter raising legitimacy of the investigation. Its a very inappropriate thing to do. Its consistent with how he has handled this generally from the beginning. Gentlemen, we got under way at 2 00 this afternoon. Its been a long day it was a lot of testimony. Perhaps its unfair to ask you for a headline, but starting with you jeremy, what was the biggest thing you learned today . No mere heads up. That in fact, the warning to the white house was substantive. It was thorough. And should it have resulted in flynns firing. Instead, they fired sally yates. Matthew, same question . I think he had the major headline. But there is one thing we havent talked about yet that i found surprising. It came out in the hearing that director clapper was not briefed on the criminal investigation that the fbi was conducting into collusion between the russian government and the Trump Campaign, possible collusion. It raises a question to me whether the department of justice also briefed the Obama White House. A lot of people asked why the Obama White House didnt sound a more urgent warning in the days leading up to the campaign. If in fact ty Department Even know it was a possible collusion was under investigation by the fbi, that might go a long way to explaining that question. And jeremy, you get the last word. Its about director clapper. Hes seen them come, hes seen them go. By that, i mean politicians, crises, threats. He doesnt scare easily. I dont think anyone has tried to assign him a partisan label. How should he, how will he be remembered in contemporary post9 11 era American History . He lives up to the ultimate Intelligence Officers creed. Know the truth and the truth shall set you free. He spoke the truth today. Couldnt end on a better note. Gentlemen thank you not only for the live coverage this afternoon but for sticking around and talking with us tonight. I appreciate it. Jeremy matthew miller. Well get our first break in now. Coming up. The president who fired general mike flynn warned donald trump not give him a big job in the white house but he did anyway. Tonight on his phone at least the president is reacting to the days testimony. Two reporters who cover the white house day in and day out will fill us in when the 11th hour continues. I find it enormously disappointing that you somehow veto the decision of the office of Legal Counsel and decide instead that you would counter man the executive order of the president of the United States because you happen to disagree with it as a policy matter. Particularly Tense Exchange during the hearing with john cornan of texas. Welcome back to the 11th hour. These things all have titles. The title of todays hearing was sally yates and James Clapper was, russian interference in the 2016 United States election. But as so often becomes the case, because of politics, a senators questions may veer off topic depending on whether there is an r or a d after their game. There you just saw the majority whip of the senate, john cornan, expressing his disappointment over sally yates refusing to defend the president s first travel ban, something that eventually led to her termination. Here is how yates responded. Let me make one thing clear. It was not purely as a policy matter. In fact, i remember my confirmation hearing. You specifically asked me in that hearing that if the president asks me to do something that was unlawful or unconstitutional, and one of your colleagues said or even that would reflect poorly on the department of justice, would i say no. Thats what i promised you i would do and thats what i did. I dont know how you can say that it was lawful and say that it was within your prerogative to refuse to defend it in a court of law and leave it for the court to decide. Senator, i did not say it was lawful. I said it was unlawful. And the president also couldnt resist politicizing todays proceedings on twitter of course, quote, director clapper reiterated what everybody, including the fake media already knows. There is no evidence of collusion with russia and trump. Then this. Sally yates made the fake media extremely unhappy today. She said nothing but old news. That was followed by this. The russia trump collusion story is a total hoax. When will this taxpayer funded charade end. Lastly, biggest story today between clapper and yates is on surveillance. Why doesnt the media report on this, fakenews. With us tonight, andy carney and brian bennett. Andy, whats it like covering a story as a deadline matter, day to day, with this presence on his phone of the person we like to call the leader of the free world kind of trolling the proceedings . I think at this point its expected. Its sort of like, well we have to wait to see what the president s reaction is at the ends of a big day when we know he is going to weigh in on anything to do with russia, this clouds been hanging over the administration. One thing about the tweets you just read, the one where he says that clapper said there was no collusion. First of all clapper didnt say that. He said he couldnt comment because it would affect the investigation. Trump actually made that tweet the background of his entire twitter page which sort of works symbolically. The issue that is sort of hanging over the first 109 days of the administration that they just cant shake. This came afte