Attack on the election. Congressman schiff told me tonight that its not going to be that he has been advised that its not to brief trey gowdy and devin nunes alone. He said hes been advised by a cabinet member, the head of an intelligence agency, the phrase he used, that its a gang of eight meeting. Its still something that should never be briefed but thats the more appropriate group in congress to brief rather than the two random people in congress. You did have the breaking news were going to be discussing, does it mean in your view then that you had a thing that was a Conspiracy Theory meeting, which is bad but now instead of only people with tinfoil hats there, there will also be other legitimate people to discuss, what you and others have suggested today was still a Conspiracy Theory . Theres a few different ways to look at this, right . I mean, if we think back to what we know happened during the campaign when the fbi had opened the counterintelligence investigation into russias attack and whether or not the Trump Campaign was involved in it, whether there were russian agents who were in contact with members of the Trump Campaign, that was briefed during the campaign to congress. I think it was james comey, if not john brennan, one of the two of them, went and briefed the gang of eight. It ultimately ended up being a sort of source of controversy because harry reed wrote we know youre sitting on information about trump russia contacts no one knew what they were talking about. So another briefing about the gang of eight about a continuing investigation, it wouldnt break precedent in exactly the same way. Whereas telling devin nunes and trey gowdy, whos not a member of the gang of eight, would be a bigger break with Law Enforcement traditions. So it would materially change it. It also might mean theres going to be a fight tomorrow between the Intelligence Community and the white house as to who can be in that meeting. Yeah, and i think you that makes a lot of sense what youre saying, is it an oversight activity or this conspiracyoriented political meeting which as you documented would be something quite different. I wish i could keep you but you get to go we have other guests. Thank you for sticking around. Thank you, ari. We have breaking news on this, the control room is telling me theres an update on confirmation of what rachel and i were discussing. There is legal heat on trump world right now and a stunning set of statements from Donald Trumps latest member of his legal team, an unpaid lawyer, Rudy Giuliani. Now the first statement that giuliani makes here is breaking news as well tonight, makes him look out of the loop and makes donald trump look pretty silly. Tonight giuliani telling a reporting he hasnt talked to his client, donald trump in weeks. So pause on what that means. One during giulianis recent lengthy media tours where hes held forth on the facts of this case and whether donald trump will testify with bob mueller, hes been doing all that without talking to his client at all. Two it means that giuliani may be communicating with bob mueller more than donald trump at times. We know theyve held in person meetings. This means whatever donald trump and Rudy Giuliani are planning they are planning through tv since they both watch coverage about themselves and each other. And finally, this speaks to giulianis competence, he didnt need to reveal this information. He could say his talks with his client are privileged and that means what they discussed, how they discussed it and how often is privileged. That means every answer costs him nothing and spares any embarrassment for him. All that is the context for what else he said, he tells buzz feed other lawyers talk to the white house, and says im not, people from my office are talking to the white house and that when those people talk, asks how that work, he said if you talk talking and correspondence, a couple times a week. Thats where rudy stands. As for a legal strategy its a waiting game with the interview with bob mueller, saying no decision until the details of this, quote, spygate situation are figured out. Thats what rachel and i were discussing, what would be basically a Conspiracy Theory. The ap reporting today that trump basically told an ally this week that he wanted to brand this informant as spy believing the term would resonate more in the media and with the public. That rhetoric tries to take back the power of scandals ending in gate. Many compare trumps russia problem to watergate. And hes looking for ways to allege others of misdeeds. It can be effective rhetorically. Consider in the last month of the 2016 campaign fake news stories online helped trump and many people, including barack obama, were criticizing fake news by name. Trump hijacked that term to attack the real news and a lot of people consider that as his term now. Thats the framework for whats happening on a bigger scale as trump says spygate could be one of the biggest political scandals in history. And he took to the lawn about whats happening. All you have to do is look at the basics and youll see. It looks like a serious event. Well find out. When they look at the documents, i think people are going to see a lot of bad things happen. I hope its not so because if it is, theres never been anything like it in the history of our country. If you look at clapper, he sort of admitted they had spies in the campaign yesterday inadvertently. I hope its not true, but it looks like it is. Everybody wants this solved but a lot of bad things have happened. We now call it spygate youre calling it spygate a lot of bad things have happened. Theyll sit in a room and hopefully work it out among themselves. Thats the big story, whos going to sit in the room. Its a bipartisan member of the gang of eight, telling her it will include the gang of eight. I was informed by the head of our intelligence agencies earlier tonight that the meeting would be a bipartisan briefing at a gang of eight level and that would be it. I expect them to live up to the commitment. That is the right procedure. If there is any information that could compromise a source or methods. Thats been around for decades and i expect them to follow it. We have heard conflicting things from the white house. Thats adam schiff saying that to rachel. Now im holding something from the department of justice, time stamped 10 00 p. M. Tonight. It describes a first meeting with john kelly, devin nunes, and gowdy. And a second meeting with the department of justice and the same individuals and all gang of eight members. The white house putting this out through the doj quite late at night. Lets get to it. Mimi roker, john allen, and kimberly, an msnbc analyst. What do you think of the news and why is it coming out so late at night. Why would it be so different than breaking news that breaks on another day. I think there has been a bit of a scramble to put together exactly how this meeting that the president has demanded and which was apparent lysetlyset u Rod Rosenstein to placate the president who seemed ready to take a more drastic action against this investigation. This is something that is not normal. Normally when there is an Ongoing Investigation by federal authorities, the oversight doesnt come in the middle. It comes once its complete, once theres conclusions, and then if theres questions about the process then the folks go in and take a look at it so the investigation itself is not compromised so there are no problems. So yeah theres no real protocol as to how to do this. So its small wonder that there is some confusion, that theres changes in the plan, different statements coming from differing agencies about how exactly this is going to work. John what is your view according to this brand new itinerary the original partisan meeting is still on the books . Its a good way to put that ari. The white house obviously was scrambling today to try to sort of counter the democratic requests for a meeting of the gang of eight, Chuck Schumer and nancy pelosi sent a letter to that effect and they were beside themselves that this kind of meeting would go on without the bipartisan leadership of the intelligence committees in congress and the leadership of both Political Parties in both houses of congress. What you have now is two separate meetings one where all the good stuff is going to be talked about between the members of congress who are trying to get information that they might then share with the white house from a Justice Department that, you know, is generally left alone by white houses during its investigations, particularly investigations of said white houses. I did a story earlier this week about President Trump now launching an investigation of the investigators. I talked to john dean, who was the white House Counsel during the nixon years and he said this all has echos of watergate. Why do you think theyre doing this . Is it a fig leaf or a sign things matter and they buckle to push back . They do buckle to push back. Its a sign things matter were not going to be in the room to see the difference between the briefing or the discussion between chairman nunes, gowdy and the Justice Department were not but were human beings with logical faculties and either these individuals are doing the same thing twice in a highly inefficient manner for very busy people who the white house chief of staff, intelligence fbi director, or theyre doing Something Different in the first meeting than the second meeting. The only reason to do this is you want separate conversations with separate content. Fair. Pmimi. This sounds to me like a judge meeting with the defendant alone and then coming out and meeting with both parties, thats not supposed to happen. This doesnt feel like congressional oversight. This feels like, as i said, a subject of an investigation going to a judge and saying, i want to see the evidence now before anythings been charged while youre in the middle of an investigation, might jeopardize the investigation, i dont care, and a judge would say absolutely not to that. But here for whatever reasons, the department of justice is giving something. We dont know yet what theyre giving. I do think its important to note that. We dont know theyre turning over documents or showing them documents or whether theyre briefing them on things that they consider not as harmful to you know, to brief them on. But its its such a dangerous precedent. And it has just no parallel in our criminal justice system, which this is a part of. This is a criminal investigation going on and being jeopardized by this. Do you think the members of the gang of eight, which are both parties and supposed to in theory be nonpartisan to these matters. Should they object the first meeting is still there . We got this news while we were live air, but my instinct is it feels very trumpy in that its saying fine, you know what well make so much noise well have a second fake meeting you can come to. It happens to be two hours later, but it could be two days, two months later. Sooner or later the gang of eight is going to have meetings. And it doesnt address what you and rachel were addressing about the original meeting, which is there is not a good reason, a valid, legitimate reason to take the nonpart investigation of the russia probe, dni director, and leave them to a criticaling by partisans who are implicated. And take what they learn undoubtedly and relay it to the lawyers, at least, of one if not all of the subjects of that investigation, which is just so youre putting your finger on it. Youre saying this is more than just protocol. Youre saying that any actionable investigative information that nunes or gowdy are gleaning could be relayed back to the suspects . Yes. Why wouldnt be obstruction. It could be. I bring it back to the parallel of an ordinary criminal case that americans face every day. It is. But ordinary people dont have the power that the president has to say you must have this meeting and turn over this information. A judge would ordinary people. Laugh in their face. John i turn to you. And im not going to make a john legend ordinary people reference. Go ahead. Lets remember devin nunes, recused himself from his own committees organization because of the coordination he had with the white house in the early days. So its not surprising that people would be concerned that his motive might be to collect information that the white house and other people under investigation is seeking but cannot get from the Justice Department. Thats his thing. Right. Thats his thing. Thats what he got busted doing. Yet now he appears to no longer believe he needs to recuse himself. Hes obviously played a part as a as a defender, protector and, you know, conspirator, i dont mean that in a criminal sense, but conspirator with the president on this russia situation pretty much from day one. You know, and as far as these meetings go, can you imagine Robert Mueller meeting with Chuck Schumer, nancy pelosi, sharing information with them about the investigation and saying well have a bipartisan meeting later. Like in the middle of the begbe benghazi probe, no. Kimberly atkins, take a look at him trying to get information out of Robert Mueller. Take a look. Kimberly, you know well how it works, the negative space in that painting is potent because people serve at the pleasure of the president if they dont have his confidence. Thats as second time in as many days that he refused to answer the question about Rod Rosensteins future. So that does not bode well, particularly with this president who has expressed his frustration with him openly. So i think Rod Rosenstein understands hes in a tough position right now. Hes trying not to just save his job but keep the investigation intact and up against the president whos very eager to attack both things. So i dont think it bodes well. I think thats one of the biggest things we have to look at what comes out of this meeting tomorrow. And to the point about devin nunes. Look, theres precedent for a lot of whats happening now. Devin nunes was the author of a memo that was confidential, declassified by the white house, over the objection of the Justice Department, and released and released first and then the white house said, okay, later well also release this democratic memo that refuted the original memo. It seems to be the mo here that republicans are given the first shot at this to help the president s claim that this is a nefarious investigation and possibly even a criminal one, something thats false, theres no evidence indicating that anything thats happened in this investigation has been nefarious in any way, but thats the messaging that the president is seeking to support. And he seems to be interested in getting that however he can. Kimberly you make a naanalog that i think is helpful. The memo was about why carter page was surveilled, which was done prior to donald trump becoming president because of evidence approved by independent judges that he appeared to be a candidate for russian spies trying to flip and use it within an asset, because of that he looked bad and they release this information, he shouldnt have been surveilled. And again, in this case it doesnt mean its bad for the informant. A lot more on the breaking news, the doj putting this out at the late hour, at 10 00. And Michael Cohen may have been brokering foreign meetings without registering, raising new criminal liability for him. Thats next. vo what if this didnt have to happen . I didnt see it. vo what if we could go back . What if our car. Could stop itself . In iihs frontend crash prevention testing, nobody beats the subaru impreza. Not toyota. Not honda. Not ford. The subaru impreza. More than a car, its a subaru. Savings on the new sleep number 360 smart bed. It senses your every move and automatically adjusts on both sides to keep you effortlessly comfortable. And snoring. Does your bed do that . Right now during our semiannual sale save up to 700 on sleep number 360 smart beds. Ends soon. With dell small businessout your Technology Advisors you get the oneonone partnership you need to grow your business. The dell vostro 15 laptop. Contact a dell advisor today. Breaking news, the department of justice announcing late tonight, in this hour, there will be two meetings tomorrow, one will include the gang of eight, this is all about Donald Trumps allegations that there was something wrong with an informant being involved in the fbi review of his campaign. I want to bring in ned price, a former cia analyst. Your reaction. Under almost all scenarios this makes no dense. Ill tell you why, devin nunes is a member of the gang of eight as the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee hes entitled to that second briefing. The odd man out is trey gowdy, the chairman of the House Oversight committee, trey gowdy as someone who is not a member of this exclusive club does not have the same clearance that these other eight individuals do. So what would make sense, what would be rational and reasonable would be to have a gang of eight meeting that all the details could be shared and if there needs to be a second meeting, have a second meeting with trey gowdy because he doesnt have the same clearance. The only way this makes sense is if somehow gowdy and devin nunes are entitled to more information than the gang of eight. And that doesnt make sense. That doesnt seem to be the case here. Something smells fishy about this. I hate to get this far in the weeds. It is important, though. You have 12 plus one, the gang of eight, which is devin nunes in both cases. The four people from the white house, doj, fbi involved in the thing, and then you have gowdy. Thats right. So the theory we were discussing before the commercial break here is is the whole thing a sham because the second meeting, the gang of eight meeting, that in a normal world we dont live in one anymore in a normal world would be the high level intel eyes only, its only a cover for the first meeting anyway. Thats what it sounds like to me, ari. The way thes