many times, there is now publicly available, written evidence of a top trump aide proactively contacting the kremlin for financial gain. now, these e-mails were submitted today to congressional investigators. the "washington post" first breaking this bombshell story. cohen, who plays a high-level role in the trump organization e-mailing a senior putin aide in january 2016. of course, the height of the gop primary. quote, i've been working with a company based in russia regarding the development of a trump tower moscow project, he wrote. and the communication between our two sides has stalled. as this project is too important, i am hereby requesting your assistance, that's kremlin government assistance. i respectfully request someone, preferably you, he wrote, contact me so that i might discuss the specifics as well as arranging meetings with the appropriate individuals. michael cohen is trump's longtime lawyer. he does trump's bidding. and here he is, in plain daylight today for the first time everyone can see it, asking the putin government for help in the same year that trump categorically denied any business or political ties in russia. >> we're all over the world. i had nothing to do with russia, folks. i have no dealings with russia. i have no deals in russia. i have no deals that could happen in russia, because we've stayed away. and i have no loans with russia. i have nothing to do with russia. i have no investments in russia. none whatsoever. i don't have property in russia. >> no property in russia. so here's what's different right now. even if that statement by donald trump were true, today's revelation shows it was not for lack of trying. the trump organization wasn't just trying to build a trump tower in moscow, when the project stalled it tried so hard, they wanted to get vladimir putin to help seal this deal. and putin is not known for his charity work. if he does something for you, he expects something in return. let's get right to it with carol lee, national political reporter on the russia story. richard painer, white house ethics white house for the bush 43 administration. glen covers the white house for "the new york times," of course. richard, this looks big to my investigative eyes. i'm curious, your view of the significance of the newly revealed information from the investigative perspective and ethics perspective. >> well, in and of itself, there's nothing illegal about the trump organization trying to build a trump tower in moscow. and, of course, seeking the help of the russian government, because that's how you do business over there. you've got to get the government on your side. so all that is quite predictable. what is very disturbing here is that president trump can't tell the truth about it. and candidate trump did not tell the truth about it. and that's what's been going on with this russia story for the past year. it's the drip, drip, drip. we hear a new revelation every week, sometimes every day, about relationships between the trump organization, or the trump campaign, and the russians. some of them pose serious legal issues, such as the meeting in the trump tower, to get dirt on hillary clinton, although a law may have very well been violated there. these other arrangements aren't illegal at all, but they're not telling the truth about it at all. repeated lies from a wide variety of people, including the president himself. the big picture, the big question here is, how dependent is our president on the russians for his financial dealings, for his political success, how many secrets do the russians know about him, that he would not want to be revealed, how much beholding is he to vladimir putin. and these are the questions we need answers to, and the united states and house and senate should be investigating, not just the special prosecutor, robert mueller, who's only focusing on potential crimes. this is a critically important issue for our national security as we have crises developing in the korean peninsula and elsewhere in the world. >> you put the question, how dependent is donald trump on russia and how truthfully has he been discussing these issues. i'm joined as well by ambassador mcfall, former u.s. ambassador to russia under the obama administration. ambassador, richard was just making a nuanced point that it is legal to do business in russia generally and that does involve the russian government oftentimes. yet what is so stark in these newly revealed e-mails, again, which are only coming out because of investigations is, there's no nice way to say it, they undercut what the trump organization and what donald trump has said. they undercut the quotes i just played for him where he said no dealings and no efforts at dealings. put this in the russia context for us, ambassador. >> well, first of all, as you just said, to do business in russia, especially a major business deal like this one that was being proposed, you're almost inevitably going to have to deal with the russian government. that seems clear. if you're contacting the president's chief spokesperson, that means that you need to deal with the kremlin. what's also important that you were just discussing, remember that robert mueller is investigating criminal problems. possible violations of the law. this is not that. but it most certainly sounds like something that's a violation of norms, normal practices that we have during presidential elections. and disclosures of what people are doing during presidential elections. so that's why we need those investigative committees in the senate and in the congress to do their work as well. >> right. and then you can lay out the time line, glen, within the month of this exposure, this is how donald trump was speaking about vladimir putin and defending him even against questioning here on msnbc about the record of targeting journalists and other behavior. take a listen. >> also, a person that kills journalists, political opponents and bates countries obviously would be a concern, would it not? >> he's running this country. at least he's a leader, unlike what we have in this country. >> again, he kills journalists that don't agree with him. >> well, i think our country does plenty of killing also, joe. >> you obviously condemn vladimir putin killing journalists in political opponents, right? >> sure. absolutely. >> glen, should we view this differently, knowing now what we didn't know then, without in i attacks, disclosure, or other transparency which is they were actively seeking not only business in russia, but again, the headline coming into our newsroom tonight that they were seeking the kremlin's help with that business? >> look, you know, the one thing i would caution against -- by the way, hearing him talk like that about journalists is a little bit chilling, just having sat 20 feet from him at a press conference. look, i think the one danger here is, every single day we're hearing revelations about this. felix slater revelations today. i was stunned, for instance, by the fact that the white house didn't deny the fact that ivanka trump sad in vladimir putin's office chair during a visit to moscow in 2007. these are sort of extraordinary connections. and as you add one after the next, it becomes a very interesting picture. but again, i think we're going to have to be patient and see if all of these various jigsaw pieces paint a picture of criminality. the one thing i would say -- >> glen, i'm going to jump in there and use moderator's privilege. we don't know if they reach criminality. we can't prejudge the outcomes. what we know now, though, is even if these are not felonies, we now know, i think, some better understanding of why the tax returns never came out, because they very well may have more than the e-mails would show an effort to get kremlin help, it was russian property, which shows the trump organization was lying about some of this. no? >> yeah, i think there definitely is a pattern of them not telling the truth. but look, you know, there are things that donald trump has done as president that are also, i think, very much worthy of investigation. i thought the "washington post" report about him pressuring jeff sessions to drop the case against joe arpaio was an extraordinary revelation. you know, ari, at some point, there's so much of this stuff, it's kind of hard to keep track. but the one thing i would caution against, i think, are people drawing all the lines between each component of this. what is interesting, and i think one of your guests pointed this out, what's interesting is russia just keeps coming up, over and over and over. i was just at a press conference with the president and the finnish president, and even then president trump was fairly circumspect in talking about the threat that russia posed to finland. he downplayed it. and i'm not certain, for instance, that the president is aware that the soviet union invaded finland prior to world war -- you know, during world war ii. that was one of the bloodiest conflicts. i'm not sure that he in the conversations with the fins was exactly aware of that history. >> but look, you're -- i hear you. you're cautioning on being vague. that's why we've taken care to be specific. this is a man who worked for trump over a decade. he used to work in ivanka's old office. he wanted a senior administration post, didn't get it. the "times" reported if anyone crossed mr. trump or stood in his way, mr. cohen would cajole, bully or threaten a lawsuit. this isn't just any aide, is it? >> no. it's definitely not just any aide. obviously this is a close associate to president trump. you know, i think we have two things here. one is, there's obviously a very significant case being built that looks at collusion in russia, and trump and his business interests in russia. then we have what you know publicly, which leads to this sort of perception problem that the president has. we don't know whether all of this is going to lead to something where he's criminally -- found criminally guilty of wrongdoing. but as glen said, russia keeps coming up. it creates a perception problem. and i think not only that, but what we've seen in the past, when these sorts of stories come out and russia's back in the headlines, particularly in ways that are significant as this, the president tends to overreact. and that's where he gets himself into trouble. which we've seen before. the other thing i would say is, if you go back to when this was happening, and when president trump was then a candidate talking about russia in positive ways, and praising vladimir putin, that was a time when the u.s. -- it was a real downturn in u.s. relations with russia. in 2015, after russia went into syria, and surprised the obama administration. so that was already raising eyebrows. >> look, i appreciate -- i feel like the odd lawyer out here. everyone's talking about how big a legal story it is. it may be a bigger foreign policy story than legal. although ambassador mcfaul, foreign policy has incredible impact. take a listen here, again, with the lens of what we know today, about donald trump speaking off the cuff, supposedly, about getting russian help during the campaign. >> russia, if you're listening, i hope you're able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing. >> how did that comment look today, ambassador? >> just as bad as it always looked, in my view. i just want to underscore two points about this bigger story. because i do think, you know, the drip, drip, drip we sometimes forget a couple of core things that are still true. one is, they never tell us about these connections with the russians, until it's disclosed by somebody else. and that makes people wonder what are they hiding. if there's nothing to hide, why are we just learning about this story today. and number two, candidate trump when he was saying that, and president trump, up to today, including in the press conference today, is alone among democrats, republicans, i would say he's even alone within his own government in speaking the way he does about vladimir putin and russia. everybody else worries about the fact that russia invaded ukraine, annexed crimea, bombed cities in syria, intervened in our elections in 2016. he's the one person that is somehow out of bounds of that narrative. why is that the case? that's the question that i think is still perplexing, and we need an answer to. >> right. his twitter stream may not be that revealing all the time, but the fact that it attacks literally almost everyone who crosses him except vladimir putin, even after sanctions are put to punish u.s. diplomats in moscow, is very, very interesting piece of evidence. carol and glen, thank you for sharing your reporting with us. mr. am bobassadoambassador, mr. please stay with me. ivanka trump as mentioned sitting in putin's private office in the kremlin, allegedly, big news, after the break. how do you chase what you love with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis? do what i did. ask your doctor about humira. it's proven to help relieve pain and protect joints from further irreversible damage in many adults. humira works by targeting and helping to block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. humira has been clinically studied for over 20 years. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. ready for a new chapter? talk to your rheumatologist about humira. this is humira at work. gloria always went big. so we helped her plan a memorial service that no one would soon forget. ♪ this one's for you, gloria. ♪ only a dignity memorial professional can celebrate a life like no other. find out how at sanfranciscodignity.com. the other russia story breaking tonight reveals a trump linked businessman pitching a business deal that would put trump allegedly in the white house with putin's help. a newly revealed e-mail from felix satter, boasting that a moscow business deal will, quote, get trump elected. this, again, involves a top aide. i'll get putin on this program and we will get donald elected. buddy, our boy can become president of the usa and we can engineer it. i will get all of putin's team to buy in on this, i will, he wrote. considering what we're learning from just today's reports, on the one hand, trump aides writing to the kremlin asking for business help. on the other hand, russian fixers telling trump aides the kremlin would help donald trump. this would look bad even if we didn't know that russia ultimately hacked the 2016 election. the very combination of carrot and stick that has been chronicled by russia experts in the infamous 2016 dossier. the e mailings show satter recounting hour weirdly in 2006 he allegedly arranged for ivanka to sit in his private chair in the kremlin. why would a businessman have such deep ties to the kremlin. under putin, there are no truly independent private markets. every money trail leads back to putin, if he chooses. and he rewards businessmen who do his bidding. he punishes those who do not. like his campaign to bankrupt and jail the billionaire who once ran russia's largest oil company. and the russian journalist that dissed putin, explaining that story. putin used the attack to give the russian business community two options, bend to putin's will or suffer the fate of a now jailed billionaire. joining me is that russian-american journalist, the author of the man without the face, the unlikely rise of vladimir putin. and ken delaney, a reporter on the story from the start. and back with us is richard painter and michael mcfaul. mosha, i start with you. we see all of these new e-mails telling this story. does it fit with what we know about putin's russia? >> i'm not sure what stories these e-mails are telling. let's not rush to conclusions. that e-mail from satter makes no sense. can you make it make sense? i can't make it make sense. >> i could make it make sense. i don't know if it's true. i think he's pitching the idea that russia would be helpful and the russia deal would be good for donald financially and politically. >> but we don't understand what he's saying, right? i mean, there's -- what the connection is between the business deal and getting donald elected. is he bluffing? it's not at all articulated. considering that we have also learned that michael cohen wrote to the business press secretary. apparently it sputtered and ended in nothing. this isn't much of a story that's being told by these e-mails, right? if you're asking me about the connection between business and the kremlin, no business is done in russia without the kremlin. if you want to have success, if you want to have a chance of success, you have to have connections to the kremlin. >> ambassador, can you speak to that? and your view of -- again, i agree, we don't know, one theory, though, one of the reasons they're of investigative interest is they suggest part of a larger conversation about russians offering to help donald trump, in the same way that the trump tower meeting had russians saying, allegedly, they were speaking on behalf of the kremlin and could rough up hillary clinton in the information campaign. >> that's right. i mean, there's a larger narrative out there with lots of data to support it. you know, the kremlin wanted trump to win and did what they could to try to help him win. including most vivaciously stealing e-mails from the dnc and john podesta and we know that to be true. we also know it to be true that there were connections between trump affiliated people and russian affiliated kremlin people, business people, that were trying to do business deals. as, you know, as back as early as 2008. that trail has been talked about. what we don't know is the details of that trail, precisely because we haven't seen the tax documents. we haven't had full disclosure of what was happening. that's why when we see things like this, it raises a question, is there a bigger story here. these e-mails, i agree with mosha, are not definitive in that, but the fact that we didn't know about these contacts before, we didn't know that there was a trump tower being proposed in moscow until -- that begs the question what do we know to know the whole story. >> if this were all coming out of the normal course, say, around the month it happened, then it would look perhaps less suspicious. the problem is, the sound i just played, in the interest of time, i'm not going to play it again, very public, cat dpor cal denials of having any business in russia. >> that's exactly right, ari. it's extraordinary. leaving aside the whole question of collusion between the trump campaign and russia, it would be extraordinary for any candidate for president to be like, oh, by the way, i have this business deal i'm trying to do with vladimir putin's deal in russia. that would be a disqualifier in many other elections. we didn't know that was happening at the time. donald trump actually denied it. the other interesting thing about the whole exchange in the e-mails is the character felix satter. he's one of the most mysterious and fascinating characters in the whole trump-russia saga. he got into trouble back in the '90s, in a bar fight and served jail time after allegedly stabbing a man with a margarita glass. >> yeah, broken margarita glass. he's on the far right for the viewers. >> fast forward to 2008, he's implicated in a stock swindle, a mafia connected stock swindle. but makes a deal with the fbi. and spends years cooperating to the point where the justice department later said he was very helpful in a national security sense. we still don't know the extent of his cooperation and what he did. but he's also working for donald trump. he has a business card that says he's working for trump. but in a deposition trump said i wouldn't know this guy if he walked into a room. so we have him saying satter was trying to get me to go to moscow. was satter working for the russians, trying to induce, you know, the trump organization? there's a lot we don't know about why the deal didn't come to fruition. but michael cohen e-mailed nbc news today, he talked to donald trump about this deal on three occasions, he said, and signed a nonbinding letter of intent. >> what's your take on the lack of transparency? >> just one more shoe to drop on the -- there's shoes dropping on the russia story literally every other day. or certainly every week. since the election. the big picture is the russians have been at this game at least since the 1917 revolution in russia where the communists sought to undermine western democracies and choose who would run governments in europe. they succeeded, particularly after world war ii in eastern europe. not only through tax and weaponry, and armed force, but through manipulation of elections, and through the communist parties. they didn't succeed. but they struck the jackpot on this one. it's abunt antly obvious they wanted donald trump in the white house. he was their man. they didn't like clinton. they didn't like the obama administration. and they feel that president trump is going to be beholding to them. this needs to be investigated by the house and senate intelligence committees. this goes well beyond the criminal investigation, special prosecutor robert mueller. it's critically important whether we know our president is beholding to the russians. we know the russians helped choose him asment, but to what extent is he beholding to the russians? are we going to have other world powers choosing our leadership or are we an independent country? we need to find out about the trump organization's financial arrangements with the russians. and payments he's receiving. they won't even disclose the tax returns. all these need to be disclosed immediately. it's not a partisan issue. it is an american issue. it is about our own independence and our own national security. >> mosha, you're bowing your head. >> i think it's overstating the evidence that we have. we know americans elected donald trump. right? and it is a huge problem that we have the americans that elected donald trump. he lies. he admires vladimir putin apparently quite sincerely, regardless of whether putin has anything on him or not. he is destroying the american government as it was constituted before he became president. all of this is out in the open. that doesn't make the united states a banana republic. that's not putin doing that stuff, that's trump doing this stuff. okay? >> you're talking about americans being accountable. >> i'm talking about americans being accountable and focusing on what's out in the open instead of imagining that somebody's pulling the strings and turning the united states into a banana republic, which is such an absurd thing to say. >> do you think trump has autocratic tendencies? >> absolutely. >> i think what richard is referring to is the notion that you have the potential foreign meddling with -- well, not potential, the meddling in, the collusion, and trump governing the way he is. >> we don't know anything about collusion. so far the evidence that you have just produced is evidence of corruption. it is in fact further evidence of trump lying. as if we needed any more evidence of trump lying. >> last word, ambassador. >> well, i feel like we're talking about apples and oranges here. on the one hand, are we a banana republic, no, we are not, we're going to survive the trump presidency. i'm very confident in saying that. that doesn't mean that there's not suspicious things involved in the relationship between the trump organization and various russian individuals. and i just go back to the point i made earlier. why is it only when somebody does incredible investigative reporting that we hear about this. >> right. >> that, to me, suggests that they're covering up something. if they didn't have anything to cover up, they should just lay it out in one 24-hour story and be done with it. the fact that they don't means there is more to be learned. >> that's an important question to rest on. i don't want to end on a joke, but the old saying when an a.m. bass dor and ethics lawyer walk into a bar, you get a lot of interesting views. >> thank you for having us. >> thank you all. now, donald trump today says he is standing by the controversial partner of joe arpaio, the former arizona sheriff. are republicans, though, getting his back? i'll speak to a leading skfrlt and get into the details. rethink what's possible. rethink your allergy pills. flonase sensimist allergy relief helps block 6 key inflammatory substances with a gentle mist. most allergy pills only block one. and 6 is greater than one. flonase sensimist. ♪ when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night, so he got home safe. yeah, my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. what?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. what's critical thinking like? a basketball costs $14. what's team spirit worth? (cheers) what's it worth to talk to your mom? what's the value of a walk in the woods? the value of capital is to create, not just wealth, but things that matter. morgan stanley sheriff joe is a patriot. sheriff joe loves our country. sheriff joe protected our borders. and sheriff joe was very unfairly treated by the obama administration. so i stand by my pardon of sheriff joe. >> president trump defending his controversial pardon of arizona sheriff joe arpaio. hurricane harvey bore down on the u.s. friday night added that the pardon was popular among the attendees at his political rally last week. that's the detail most presidents avoid admitting would enter their calculus in this kind of decision. a federal court ordered stop detaining people based solely on his suspicion they were undocumented immigrants. it's drawn a rare rebuke from republican speaker paul ryan. we welcome american conservative union chair and former political director to president bush. how are you? >> great. good to be with you. >> thanks for being here, matt. how can a law and order president defend a pardon undermining the rule of a federal judge issued before the state was even completed? >> well, very simply, which is the constitution lays out the powers in each branch of government. one of the powers invested in the executive branch is the ability to pardon, basically unlimited power. it can be done at any time in the criminal process. donald trump believed that this was the right time to intervene. he did it. >> i know he did it. and the supreme court has held you can do it at any time. was it a good idea? and does it reflect conservative principles of law? >> yeah. the first question is, are there legal questions involved here. i don't think there are. the second question is, what's the right way for presidents to handle pardons. this is where i do think the white house should be cautious and careful to come up with a process. and a thorough process. and most presidents do that. as a matter of fact, politically pardons have gotten presidents in a lot of trouble. obviously president bill clinton exited the white house with a huge cloud over his head with mistakes in judgment around pardons. so i think having a big process would be useful. now, that being said, it is quite stunning for the president to do this so early in his administration. mot presidents do this as they're kind of slinking out the door, because they don't want to deal with the political consequences of making tough decisions. as with most things, donald trump approaches it from a completely different standpoint. he likes sheriff joe. he thinks sheriff joe arpaio was trying to enforce our immigration laws so he did it very early. >> he admitted today, he thinks it's popular among his supporters. so he didn't act like it was some sort of political courage. the opposite. he kind of "american idol"ed it and held it out at the rally, and cited that cheering today on the substance. i want to read to you from the contempt citation so folks can understand. it was a finding that there was a definite order that arpaio violated by failing to do anything to ensure compliance and directing them to continue to detain persons for whom no criminal charges could be filed. some are concerned about this. i wonder if you as a leader of a conservative organization, what is conservative? or law and order about detaining people when you cannot substantiate the charges against them? and add on to that the fact it was done according to a federal judge in a racially discriminatory manner? why defend that? >> well, what the facts are, from my understanding of doing research on the topic, is that being in the state illegally was not enough for the border agency, and the feds, to do anything about this population of folks who were here illegally. they had to commit a state infraction on top of it. we get to the question of how we handle our federal immigration laws. what it seems like these judges are saying is that being here illegally is not enough to trip the legal process. you actually have to do something additionally -- you have to break a state law. what that basically means is you have amnesty when it comes to breaking federal immigration laws. >> but matt, that's what the supreme court ruled. you're accurately describing the state of the law. the question is, why would a president go in and try to allow for that kind of -- let me read to you one thing from that so the folks have the benefit of it. they said if you believe or know a person is in the country unlawfully you cannot detained them based on that alone. you have to have state charges or release. again, to go to conservative principles, that's what conservatives used to cheer because you don't want a sprawling government power that has no check on it. >> i believe that it's perfectly appropriate, though, for the -- for sheriffs to work with the federal authorities, to make sure people who are here illegally aren't able to stay and flout the law. it comes down to a basic question of this, which we're having a disagreement on in the country, i will agree with you. but it should be enough to trigger federal law enforcement if somebody is here illegally. if we want to change those laws, and say, look, we want to soften them, well, that's the option of the legislative branch. in the meantime, you have to uphold the law. you can ask this question about the process by which people were detained, and there were all types of complications about that. but it comes down to the fundamental question is, which is, do sheriffs have the ability to work with the federal government to bring up the -- >> but matt, respectfully, sir, the question has been answered. we are a nation of laws. and the supreme court has held that the state doesn't do that on its own, because it doesn't have the federal powers. so the answer has been issued. you have judges enforcing it. and a president come in and say that what federal judge's rule isn't good enough. it is mind-boggling to me to hear intellectually conservatives to defend the law. it's undermining what the federal judge held. >> basically what the federal judge said that being here illegally is not enough to trigger the feds to do something. >> to do state detention. >> people across the country don't think you should be in a safe harbor, and that immigration laws shouldn't apply to you, because simply you have also committed a state infraction. arpaio said, okay, i'm going to allow the feds, i'm going to bring this to the border patrol folks and say, look, we have these folks who are here illegally, will you do something with them. the border is going to -- >> we're out of time. i want to get the last question on the record. >> sure. this has all been on the record. >> it's all on the record. is this the new position of conservatives, that the president should go around and undo federal judicial orders that are consistent with federal supreme court precedence? because they don't like the outcome? is that the new law and order? >> let's be very clear. a pardon is about an individual. it does nothing to change the state of the law. it simply means that individual receives different treatment. it could be clemency or complete exoneration. in this case with sheriff arpaio, he is now out of legal harm. it doesn't change the basic question in this country about what do sheriffs and local law enforcement do when they find people are here illegally? it sounds like what i hear the other side saying is they can do nothing. the fact is, that means blanket amnesty. >> i don't want our viewers to get the wrong impression. it's not an issue of other people, it's what the supreme court has held as to who has which powers. i'm old enough to remember when conservatives were big on federalism, and having those divisions. we're out of time. >> and the federal government had the obligation to take these folks who are here illegally and enforce the law. they decided not to do that. that is also an abridgement of their duties. >> matt, i always like talking to you. >> you, too, sir. >> i hope to have you back on "the beat." appreciate it. >> thank you. more breaking news. this from nbc news on the russia probe and what special counsel mueller is looking at. i got this five minutes ago and i'll bring it to you right after this break. swing set standoff. and we covered it, july first, twenty-fifteen. 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 ♪ when heartburn hits fight back fast with tums chewy bites. fast relief in every bite. crunchy outside. chewy inside. tum tum tum tum tums chewy bites. i am totally blind. and non-24 can throw my days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do. talk to your doctor, and call 844-214-2424. (woman) there's a moment of truth.etes, and now with victoza®, a better moment of proof. victoza® lowers my a1c and blood sugar better than the leading branded pill, which didn't get me to my goal. lowers my a1c better than the leading branded injectable. the one i used to take. victoza® lowers blood sugar in three ways. and while it isn't for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. non-insulin victoza® comes in a pen and is taken once a day. (announcer) victoza® is not recommended as the first medication to treat diabetes and is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or if you develop any allergic symptoms including itching, rash, or difficulty breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis, so stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. the most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. now's the time for a better moment of proof. ask your doctor about victoza®. 6:44 p.m. on the east coast. we have a breaking nbc news exclusive. sources telling our newsroom right now, that special counsel mueller is focusing on president trump's role in crafting that response to the quite suspicious done jr. 2016 meeting with russia-to-trump tower. investigators on mueller's team, according to nbc sources, want to know what trump knew about the meeting, and whether he intervened explicitly to conceal its purpose. this is obviously new. it's also important because mueller has already indicated that potential white house obstruction is in his criminal investigative purview. joining me is a former hillary clinton aide and katherine. katherine, this is one of those news nights. we came into the room with two big russia stories going, new revelations in the e-mails about business dealings. here we are on the other side, on the investigative side. your view of this story? >> it's almost hard to keep track of every additional development, because it's like a russian novel. there are too many characters to keep track of, and too many twists and turns. it does make me think that trump was not terribly forward looking, surprise surprise, when they basically tried to lie repeatedly about what the purpose of the meeting was, who was in the meeting. i mean, the more that they try to block, what the public knew about it, the longer this investigation into it gets stretched out. they should have just been up-front. >> let's be clear, the reason this is so important is this meeting was problematic because it was the first contemporaneously documented time that people claiming to represent russian government interests were offering dirt on hillary clinton, which matches with some of what happens in the campaign. then on top of that, you have a thing that happens a lot with donald trump. he takes an action without thinking about the reaction. >> right. >> in the case of firing jim comey, it almost certainly led to the appointment of the special prosecutor who we're discussing right now. we literally probably wouldn't be discussing this if he hadn't taken that wanton action. julia and tom winter saying he's looking at the spin, the pr, the crafting of that statement as its own potential legal issue. >> i think every piece of new evidence goes to donald trump's state of mind at the time. why was he doing certain things, why did he lie about the meetings to begin with, and why did he wait until the reporting came out to say, oh, well, we did have this meeting, or here's what the meeting was about, it was about adoptions when it really wasn't. i think if you think about after the g-20 when they're on the plane and essentially "vanity fair" said it was a frenzy trying to come up with a statement to react to the e-mail, it seems they were doing some sort of crisis management, which the president was directly involved in. people who have worked with him said he is somewhat of a micromanager. so i think mueller is rightfully looking at this stuff because it goes to his state of mind and perhaps intent. >> there's a saying if you want a job donitdonite right, do it yourself. he thinks he's his best spokesperson. he thinks he's his best spokesperson and campaign manager. some of these things you can understand where he got the ideas. also he evidently thinks he's his best lawyer. there's no lawyer in the country that would tell you to personally get involved in writing the defense of facts that you weren't a party to, because he wasn't in the meeting. the best news for donald trump is you're not in the meeting. donald trump's legal strategy was to find a way to get himself implicated in this meeting by talking to his son about how he describes it. >> and to insert himself into a statement that, again, was -- from what the reporting has been -- was attempting to be more forthcoming allegedly. that they initially said they wanted to get ahead of the story, and say, okay, here's what happened, here's what we did, let's not make the cover-up worse than the crime. we don't know what the crime was, but that's what the reporting said. he inserted himself into this situation when he may not have needed to. it's kind of the peter principle at work here. >> what's that? >> that people rise to the level of their incompetence. to the level they can no longer add value. he's risen to the top. and he thinks that because he's at the top, he must know everything. and he's writing off every piece of advice, legal or otherwise, that he could be -- legal, political, for that matter, that he could be getting that he could benefit from. but he thinks he's the best because he's the boss. >> i see your peter principle and i raise you. this report that i want to read, just so folks have the understanding of it, federal investigators working for mueller focused on trump's role in crafting the response to the meeting between the russians and his son donald jr. prosecutors want to know what trump knew about the meeting and whether he sought to conceal its purpose. the peter pan principle would be, if you principle will be, if you will allow me to -- >> please. >> -- to just improv. you have to let your criminal defense team deal with this. and the benign explanation is this was an error that donald trump made because he cares so much about his son, don jr. what, quote, any father would do. i wonder if someone thinks there is a less benign view of this? >> i don't know if there is a less benign view because we don't have all of the facts. this does not look good in context of all of the other details we know. when you put this on the time line, this june meeting was not just some meeting that donald trump wanted to get involved in in creating a statement for don jr. this is at the time right before and during the hack of the dnc and later release of e-mails in july. in the context of what was happening at the time in the campaign, if you put all those facts together, donald trump getting involved in this does look like he is covering up something. i'm not saying he is because we need more facts but i do think that when you put it on the time line is when it becomes a problem and it doesn't look like he is just trying to help his son. >> that goes to denials we have been covering in a couple of stories. here is don jr's denial. >> i'm more than happy to be transparent about it and more than happy to cooperate with everyone. >> as far as you know this is all of it. >> this is everything. this is everything. >> katherine? >> that wasn't everything. clearly. because they revised their story multiple times of that. >> joining us on a very new story about an old story. a new story about an old story. thank you both for being here. we will be right back with something new. patrick woke up with back pain. but he has work to do. so he took aleve. if he'd taken tylenol, he'd be stopping for more pills right now. only aleve has the strength to stop tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. aleve. all day strong. my belly pain i could build a small city with all the over-the-counter products i've used. enough! i've tried enough laxatives to cover the eastern seaboard. i've climbed a mount everest of fiber. probiotics? enough! (avo) if you've had enough, tell your doctor what you've tried and how long you've been at it. linzess works differently from laxatives. linzess treats adults with ibs with constipation or chronic constipation. it can help relieve your belly pain, and lets you have more frequent and complete bowel movements that are easier to pass. do not give linzess to children less than six, and it should not be given to children six to less than eighteen. it may harm them. don't take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach-area pain and swelling. talk to your doctor about managing your symptoms proactively with linzess. nbc news exclusive this hour. special council bob mueller is focussing on donald trump's personal role in crafting that response to the don junior meeting. we will continue that with the beat with ari. or e-mail us at msnbc if you have questions for me. now time for, who said it. here eat quote, if you strike me down i shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine. in a twist tonight there are are two people who have been saying it. the answers and why it is suddenly relevant after this. rethink what's possible. rethink your allergy pills. flonase sensimist allergy relief helps block 6 key inflammatory substances with a gentle mist. most allergy pills only block one. and 6 is greater than one. flonase sensimist. ♪ with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis? how do you chase what you love do what i did. ask your doctor about humira. it's proven to help relieve pain and protect joints from further irreversible damage in many adults. humira works by targeting and helping to block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. humira has been clinically studied for over 20 years. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. ready for a new chapter? talk to your rheumatologist about humira. this is humira at work. your bbut as you get older,ing. it naturally begins to change, causing a lack of sharpness, or even trouble with recall. thankfully, the breakthrough in prevagen helps your brain and actually improves memory. the secret is an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember. we are back with a really good, who said it. the quote, if you strike me down, i shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine. there are are two people who said it. one is owe by one is oeby wantb. >> if you strike me down i shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine. >> a great line from a great film. now being repurposed in politics by this man, former white house aid sebastian gorka, left his post friday night during the hurricane and made the following comment this weekend about steve bannon, who is also recently left, to go back it breitbart. with steve back at the helm, it is like the last scenes of star wars, do you remember what obi-wan kenobi said to darth? if you strike me down, i will become more strong than you can imagine. this begs the question, who would gorka be in this analogy? the answer was you are more like jaba the hut and you are more like gentlemjaja binks. hard ball starts right now. >> trump tackles storms. let's play "hardball.""hard bal. >> trump tackles storms. let's play "hardball."ball star. >> trump tackles storms. let's play "hardball."" starts . >> trump tackles storms. let's play "hardball." good evening. "the washington post" reports that trump saw a real estate deal in moscow at the same time that donald trump was running for president. we will get to that story all of those details in just a moment. we begin, though, with massive devastation in texas after what is being called a historic storm. houston remns