i could talk to these friends for another four hours, i think i thank peter jeremy, megan, steve, donnie and rick. that does it for our hour. i'm nicole wall as. mtp daily begins right now. congratulations on your win on wednesday. you are still smiling. what is it about college football. >> it's unbelievable. and i know what easy going to be doing at 9:00 tonight. we will be watching shows to find out where they are ranked. >> if it's tuesday, has the white house sprung a wikileak? >> tonight, attorney general jeff sessions in the
congressional hot seat again. >> have you ever deliberately lied or sought to deliberately mislead the united states senate or this body here today? >> no, i have not. >> democrats press sessions on what he remembers about the trump campaign and the russians. plus, as the evidence mounts, roy moore's support begins to fall away. >> i am -- have no reason to doubt these young women. >> so what do republicans do if he actually still wins the alabama senate race? finally, ending harass men on capitol hill. >> there are two members of congres congress, republican, and democrat, right now, who serve, would have been subject to review or not have been subject to review, but have engaged in sexual harassment. >> we'll talk to congresswoman
jack jackie spehr. this is m, the perks daily, and it starts right now. good evening. i'm chuck todd here in washington. welcome. we have had a lot of bombshells in the russia investigation. this one is right up there. because it cuts to the heart of what might be the single biggest question in the russia questionings, did the trump campaign coordinate with wikileaks during the campaign? remember, wikileaks was used an an arm of the russian government's effort to meddle in the election. that's according to the intelligence community. that's not just some sort of reporter's thesis. it is a serious allegation facing the campaign. it's also one that vice president pence denied both before and after the election. >> someone suggested on the left if all this bad stuff about hillary, nothing bad about trump. that your campaign is in cahoots with wikileaks. >> nothing could be further from the truth. >> was there any contract in any
way between trump and his associates for kremlin or cutouts they had? >> i joined this campaign in the summer. and i can tell you that all the contact bay the trump campaign and the associates was with the american people? but there is now hard evidence that those denials are just not true. last night donald trump jr. himself confirmed a story in the atlantic that he was communicating with wikileaks via dwirt direct messages during the campaign. the communication, which was proird by jr.'s lawyers to the russia investigation was one-sided. trump says he replied to them only three times. today on capitol hill, attorney general jeff sessions who was also a trump campaign adviser during the campaign was grilled about his view of wikileaks and trump jr.'s contacts with them. >> candidate trump said throughout the campaign, i love wikileaks. do you love wikileaks, mr. attorney general? >> i'm not a fan of wikileaks.
>> do you think it was appropriate that donald trump jr. communicated with wikileaks during the campaign. >> i'm not able to make a judgment about that. >> while sessions says won't make a judgment he recused himself from all thing russia. time linewise on september 20th of last year wikileaks asked trump jr. about an anti-trump group they were targeting. trump jr. wrote back saying he would look into it ask around. thanks. two weeks later donald trump jr. asked them about a leak about hillary clinton. what's behind this wednesday leak i keep hearing about. but wikileaks didn't write back. that correspondence was from october 3rd. wikileaks hadn't started publishing john podesta's e-mails yet but they did four lays later. that's the same day the u.s.
intelligence agency is saying russia is meddling in the election and this wikileaks is something they are using as a tool. on october 12 in the a lechy message wikileaks asked trump jr. to send out a link. strongly suggest that your dad tweets out this link if he mentions us. and then they go on to say by the way we leased podesta e-mails part four. trump jr. days later says for those who have the time all the wikileaks eems are right here. trump himself was tweeting about it 15 minutes after the e-mails were received. >> corey loun do youski argue has the campaign did not wikileaks was being used as a carveout of the russian government, which would mean
trump jr. didn't see major stories like these during the summer about russian hackers penetrating the dnc or tweets like this from roger stone saying quote of course the russians hacked hillary clinton's eem or this joint statement from the intelligence community that i mentioned in early october as trump jr. is in the midst of talking with wikileaks, they released the following. quote, the russian government directed the compromise of e-mails from u.s. persons and institutions on sites like wikileak. in a statement, trump jr.'s lawyers said they have, quote, no concerns about these revelations. they blamed congress for leaguing investigation they smith submitted to investigators. trump jr. wasn't the only person communicating with wikileaks during the campaign. roger stone was communicating with them, too and the head of the firm's data operation says his firm tried to contact julian assange last june to see if he would share information with them about hillary clinton. joining me now, joyce vance, a
former u.s. attorney for alabama. considerly a visiting professor at the university of alabama school of law. thank you for joining us. >> thanks for having me. >> let me start here, ms. vance. how much legal exposure does donald trump jr. right now have just based on what's out there? >> so this is i think the first information that we've seen that would tie trump more firmly to a potential conspiracy. but of course conspiracies are only illegal if they have an illegal objective. so the question is, what would these direct messages tend to prove? would it be hacking? would it be receipt of stolen property? coit possibly be a conspiracy to unlawfully involve a foreign government in a u.s. election? i think those are the possibility that are on the table although i don't think there is firm evident based just on these dms. >> can you prove that because
there was publicly the government went public with its accusation that wikileaks was an arm of the russian government that donald trump jr. then should have known immediately that it was illegal, that potentially he was committing a crime in his back and forths with wikileaks? >> i think you need a little bit more than just those two facts in conjunction. but the reality is that trump jr. was on twitter where this information was being widely paraded. and what's a little bit tantalizing here, chuck, is the fact that these direct messages, they are a little bit too casual, a little bit too direct to be a first contact. and you have to wonder what other source of communication there might have been between wikileaks and trump jr. i suspect that bob mueller's folks know a lot more than we do, and there is likely additional information that talks about the communication that trump had that might do a better job of establishing his
knowledge of wikileaks status as a cutout for the russians. >> does it matter if technically donald trump jr. -- i'm just talking about in a legal sense here -- is not a paid member of the campaign s simply a family member -- can he deny that he was somehow a part of the campaign and just claim that he was a private stipulate here? >> i don't think that really helps him from a legal point of view. if we are talking about a conspiracy to hack a conspiracy to receive stolen e-mails or some sort of foreign interference on a campaign, none of those sorts of crimes would really turn on his status as a member of the campaign. >> you were careful to use the word conspiracy. that has a legal definition. there is really no legal definition of collusion here, is there? we use the word a lot but is there one that you could actually prosecute on? >> there is no statute that says it's illegal to collude.
i think as we all use that word inclusion, we really are talking about a conspiracy, which is just essentially two or more people either implicitly or explicitly agreeing to accomplish an illegal goal and taking an overt step in that direction. >> well then based on what you just said, how is the -- how is -- there's at least a circumstantial case that donald trump jr. and yulian assange were conspiring here? >> there are a couple of details that you would need to lock down, right. who really was on the other end of those dms, assange on somebody else. >> does that matter? >> you would need to nail -- i think you would have to prove who he was conspiring with to make sure it was someone who was eligible. for instance he couldn't conspire with an undercover agent working for the bureau. you would need to nail down details but mostly his intent, his knowledge, his state of mind. >> the idea that he was still he can changing direct messages with him into 2017 is clearly
bad judgment. that, though, is there legal exposure with that? >> bad judgment is never enough, but it might be enough to establish knowledger at least what prosecutors call willful blindness which means you really knew the truth but you were trying to pretend that you didn't. and at some point people's efforts to distance themselves from what they know to be true becomes so paident that it's evidence their knowledge and intent. >> what do you feel like -- what is this missing? i can tell you the person that i am most intrigued by is whoever helped wikileaks curate the e-mails because it clearly had to be somebody who was an american that understood each day what would hit what would affect this immediate why relationship and this and that. that's always been a missing person that i'm curious about trying to figure out who that is. what is missing right now for you to understand this story better. >> i think that's missing is what would have prompted donald
trump jr. to engage in this kind of conversation? it's really interesting, everybody knows in this sort of a campaign that the russians do, they dangle. they seek disrupt our elections and our way of life. and it was obvious that they would reach out the trump who was a candidate of chaos in this election sequence. so why doesn't trump jr. immediately go to law enforcement and say listen we are having this outreach and we know its a illegal. what led him to go forward? >> is it possible he didn't know? i mean one of the theories out there is maybe he didn't appreciate what he was -- what he was doing was frankly this illegal. >> right. we are hear that argument was trump was poorly served. candidate trump was poorly served by not having professional campaign staff. and and yet during at least part of this conversation, paul manafort, who had experience was
on board, other experienced people like jeff session who testified today that he was pushing people away from russian contact, they should have known. >> joyce vance, former u.s. attorney in alabama, it's nice to have somebody on from alabama when we are talking about a story that doesn't involve the state of alabama right now. >> i appreciated that chuck, thanks. >> we will talk about that story later in the show. >> tonight's panel, amy walter. newera contain, and brad todd is a republican strategist and an ad maker. amy walter, we sort of joked about this in one of our morning meetings. so it's donald trump in the wikileaks room with the candlestick. i say this -- had this come out nine months ago, donald trump suhr had back and forthst with wikileaks in the middle of the campaign, it seems like this would be explosive. it's surprising to me how underplaying this is. >> i think there are a couple of things. one them was raise by the u.s. attorney and the question of
whether it was clueding with russia or whether it was working with an entity that had hacked e-mails. right? so you are taking stolen material. forget whether it is related to russia at all. if you as a campaign are getting materials that are knowingly stolen and disseminating them that in and of itself is a problem. let's take russia out of this completely. the second piece that was also raised in your interview is the fact that we still only have little tiny pieces was this puzzle. it's like throwing an entire puzzle upside down, and we flip over individual pieces every now and then but we still don't have a bigger piece. we know what some of the direct messages are. we have no idea what else robert mueller has in terms of the messages and the e-mails from all kind of campaign professionals as well as what's going on from wikileaks. did they reach out the other people? right now we only know that they reached out the to donald trump jr. >> both of you i actually want to you wear your partisan hats here.
>> it will be tough. >> answer the question, what if this revelation makes you feel as if, a hey, and what is missing for you to say we don't have everything yet? >> i think it's really clear that the trump campaign was clueding with the russians. the question is what is the illegal behavior. if you want to indict, say that terrible things were done here it seems to me that's enough. this is demonstration that the trump campaign, because donald trump jr. and he he informed everybody else, he wasset going help from wikileaks and they all knew at the time that wikileaks was a cutout for the russians. that was clear. >> does it at all sort of give you pause that it's not clear to me that they helped wikileaks curate it? or does that -- is that there is still somebody else involved here that seems to know -- >> mueller has more information. you are totally right. >> we don't know what we don't know. >> auto we don't know what we don't know. and truthfully surprises come
out every week here. >> they do. >> so it seems to me there is a lot more information. what i would say is i do not understand how american patriots think it's okay that the trump campaign was clueding with the russians to hurt hillary clinton. why is that okay. >> same question, which is what concerns you here? and what do you think is potentially exculpatory. >> this particular information was a leak from the democrat staff of a congressional committee. >> you don't know. you don't know how many times the leaks come from the exact opposite. that's not an established fact. >> the reason we have the counsel is so he can put all the pieces together. moet of the american voters are not going to worry about it until they see the pull report. then they will make the decision. >> that i agree with you. until we see everything. but donald trump jr.'s exposure on this is not a helpful thing if you are the president. >> i'm sure the president prefers -- thinks all of this is not helpful. every step, every piece of news on this i think he thinks is
unhelpful. in the end what we have learned about this president is the public is going to make their judgment after a long period of time, after they get all this information. bob mueller is trusted. once his report comes out that's when they will decide. they are not going to weigh it on the leaks from the house committees. >> it's clear that partisans have already made their adjustments. they already now how they feel about this. it doesn't matter what bob mueller says. democrats aren't going to say you know, bob mutualer is making a good point. >> there is a large s.w.a.t. in the middle. there is large -- i think we sometimes are too dismissive. >> of the people in the middle? >> yeah. >> 60% of people think this is a serious issue. >> that's what i mean. >> it's not 50/50, it's # 0/40. >> it's like what is the final say. >> exactly. >> it's never going to clear it up. we had a final say after benghazi. do you think that cleared that up? now everyone is there wasn't actually -- there was here's the final report.
hillary clinton did not personally -- you know, she's not been personally fingered as the person that was responsible for this. and yet that didn't put any of the conspiracy theorists -- >> i'm not saying -- you are right about that some of this stuff will never go away but i do think there is a chunk in the middle here that is going to respect the report, right. >> i don't know. i think there's a chunk in the middle that is saying you know what, winning an election by getting the help of a foreign government or getting any help from a foreign government to win your election is not how you are supposed to win election in the united states and be a patriots. people are worried about russian interference in an election. most americans are not dismissing this as a partisan issue. >> i don't think most americans are going to conclude they needed anything from the russians to that hillary clinton was a diss honest person. >> then why did he talk about it 164 times. if he didn't need it to win why did he talk about it so much. >> he did a lot of stuff during
the campaign that didn't high pressure him win. >> that was part of his stump every day. >> i think the hardest part is this is now twice, amy walter, where you have donald trump jr. sort of -- the best defense it has is naivety. that's the best defense they can come up with. >> it's the second meeting. it's not the first. >> and that seems to be the issue here. >> right. i mean, this is that the campaign -- well, i'm sure we are going get to this later but this is also the jeff sessions message today at the hearing was essentially, it was a total chaos. >> yes. >> nothing was organized. we were doing this all by the seat of our pants. and so mistakes are going to happen. mistakes happen. that is absolutely true. this does not fall into the category of oops it kind of fell through the cracks that we reached out to wikileaks. >> because of that chaos, then they can't guarantee that nobody infiltrated. that is an issue that they have.
all right. war going to take a pause from the conversation. you guys stick around. up next, roy moore continues to lose some republican support here in washington. what about in the state of alabama? we'll which he in there. for every social occasion. so the the broom said, "sorry i'm late. i over-swept." [ laughter ] yes, even the awkward among us deserve some laughter. and while it's okay to nibble in public, a lady only dines in private. try the name your price tool from progressive. it gives you options based on your budget. uh-oh. discussing finances is a big no-no. what, i'm helping her save money! shh! men are talking. that's it, i'm out. taking the meatballs. ♪ if you wear a denture, that's it, i'm out. you not only want a clean feeling every day, you want your denture to be stain free. did you know there's a specialty cleanser that's gentle enough for everyday use and cleans better than regular toothpaste? try polident cleanser. it has a four in one cleaning system that kills ten times more odor causing bacteria than regular toothpaste,
welcome back. buy nbc's count, donald trump mentioned wikileaks 164 times in the final weeks of his campaign. here's montage of some of them. >> wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. that came out on wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. boy, i love reading those wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks, right? it's wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. that's wikileaks. did you see on wikileaks? wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. so it came out through
wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks is fascinating. the wikileaks revelations. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks shows how crooked the whole thing is. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks. wikileaks is unbelievable. ♪ video-game dance music
[burke] abstract accident. seen it. covered it. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ he should step aside. number one, these allegations are credible. number two, he should -- if he cares about the values and the people he claims to care about, then he should step aside. >> do you believe these young women? >> i am -- have no reason to doubt these young women. >> your message for roy moore, senator? >> get out.
>> welcome back. as you saw there, more done democrat nations from capitol hill of roy moore. majority leader mitch mcconnell said today there is deep concern about the alabama republican senateth and that he is disgusted with both the president and vice president. >> roy moore should step aside. the women who have come forward are entirely credible. she he's obviously not fit to be in the united states' senate. we looked at all the options to try to prevent that from happening. obviously, from a republican point of view, we would hope to save the seat. and that might require a write-in. all of those things are under discussion. >> meanwhile, the democrat in the race, doug jones, is looking to capitalize on republicans turned off by moore. he is out with a new ad today that invokes the issue. >> don't decency and integrity matter anymore? >> i'm a republican.
but roy moore? no way. >> i'm for doug jones. >> i'm another republican for doug jones. >> at a press conference this afternoon, jones said the final say rests solely in the hands of alabama voters. >> they are going to have to make their own judgments about roy moore. they are going to have to make their own judgments about doug jones. i'm applying for a job. he's applying for a job. and that's the way people of alabama need to look at this. who would i hire to represent me in the united states senate? >> joining me now from alabama is vaugh hillyard. he has been covering all thing alabama senate for us for the last week down there. good to see you. let me start with what i feel like is clearly a disconnect. the state party leaders and the national party leaders. seems as if yesterday it was clear there was a big divide on this. is there any erosion for moore among state bomb bomb republican
leaders today? >> exactly, chuck. mitch mcconnell can say all he want. he spent $30 million a month and a half ago in that runoff and roy moore still pulled off the race. in terms of stepping aside it doesn't appear that moore is going to do that. and he has really nobody inside the state telling him to do so. the gop chair said if there was any republican looking to challenge him they would be punished by up to six years not being able to run as a republican in the future. there is a 21-member gop committee here that would remove him. but a committee man said this afternoon there is no chance that's going to happen. there are six republican congressmen here in the state. none of them have been outspoken. and yesterday we talked to congressman mo brooks. he said quote as long as roy moore is our nominee a republican cannot wage a write in campaign under alabama
republican party rules and be on the ballot as a republican in the future. >> he is referring to the so loser law. that would impact two people, mo brooks and luther strange. but i do get the sense that the governor is not shoes enthusiastic about supporting him. you have a whole lot of the alabama central state committee that seem like it's not out of the question pulling the plug on them. >> as of this afternoon, according to the rnc, they still have not told us otherwise. they have a joint fund-raising agreement, the same agreement that this the nrnc pulled out of on friday. they have 11 field operatives still across the state. >> roy moore still hasn't gone up on the air in this general election or at least in anything
substantial. do you hear, is that going to change? is he going to try to address voters? address the issue directly at least in paid advertising? >> well, we have haven't seen anything on tv. his campaign is not the most responsive. he hasn't had an enter sue since sean hannity. he is having a true public event tonight. he will be having 5,000 people, he will be speaking at a church service tonight. we have been requesting an interview for the last week. he has not been willing to talk to anybody beyond denying these allegations and suggesting it's him against the world and that the women are lying about him. >> should be an interesting night ntd to. we will see if moore addresses the issue directly or not. still ahead, a congresswoman vows to stop sexual harassment on chill.
-- on capitol hill. (♪) (♪) it all starts with a wish. the lincoln wish list event is here. sign and drive off in a new lincoln with zero down and a complementary first months payment. 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. the name to remember.
when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. still ahead, when celebrity is the mother of invention. remembering the woman who says she invented donald trump. first the cnbc market wrap. >> we had stocks closing lower on wall street shares of general electric plunged for a second straight day.
ge fell 5.9% to its lowest level since 2011 after the company unveiled a massive restructuring plan and slashed its dividend by 50%. snim hope depot shares rose 1.6% on news its earnings and revenue beat expectations. the home improvement retailer says it's courting younger shoppers who prefer do-it-yourself projects. that's it from cnbc. first in business worldwide. whoooo. i enjoy the fresher things in life. fresh towels. fresh soaps. and of course,
tripadvisor's freshest, lowest... ...prices. so if you're anything like me... ...you'll want to check tripadvisor. we now instantly compare prices... ...from over 200 booking sites... ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. go on, try something fresh. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices. accused of obstructing justice to theat the fbinuclear war, and of violating the constitution by taking money from foreign governments and threatening to shut down news organizations that report the truth. if that isn't a case for impeaching and removing a dangerous president, then what has our government become? i'm tom steyer, and like you, i'm a citizen who knows it's up to us to do something. it's why i'm funding this effort to raise our voices together and demand that elected officials take a stand on impeachment. a republican congress once impeached a president for far less. yet today people in congress and his own administration know
first and foremost, let me say that there is no place for sexual harassment in our society. period. and especially in congress. >> welcome back. as we said in the show before, our country is experiencing a defining moment in talking about sexual harassment in the workplace. just last week the senate unanimously approved a resolution to require sexual harassment prevention training for both senators and their staff. today a house committee on administration held a hearing
looking at what they can do to help prevent sexual harassment on the house side. and right after house speaker paul ryan issued a statement saying in part, going forward the house will adopt a policy of mandatory training for all members and staff. during that hearing, republican congresswoman barbara come stock of virginia told one story she says she heard from someone she trusts about a member of congress. >> this member asked a staffer to bring them over some materials to their respects. and the young staffer, as a young woman, went there and was greeted with a member in a well, it was a male, who then invited her in. he at that point decided to expose himself. she left, and then she quit her job. >> and then one of the committee's witnesses, democratic congresswoman jackie spehr of california claimed there are two members of congress considerly serving right now who engaged in sexual
harassment. joining me now is congresswoman spehr. congresswoman thanks for coming on. >> good to be with you. >> let me start with what you are trying to do on the house side. it's the same question i had for senator klobuchar on the senate side involving their training. the real issue here is how difficult and onerous the reporting process is. tell me what steps you think you can take on your own but are going to need a vote of the house to fix? we really need to reform the entire office of compliance process. and a spent a lot of time in the hearing this morning talking about it. right now it takes almost 90 days to be able to file a complaint. and before actually going through the mediation, you have to sign a non-disclosure agreement. and then you are not represented by counsel, but the harasser is represented by the house of representatives' general counsel. so i'm introducing a bill tomorrow that is going to make it one apply to patterns and
fellows, which it does not apply to now. there will not be mandatory mediation. there will not be mandatory non-disclosure agreements. there will be a special victim's counsel for the victim to be rent sented by. all these will be steps in the right direction to deal with what is an antiquated process and what is unacceptable in this day and age. >> this has been -- it is a like one of those -- it's like finding out there was gambling going on in casablanca. the environment on capitol hill, particularly when i was younger in the '90s and the '00s. it was sort of well-known that that environment existed. i on say that because you have said that you know of two members of congress. what do you believe is your responsibility in going public with that information? and why don't you believe it's your responsibility? >> well it is my responsibility to address the seriousness of
this issue. these survivors are subject to a non-disclosure agreement. i'm not going to violate their agreement. and i think moving forward we have got to take steps to make sure that there is transparency. that in fact the harasser is not going to have the settlement paid for out of the u.s. treasury and have all the u.s. taxpayers paying for it. it should be something that is paid for by the individual. >> what you are saying now is that you know of two individuals who have paid out sexual harassment settlements? so taxpayer money has been used to protect the identity of these members of congress? >> one member of congress has been -- has settled a claim, and there has been a taxpayer settlement. >> is this something that if the taxpayers involved, don't we have the right to know. >> i think you do have the right to know. right now under the system you
don't have a right to know. >> is this something you think you will retroactively deal with? >> i don't know that we can retroactively deal with it because that's a contract that has been signed by bothers pa. i think moving for the we absolutely must. we do know there is about $15 million that has been paid out by the house on behalf of harassers in the last ten to 15 years. >> 15 middle has been paid out over sexual harassment claims. obviously more than one member of congress. do you know how many over time that is. i know some are former members by now. >> i don't know how many members that enild tails. >> is this information that's going to get disclosed now over time? again considering this is taxpayer money it feels as if it should, i assume if you put it to a vote of the house -- is this something that you think should be retroactively done? let me ask it that way. >> i think that we've got to,
you know, represent that moving forward this is going to be done. i don't -- you can't, i think, tinker with preexisting contracts that have been signed off by both parties. i think moving forward it absolutely should be a kpoen enltd. we need to have -- component. we need to have it accountable and transparent. >> let me ask you this. i know you weren't a member of congress in the '90s. you came to congress in 2008. you were involved in politics and you worked on capitol hill. the democratic response and the victim shaming shaming that took place in the allegations against bill clinton, in hindsight how bad does that look? >> it's bad. i remember being the mother of a 6:-year-old at the time and having to explain to him what blow job was. and i was offended by it. so the victim blaming absolutely was a thing of the past. i think that's why many victims don't come forward because in the end they think they are going to pay the ultimate price.
one of the survivors i spoke to said you know, going through the process of filing a complaint was almost worse than the harassment. so this system has to be changed here. >> let me ask you a quick question, you are on the house intel committee. i'm going to ask you one quick thing on wikileaks. did you know before reading in the atlantic landic yesterday about the exchanges between donald trump jr. and wikileaks. >> yes he. >> was that something the house intel had been briefed on. >> yes >> gotcha. and let me ask you this, is there more we don't know about the exchanges between the two of them or is that information we don't have yet? >> some of that information we have but i'm not at liberty to share that with you right n.o.w. >> what about the concerns that democrats are leaking the information. are you concerned there is too many leaks? >> i don't think we should be leaking at all. every time i have a reporter want me to confirm something i always shake my head and go how come they got the actual language?
we all need to do a better job of just teeping our lips sealed. >> rtd will. congresswoman jackie spehr. we'll look forward to the new rules you would like to put in place. a lot of men and women on the hill would like to see that place operate a whole lot better. >> up next we'll meet the woman who says she invented donald trump.
woman who claims she invented donald trump. that is at least how the "washington post" described the new york gossip columnist liz smith who died this weekend at the age of 94. beginning in the 1980s, trump had a love/hate relationship with smith. he hated who she wrote but he loved the fact she was writing about him. the big story for both of them came when trump's marriage to his first wife fell apart. smith advocated for ivana. and her rival at the post backed nld do. but they all agreed there was no such thing as bad publicity. smith wrote trump was the king of hyperbole and had just the right up the of elvis vulgarity. it all made liz smith the highest paid print smith in the country. a transactional gossip
columnist. how about that. there you go. the chronicle lure of presidents. liz smith. and how to work around your uc. that's how i thought it had to be. but then i talked to my doctor about humira, and learned humira can help get and keep uc under control... when certain medications haven't worked well enough. 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.
well watch this. i pop that in there. press brew. that's it. so rich. i love it. that's why you should be a keurig man! full-bodied. are you sure you're describing the coffee and not me? time for "the lid." i have three campaign minds. brad, you are as good of a pollster when understanding an electorate as anybody i know. is roy moore beatable or not in alabama? >> roy moore's last election was not a good one for him. his last election, he outperformed the entire ticket. i think he won by 3 points statewide. this is just roy moore the evangelist. >> the only question is
alabamans don't take too kindly being told what to do from outside. and that's the wild card in this election. >> you made a comment. doug jones, smafrtest thing he did, cancel today. >> i think he literally said today, in his reaction, alabamans will decide this. it won't be decided by anyone else. it will be decided by the voters of i think that's the right message for alabama. >> charlie and jennifer, your partners in crime over there, they've been big skeptics. >> that's a toss-up. in part because of so much of this uncertainty that brad is talking about. you look at the numbers and the state of alabama and you say, boy, a lot of things have to come together. even for as bad as this looks for a democrat to win here. and at the same time, you know, you also know that there is
just, this feels like this unraveling is happening. this is exactly the kind of environment in which surprises happen. and let's be clear that doug jones is a pretty decent democratic candidate. just in terms of his profile. so this is not like just putting this coffee cup up here. >> i think they wish they had a slightly more conservative abortion position. let me ask you, there is this one last hope that a lot of republicans here in washington have that somehow the president has enough standing with roy moore to convince him to go. do you think he does? >> i think roy moore has to decide if he believes the conservative things he's said, the cause he's advocated. he has to admit that he's not the right person for this election. so we'll find out. is it about roy moore's ego or do the best thing for the cause?
>> if you're counting on a guy who has been accused by five we will, doing horrible, horrible things, to do right thing now, that's a strange situation to be in. alabamans have a choice, do you want to say to women who faced horrible incidents like this that we'll put a guy who did this and lots of republicans believe that he did this, in the united states senate. >> let's talk about if hes win. explain to me how they can defy the will of the voter, especially if the voter has all this information. >> corey gardner laid it out yesterday. >> the voters had all this information. >> the united states senate, and it was the republicans who wrote a report recommending the
expulsion -- >> the guy who wrote wrote it is mitch mcconnell. >> once roy moore realizes he is not the best person to win the election. he gets expelled if he does win. does he believe the things he's said. >> it could take a while to do this. you have to put tergthics committee has to put together the recommendation. this is not necessarily like he gets there on december 24th or january 1st, and then by january 15th this is done and gone. there has to be a procedure that goes through this. and by the way, do we have a tax bill yet by the first of the year? >> can i say though, i hear these things. we need the tax vote. i think what you saw last week is that there are a lot of women who are kind of tired of politics as usual. you see it with the culture, the response to what's happening with harvey weinstein with all the issues with this guy. i commend republican who's say they'll vote for a democrat over a person who they believe has
committed pedophilia. this is not political. this is right and wrong for people. >> it does seem to me that there is a political congratulations that has been made. it is worse for the parties if he is in. it is better for the party if you get a democrat in the there and get better candidates. >> i think you take each situation as it is. i think people on the republican side have rightly stood up and said these stories are believable and it was wrong and roy moore needs to make amends instead of waging a campaign. republicans down the line are saying that. next year, the seats had. >> reporter: in a great place to win. that will get most of the energy. we shouldn't worry about missouri. >> i think alabama is going to have an interesting, unique impact on our senate. i'll leave it right there. some days i'm just sort of
i need my blood sugar to stay in control. so i asked about tresiba®. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ tresiba® is a once-daily, long-acting insulin that lasts even longer than 24 hours. i need to cut my a1c. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ tresiba® works like my body's insulin. releases slow and steady. providing powerful a1c reduction. my week? hectic. my weekends? my time. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ i can take tresiba® any time of day. so if i sleep in, and delay my dose, i take it as soon as i can, as long as there's at least 8 hours between doses. once in use, tresiba® lasts 8 weeks, with or without refrigeration, twice as long as the lantus® pen. (announcer) tresiba® is 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. ask your health care provider if you're tresiba® ready. covered by most insurance and medicare plans. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪
this new college of media arts and humanities is scheduled to launch in the fall of 2018. the president of simmons college said a school is a way of cementing her legacy at simmons. we look forward to having the interns at "meet the press" very soon. that's all we have. we'll be back. "the beat" starts now. >> no more fitting tribute to her than a place of learning. three stories, one, the campaign, two, the announcement that his d.o.j.'s considering investigating hillary clinton just like president trump asked him to do. and three, a congress probing whether sessions lied under oath.