guilty to that is illegal is lying to the fbi when he said -- when he had all these contacts with the russian, he was not working for the campaign. that turns out not to be true. the other things that the guilty plea talks about, these meetings with the russians, trying to set up a meeting, that's of course not illegal. >> when you look at the pattern, what do you see in terms of the dynamic here? are they using the charges against paul manafort and his associate rick gates to pressure him with huge penalties in terms of prison time? are they using george papadopoulos to try to provide information? because it seems to me the supervisor that is referenced here may well be manafort. and that is all about responding to a russian overture where the russians offer information on hillary clinton. and there is some kind of response by the trump team. and we're going to have to find out what that response was to see if there is collusion. >> well, it's clearly his role in the campaign that interests them. you would certainly think that the prosecutors are going to use these charges against ma

things the fbi was investigating long before mueller took over. so, i think it's possible what we might see tomorrow are indictments of, say, you think of these as -- if you think of the core investigation as a river and there are several big tributaries flowing into it, one of those tributaries is paul manafort, paul manafort, people that worked for him like brit gates, constantine, several lobby firms that worked for him on ukrainian business. you could see a series of indictments on each one of those so-called tributaries. mike flynn being the obvious other one. >> tom, let me ask you about both points paul and matt have raised, which is if this turns out to be somebody we haven't heard about in the past, like let's say it's not a manafort or it's not a michael flynn, someone of a lower level, someone we're hearing about for the first time or not directly connected to the white house, does that give the administration a chance to say, hey, we told you so. they have nothing. and how big of a problem would that be for bob mueller's investigation if his first move out the gate is

any number of lesser people as well. i mean, it could be any person who lied to the fbi in this investigation and is still remaining intransigent, and mueller may have just reached his limit with someone obfuscating. michael flynn jr. is a good person, but what if it's the person that was already told, which is paul manafort who was told he was likely going to be indicted, then had an fbi early raid on his house? all the indicators are pointing to him. look, someone's getting arrested in this thing, but i'll tell you who's not getting arrested tomorrow, hillary clinton. >> renato, your take, after that, of course. >> wow. yeah, well i always love malcolm's commentary. what i would say, what i would say, first of all, is one thing that's very interesting to me is there had been reporting that manafort and flynn's attorneys have not been informed that there's an indictment incoming, so that tells me one of two things. either as was previously suggested, we're looking at a figure like flynn's son or an accountant or someone that could be used to flip-flop manafort or flynn, or it c

fbi agents. so it's probably a very wide-ranging investigation. we'll get a glimpse into possibly one, maybe two angles when we see these indictments. >> do you think, though, david, from what you've been hearing, what you've been reporting on about where bob mueller has been looking, that this is, that these are going to be periphery players that these aren't going to be the bigs that people have speculated about? >> you know, i don't know. danny would know that sometimes you rush out indictments because of a statute of limitations issues. maybe he's trying to put pressure on people to cooperate with him. i mean, there are just so many different scenarios possible here that i don't think, you know, we have a good idea of the reporting. nbc has confirmed this, but the reporting still has been rather thin on all the places, but what the details are regarding these indictments. >> all right, so danny, i'll give you the last word. >> what he said, sealed indictments are sort of used to get away from the statute of limitations if it's approaching. on the other end, it may be sealed be

issues with the fbi and the transfers. they are linked to him, more than $3 million around the globe betwe between. >> this is paul manafort being put inside for the campaign and why? >> i think it is hard put to call into question his decision making and judgment, but that's on daily display on twitter. but for him, i think, it's not the oval office. we forget, this is a guy that was, you know, a major figure in a presidential campaign in the united states. and if he ends up in handcuffs tomorrow morning, we already saw the fbi paying him a early morning, precoffee visit. that is a big thing. it may not reflect, it may not end up with donald trump in handcuffs, or anyone even much clother to him, but the fact of the matter is that someone right there in that campaign could end up in handcuffs and will have a very bad monday. >> how important is it for this indictment to be a dish best served cold. like michael is pointing out. early morning, nobody knew, now we get this news on friday and people get this 48 hour, 72 hour window to prepare. >> yeah, there is shock value in that for s

see fbi flak jackets. we're going to see an arrest where typically you're allowed to surrender. here what mueller is saying is i'm going to use the shock and awe policy with respect to this investigation and this prosecution. so i think it's a very significant development. the leak was intended to build pressure, to create an atmosphere that something big is going to happen. and frankly, it worked. >> so, i guess we can assume that tomorrow's indictment will probably look bad for the president. correct? >> well, i think what's going to happen tomorrow is they're going to indict somebody on an issue unrelated to the campaign. i don't think it's going to be anything that really relates to the campaign itself. but what they're going to do is press that person to provide information about president trump, people close to him, and certainly the campaign, as will. >> does this person know who they are -- >> no. >> and be offered in exchange possibly for testimony? >> no. and that's why it was done in secret with a sealed indictment. usually, you know, in dealing with a u.s. attorney'

sign that the investigation led by former fbi director, now the appointed special counsel, robert mueller, is a serious one. and the resources that are being expended are resulting in some kind of indictment. and then in sort of a parallel track, we know that the congressional committees are continuing their work. this covers all kinds of areas from financial dealings of some of the individuals who have been in the president's orbit, some of their lobbying, comments they may have made. meetings that have been held with russian officials or figures. a whole array of different sort of vin yets in a very long national story, and we don't know what will expose someone to criminal liability, but we may find out all of that on monday, a major step in this investigation. >> real quickly, i know we didn't really -- we're focused on the white house, but because you have such great work on the hill and well sourced, trusted people. has there been congressional reaction from certain people that you've spoken to about what that means? >> there hasn't been in large part because some of the key

the fbi which started out as a counterintelligence hunt and is going into seeing whether american citizens work with a foreign intelligence agency in power to influence an election. this is the first time that's happened in history. this will be the biggest week since watergate. it doesn't matter what level the person is. if it's related to the trump-russia scandal, it's going to be as big as water game. >> here are some of the other facts. "the new york times" reporting that the washington free beacon, a conservative website, first funded research to be compiled by fusion gps that led to the trump dossier. republicans have been using reports that the dnc and the clinton camp helped fund the research to argue that bob mueller and his investigation should be terminated. so malcolm, when we think about op o research, campaigns are not supposed to accept foreign aid, certainly not accept foreign aid for free. can american organizations be able to reach across borderlines to other countries in seeking opposition research. >> it's a question of where the information and the source of t

already knew, and not much that we didn't know. we know more about what the fbi new about lee harvey oswald in the time before the kennedy assassination. we know a little bit more of the reminded about what the cia attempts to senate fidel castro. but the big question everyone wants to know was there a conspiracy. was there more than lee harvey oswald behind this. we don't know anymore than two days ago. >> now the real focus in addition to all that, city, as activities there, more details on that that we need to get to. as you look at that, the secret service did not open up a protective file until assassination day. so jeff, as we look at some of the details, though there are not a lot necessarily, more questions and more fuel for those looking at the conspiracy theories. >> especially because not all the documents were released. this is something people have been waiting for for decades, and even president trump was frustrated that the fbi and the cia were pressuring him not to release all the documents. so the fact that there are still some that were not released will cont

his false statements to the fbi concerning his meeting with the russians. so i think it's going to be extremely interesting to see exactly who is indicted and what the subject of that indictment is. >> nick, the timing here. in the conversations that you've had, and conversations we've had here on msnbc with other watchers and experts like yourself, expectation of timing was not necessarily in the six month time period. folks are saying it could be a year or two or even more. the timing being six months in, does this mean at the moment mueller's team is hoping show shake the tree, maybe pressure folks to turn, if you will? >> reporter: i think that's a possibility. but i think it's more likely that mueller would be bringing his first indictment in a way that would not only tie in allegations that we know about, like, for example, money laundering allegations that are out there about manafort or false statement allegations out there about flynn, i would think that his first indictment he would want to combine the russian collusion in the allegations of that indictment, just for politic

grand jury or lied to the fbi. if they do that, it is a perjury charge. that sets the tone for other witnesses. or manafort is more likely to be indicted on some financial dealings as opposed to collusion or coordinating. i don't think donald trump in all of this is going to beism kaeup was implicated with the russians. this could go on weeks, months, or even years. >> it has been said that a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich. but if it turns out to be a very small fish, what then? >> this is just the beginning. i agree with rick and joe. i think for all the president's claims that this was a hoax and witch-hunt, i think we have a real indictment here. and so this just got really, really serious. and i do believe that based on the facts that we know now as katie said, there are facts that are indictable that we know right now. we know michael flynn was misleading in his conversations with the fbi. we know he left certain things off of his required forms and filing based on his actions as a foreign agent. and i think that, you know, this is just going to get more and more int

fbi in july. so those are some names -- that's a name that comes to mind. we have no idea who this is going towards or the extent or how many people, how many defendants will be indicted as soon as next week. >> so many questions. kevin, what does this mean for the congressional investigations now that we're seeing the first set of filed charges? >> dara, clearly the investigations have reached a new phase. with the bombshell report that an indictment charges were filed with the timetable we do not know for when they will be made public or if any arrests will be made, we don't know the timetable of that. next week in particular, it comes at a time when silicon valley is going to be put under the microscope, particularly for their role in public disclose shu -- disclosures on a series of advertisements throughout the 2016. that's why you're seeing things like twitter and facebook trying to play catch up with policy by tweaking some of their rules. from the democrats and republicans that i speak with, they don't think that's enough. so clearly the senate intelligence committee is def

assassination. on thedy that lee harvey oswald was shot by jack ruby, fbi director hoover dictated a memo about how the bureau should proceed. it's not clear kaib hoover was concerned that the public would be skeptical of the initial conclusions. quote, the thing that i am concerned about is having something issued so we can convince the public that oswald is the real assassin. it's also clear that the cia had deducted surveillance on oswald and were aware of his associations with soviet and cuban officials. however, the documents show that lee harvey oswald was not on the list of potential threats to the president. and he was only added after he had killed the president on november 22nd. i'm joined by andrea mitchell, joy ansly, and john meech um. i want to get as much as we can get done tonight here. starting with what is your understanding, andrea of what hoover was trying to say with that memo? >> well, he was trying to say at least if you read the words is that he was concerned that americans would not accept the finding that oswald acted alone and he wanted to rule out any susp

was an issue that was mueller -- not mueller, comey was talking about it, the fbi looked into this. remember, president obama hedged up president-elect trump during the transition period about this. the democrats clearly wanted this information coming from the intelligence community. if people believed that it was coming from democratic sources and mark elias was definitely behind this, we've confirmed, it wouldn't look as good. it wouldn't be as good as a story. so clearly, they obfuscated this so they could -- >> how's it look now? >> i think it doesn't look great for them. but the bottom line is, none of this has a bearing on what is or what hasn't been proved -- >> if you were a trump supporter, wouldn't you think it did? >> yeah! and by the way, any democrat -- if hillary clinton were president, and the rolls were reversed, she would be saying the same thing. this is a hatchet job by the republicans. >> fair enough. i want people to watch you right now and get it. you've got to look at things from both sides once in a while. anyway, the president further told lou dobbs with fo

mueller's team yesterday. spicer was grilled about the firing of former fbi director, james comey and his statements regarding the firing, as well as about trump's meeting with russian officials. that's a lot. reince priebus was also interviewed and corey lewandowski met today with the staff of senate intelligence committee. i'm joined now by annie karni of politico, charlie savage is coveraging sessions' hearings for "the new york times," and malcolm nance, msnbc's analyst. hold on, malcolm, for a second. i want to go to charlie about this sessions thing. what's this mealy the mouse thing going on here. this mousey, gee whiz, cute, i mean, he's a grown-up man. why can't he answer a question yes or no? >> there were a lot of weird moments in this hearing. and surrounding the weirdness was an unwillingness to answer questions about his conversations with mr. trump, both about russia and about other issues as well. >> how about with mueller? >> at first he didn't even want to say that. >> why?! >> you get the sense of is a man who's really being careful not to get tripped up. he said this t

about the firing of former fbi director james comey and his statements regarding the firing. spicer was also questioned about trump's meeting with russians, including one with sergey lavrov in the oval office. spicer declined to comment of course on this report and we'll be right back. ...it starts a chain reaction... ...that's heard throughout the connected business world. at&t network security helps protect business, from the largest financial markets to the smallest transactions, by sensing cyber-attacks in near real time and automatically deploying countermeasures. keeping the world of business connected and protected. that's the power of and. >>> let me give a warning to you. nobody can run and hide on this one. these folks are coming for you. the day of taking a few nice conservative votes and hiding is over. there's a time and season for everything. and right now it's a season of war against a gop establishment. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was trump enforcer steve bannon this weekend declaring a state of open warfare against incumbent republicans in congress. he's goi

was going to say to the fbi director? >> let me ask you about exposure of mr. priebus himself. if you're sitting in a room and three or four people, or one other person is talking about committing a crime, obstruction of justice, to what extent are you exposed to the law? are you part that of if you sit there and don't comment or go good point, interesting point and play along with the guy? if you're working for president you're not going to say that's bs, or that's stupid. don't do that. that's crazy. that's illegal. if he didn't do those things, is he incriminated? >> it's a great question, chris. if you're a typical prosecutor, somebody being prosecuted by the federal government, say a low level drug employee, that would be enough for conspiracy. unfortunately, you said the magic words, working in the white house. different process that applies to these guys. so unless there is some kind of smoking gun evidence. i think priebus is more useful as a witness, as someone who can tell what trump was actually thinking, what he did as opposed to someone who is the subject. >> they're

supposed to come clean to the fbi about my meetings. all of these things that are happening, they put a direct cloud, as you said, over this administration which makes us believe we don't know who trump is working for. is he working for the american people like he said he was going to do or is he working for the betterment of his pockets, his family and the russians? we don't know. we will not know until we get a clean bill of health from mueller, if in fact, that's what comes out of this. >> that's what everybody really needs, to move on right now for bob mueller and his team to continue, wrap up, provide the details and let people either, you know, pick up the pieces and decide what to do if there is something specific to go after or let president trump get on with the business of what he said he was elected to do. great to have you all with me. wroo brian, erin, michael aaron. thank you. and great news for you and colleague and friend of ours, mine especially here at msnbc with kasie hunt and her new show, kasiedc. joining us here on msnbc. i know some people say kasie dc? almo

former fbi director james comey. we've heard this week that the white house has been producing a lot of documents to mr. mueller and his team. and the fact that he is interviewing senior white house staff means that that's proceeding more quickly than maybe some peopleimented. but i still would not expect any resolution there until next dwreer. >> sean, how explosive is this new fuel to the fire here? we have obviously the don junior revelations with the meeting at trump tower with the russians. and now we're hearing about this. in the scheme of things how bad is this? >> it's another concrete link for another-person in president trump's circle. a former campaign chairman who was essentially in charge of the day to day operations of the president's campaign last year. so we're seeing another link in someone in trump's circle and someone with ties to the russian government. so that adds another layer of questions about what financial interests or other interests trump's associates may have had. and when when you look at the interview, it shows you how deep his investigation is goi

russian officials and who is reportedly part of discussions on firing the then fbi director james comey was interviewed by robert mueller's team and according to his lawyer william burk. he said priebus was happy to answer the their questions and a second piece of big breaking news and that is nbc news po

. they couldn't get the fbi director to do it. they fired him. now they want to get an exoneration from mueller. good luck. this is "hardball," where the action is. but there will still be pain. it comes when your insurance company says they'll only pay three-quarters of what it takes to replace it. what are you supposed to do? drive three-quarters of a car? now if you had liberty mutual new car replacement™, you'd get your whole car back. i guess they don't want you driving around on three wheels. smart. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, we'll replace the full value of your car. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. i'm not a customer, but i'm calling about that credit scorecard. give it. sure! it's free for everyone. oh! well that's nice! and checking your score won't hurt your credit. oh! i'm so proud of you. well thank you. free at at discover.com/creditscorecard, even if you're not a customer. >>> i'm elisa rehberger. whipped by powerful winds. at least 15 major fires are burning in eight counties. the so-called tubbs fire grew from 200 acres to mor

already sat down with the fbi. when he started doing this work in june of 2016, he was so troubled by what he was finding regarding what he believed to be links between the trump camp and russians that he, even though he wasn't working for the fbi, he called people he knew in the fbi, he had contacts there from his previous line of work. so i have this information and ended up feeding it to them and a few months later, they said, give us more. so everything he was finding in his source from his sources and other material have already been given to the fbi, which are the people doing the investigation, bob mueller. i'm assuming bob mueller is going back to him saying double checking, do you know anything else, what about this source, that source, doing good, steady investigative work. but the fbi already has all the best stuff that he developed. >> all right. we'll see where it goes. all the best stuff that we have gotten is just from accusations that have been made in that dossier but connected dots from the trump organization to the agalarov family to the prugs u russian prosecuto

returned to the united states in the middle of the week to be welcomed or greeted by the fbi and questioned by them. have any of those interviews shed any light on the motivation behind his deadly rampage? >> reporter: every day we hear more of what happened, and what might have happened. for example the revelation a couple of days ago about how the suspect had cased a number of other locations. one here in las vegas where there was a concert the week before and the one -- the deadly one and that he had looked at places like in chicago, and perhaps in boston as potential targets. we've heard i lot about the what. we've not heard much about the why. about why this individual did this and what was in his mind and heart and that is the thing that so many people struggle with and that is the thing that they can't get their heads around. this massacre doesn't fit the typical profile of the serial killer if it you will. there was no manifesto or note, there was no clear ideology or racial hatred that was obvious. and that is a big problem for this community to go forward. mental health

law enforcement. the fbi is very much involved in the investigation here, trying to answer that question that so many can't answer as to why, what is the motive and behind the rampage this gunman went on killing 58 people here, 58 innocent souls. vice president pence just landed. he is getting off the plane. it should take him 20 minutes to get here. there is not much traffic. and i'm sure he will be greeted and welcomed with open arms by community that's very, very much in prayer together trying to generally around each other and support each other during this very, very desperate, desperate time. >> ron allen live for us there in las vegas, novembevada. thank you so much. we will be coming back to you when the vice president does begin his remarks. i now want to bring in one of the writers of the "time" magazine piece, charlotte alterg. it's gun owners a tha s and the to own them. there are an estimated 265 million guns in the u.s. they are owned by 30% of the adult population. of note 3% of households own half of all the guns in america. 57% of voters believe guns are too eas

fbi got information about this doccile more than a year ago. what it shows is it still in play. the fbi is still trying to pursue leads and wants to talk to the author. that is deeply significant because the doccile makes extraordinary allegations. >> it's not proven, right, price to you on this, 30 seconds. your thoughts on the portion of this doccile moving forward now that the mueller team is in it? >> i think the mueller team has taken a closer look at it. the fbi has a long history with christopher steel. they reportedly were in talks to pay him as part of this doccile in october before word of it went public. i think the question becomes just how much stock the intelligence committee will be able to put in this document and it sounds like the senate team will be meeting with christopher steel and his team in the coming weeks perhaps. >> thank you so much as well for your reporting on this. all right. we're going to take a short break. we'll be right back. discover card. i'm not a customer, but i'm calling about that credit scorecard. give it. sure! it's free for everyone. oh!

service, mi6. he's known as a russian expert and he has credibility. moreover, the fbi worked with steele in their investigation of corruption in international soccer before he began working on the trump thing. and then the fbi was prepared to pay steele to allow him to continue his fact-gathering on the trump/russia stuff. that didn't come through. but the fbi has been working with steele all along. and now we know that mueller has some additional questions for him. >> is this going to be like he meets -- if mueller meets with the guy, he gives him a template, a blueprint for what to check out. in other words, he could give him a guideline as what to look for. >> i think that has already happened. what this would be is probably follow-up questions. there are things that the fbi can't answer, wants to understand better, where steele got it, how -- you know, what's the timeline around a particular meeting. and that's probably the kind of thing they're asking now. because don't forget, they've had this steele information since last july, some of it. so it forms the basis of the fbi's

the fbi, are they all complicit together? >> well, no. what we're doing is we're trying to bring together all of the elements. it's wha very confusing situati. you've got, you know, cybersecurity, you've got possible money laundering, you've got three investigations in the congress, and then you've got mueller and the fbi. so we tried to give people an overview. plus the history of what the russians have been doing. chris, you know, we're the same age. we ducked under desks when we were kids. >> i remember. >> we worried about the a ltom bomb. there's no desk to duck under now. we've been invaded and we have to understand the nature of this war. >> senator burr says the committee has been unable to interview christopher steele and cannot assess his credibility. he suggests that they've corroborated some parts of the dossier going back to june of '16. let's watch the chair. >> we're investigating a very expansive russian network of interference in u.s. elections. and though we have been incredibly enlightened at our ability to rebuild backwards the steele dossier up to a certain d