tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC August 16, 2018 12:00am-1:00am PDT
gets to decide how we defend ourselves and importantly how we hit back, who we hit when and how. all of it filed under the heading elections have consequences. that's our broadcast on a wednesday night. thank you so much for being here >> tonight on all in. >> i have revoked the security clearance on john brennan. >> revoking my security clearances is his way of trying to get back at me. >> tonight, john brennan responds. >> is this an effort to try to cowl individuals. >> james clapper, james comey. >> more former officials. >> susan rice, andrew mccabe. >> threatened by the white
house. >> what is really going on here. >> this really has the feel of someone simply trying to distract from another damaging political event that's going on with miss omarosa. >> plus, day 12 and the manafort case heads to the jury. >> mr. manafort was happy with how things happened today. >> "all in" starts now. >> you don't know anything about us. >> good evening, from new york. i am ali velshi in for chris hayes. as the jury deliberates, a former white house aide threatens to release more secret tapes and the special counsel closes in. the president of the united states appears to be trying to change the subject by using his office to retaliate against political opponents. the kind of move we associate with authoritarians and despots
the president revoked the security clearance of john brennan. now, a senior national security and intelligence analyst brennan has become one of the president's most prominent critics. tweeting it's astounding you often fail to live up to minimum standards of decency. brennan was one of the first officials to blow the whistle on russia's interference. and later he entertained the possibility of collusion with the trump campaign. >> i know what the russians try to do. they try to get individuals to act on their behalf wittingly or
unwittingly. and i was worried about the number of contacts that the russians had on u.s. persons. i had unresolved questions in my mind as to whether or not the russians had been successful in getting u.s. persons involved in the campaign or not to work in their behalf. frequently people don't realize they are along that path until it gets to be a bit too late. >> the white house press secretary laid out the rationale for stripping brennan's clearance. >> are now outweighed by the risk posed by his erratic conduct and behavior. recently leveraged his status as a former high ranking official with access of highly serious
information. as part of this review, i am evaluating action with respect to the following individuals. james clapper, james comey, michael hay den, sally yates, lisa strzok. >> dan coats was left out of the loop on today's announcement as were other senior intelligence officials. as for brennan that he actively abused security clearance, the white house declined to provide any. >> as was alleged earlier. >> i have laid out the reasons for the decisions that was made on this specific instance and we'll continue to review the other accuracies.
>> by not you saying those things, you didn't find any yet. >> i wouldn't make any assumptions. >> in a phone call, brennan condemned the president's action and vowed that he won't be silenced. here now, an extended portion of an exclusive interview with former cia director john brennan. >> i believe that mr. trump decided to take this action as he has done with others to try to intimidate and suppress criticism of him or his administration. revoking my security clearances is his way of trying to get back at me. i think i have tried to voice the concerns of millions of americans about mr. trump's failures in terms of fulfilling the responsibilities of that sacred and solemn office of the presidency. this is not going to deter me at all. i am going to speak out.
i am worried about the message that it appears mr. trump is trying to send others. including those who currently hold security clearances in the government. i think he included bruce orr among those he is reviewing. both inside and outside of the government to make sure that they don't say anything either that is critical of mr. trump or with which he disagrees. and i have seen this type of behavior and actions on the part of foreign tyrants and despots and autocrats for many years. i never ever thought that i would see it here in the united states. and so i do believe that all americans really need to take stock of what is happening right
now in our government. and how abnormal and how irresponsible and how dangerous these actions are. so again, if mr. trump believes this is going to lead me to go away and be quiet, he is very badly mistaken. >> let me ask you an uncomfortable question, the president describes your conduct as erratic. he is trying to diminish your credibility. what do you know that you haven't shared yet that he would want to take your credibility down a notch. you are highly regarded by democrats and republicans. but as he has done with jim comey, and rob mueller, your credibility is something that he sees is important to diminish. what do you know that he is afraid of? >> well, i think he is concerned about the criticisms that i am
voicing publicly. i think he hears those types of criticisms. he fears individuals who could damage him, could damage his standing. they look at the way he is referring to bob mueller. a national treasure, an icon within the law enforcement and justice communities who is doing his level best to investigate russian interference in the election. and the denigration of bob mueller as well as his team of investigators is reprehensible. and when i speak out about some of his practices and his what i think are flawed policies, now we can all have policy disagreements and differences, that's what makes this country great. but i must tell you that mr. trump's dishonesty, lack of
integrity, nastiness, and mean spiritedness. the terms that he uses, that is not what i think of american president nor of america. we are better than this. we have to be better than this. we have been a shining example to the world and mr. trump is letting this country down. >> do you believe he is motivated by a desire to please someone other than the american public. and by that, we have had a lot of conversations about his republicans of vladimir putin in helsinki. even white house staff started scratching their head and thinking maybe there is something there. carrying out vladimir putin's wishes for the american democracy, the division, the polarization, the pro russia policies. do you think there is something more going on than incompetence.
>> he may very well have a guilty conscience about the time types of things he has done in the past. i don't know. he is the one that has to account for those previous actions and whether or not those accuracies ran afoul of the ethics and of the law. i don't know what he may be concerned about in terms of what might be divulged as part of this investigation and others. but as i said repeatedly, i fire department his attitude and behavior toward vladimir putin and the russians very puzzling. and very, very irrational. and so i don't know what it is that is behind that.
i think that is why it is critical and important that bob mueller and his investigators be allowed to continue their work and unimpeded. and important that rod rosenstein stays in charge of that investigation. clearly, mr. trump is getting more and more concerned, more and more desperate. i would say more and more frightened as there is closer and closer magnification of some of the things that those around him have been involved in, those who may have been concealing illegal activities as been admitted by a number of individuals that are closely related to the campaign. i think it is important that i
continue to speak out. i know somethings that the russians were involved in but i certainly don't know all of the things that mr. trump has been involved in throughout the years and i don't pretend to have that knowledge. he is the one, and clearly his actions are those of somebody who is seeking to prevent the full light of day being shown upon his past. >> you've talked about a guilty conscience and the importance of robert mueller completing his work. you know mueller is a punching bag from the president and his tweeter feed. you having some familiarity with how bob mueller runs an investigation and how he thinks about prosecutions and investigations, i wonder if you think that the president is at this point a target in the obstruction of justice investigation or the conspiracy investigation around collusion
of russia and if you think that is a semantic gain at this point. if you think mueller is adhering to policy. do you think but for that the president is a target for the investigation or the collusion investigation. >> i have no knowledge of what mueller and his team have uncovered and are pursuing. what i do know about bob mueller is that they are exceptionally thorough. and will continue to look for any evidence of criminal wrongdoing whether that was to conspire with foreign governments against this country. whether it was to defraud this country as a result of a financial transaction that were hidden. or obstruction of justice. and over the last year plus,
when bob mueller has been involved in this effort and the previous year, i am competent that they have looked at all of these different angles and i know that bob mueller is not going to give anyone a pass in terms of any kind of criminal conduct that might have been uncovered. so again, i have no knowledge about what is the status of that investigation. but i know that the quality of bob mueller and his team is one that all americans should be proud of. and all americans whether they support mr. trump or not should want this investigation to be brought to completion. >> for more reaction to the president's unprecedented retaliation against the former cia joins by john mclaughlen. now that we have had a few hours to listen to it, and you have heard john brennan's own words, what are your thoughts about
what happened today? >> i thought a lot about it. and i can't find any way to describe this as anything other than a transparent attempt to muzzle free speech. i looked at the 26 page executive directive that governs. 32 reasons for revoking security clearance and not one of them matches anything close to the reasons given in the white house statement. it was signed out during president trump's administration so he owns it. i see it as nothing less than that. a vindictive way to mete out punishment. considering taking the same action on.
>> will it achieve that goal of intimidating others. listing a bunch of names, james comey, sally yates. in the end, as a punitive measure, is this going to backfire on the president and make him look petty and punitive. >> i think it is going to backfire and if it goes into administration or court proceeding, i am not a lawyer but i have talked to a few this afternoon, i don't think it will hold up. the president has the authority to do this. but the gravest mistake a president can make is to deny an american citizen his rights.
it does have the feel of what an authoritarian tyrant does. the white house is not clever about this. they are transparent. not given a reason mentioned in the laws -- >> let me ask you this. senator mark warren has a more sinister view. >> i worry whether this precedence is going to somehow lead to the president and mueller. this is clearly another effort to silence critics and not allow the mueller investigation and for that matter our investigation to get to the bottom of this. >> it is an interesting take. what do you think about that? >> i wouldn't rule it out.
this president has not lost the ability to astonish us every single day. it is such improper behavior for a president. and i wouldn't rule it out. although i think it may give them a little more credit than they deserve given this directive was dated as someone pointed out today back in july. they clearly use today as sort of an opportunity to put it out and probably to distract from the omarosa affair and so farther. -- forth. i wouldn't rule out anything from the president. i sensed a quickening panic on the part of the president. and the ways the walls are closing in. this has a feel of an act of desperation. it is denying mr. brennan his first amendment rights, he still has his first amendment rights, but punishing him for exercising them.
that's an important point. and i think that's, i don't see how you can put any other construction on it. there has not been a reasonable persuasive reason given by the white house for the action they have taken. >> careful, that kind of talk will get you labeled erratic. >> been called worse. >> thank you for joining me. for more on what the president did today. joined by former deputy national security advisor under president obama. ben, at the time, it was hard to make sense of this. i asked you in the obama administration, you had enemies there too. did you consider action like this at any point?
>> absolutely not and i sat across the hall from john brennan for years. it is unprecedented in the history of our country to say we are going to take this mechanism and use it to punish our political enemies. that is something that wouldn't expect to see in our democracy. >> senator kennedy today mentioned something about the politicization. and i want you to tell me your thoughts. >> i have made my feelings known about mr. brennan. most americans look at to be above politics. he has been totally political. i think i called him a butt-head and i meant it.
he has given the national intelligence community a bad name. >> evaluate that for me. i think we would be having a different discussion. he is a private citizen criticizing the president. >> i was called into brennan's office. for that member of the senate to call him a butt head is offensive. and what has he done or donald trump that is as consequential. >> famous photo of the night of the osama bin laden raid. you tweeted john brennan was the point person for obama white house on the operation that
killed osama bin laden. there is a deeper point. this is a guy that you want to keep close to you. this is a guy who actually knows something about some of the biggest threats facing this country. >> he served for decades. he knows more about terrorism than just about anybody in the country. you would want him as a resource. you ask about motivation. donald trump, his associates are under investigation for potentially conspiring with a foreign adversary to undermine our democracy. that is already produced guilty
pleas. and that circle is closing around donald trump, his family members and closest associates. so what he needs is villains. to stir up his base. john brennan is a patriots. and we have the president in the oval office who is being investigated for potentially conspiring with russia. that is the real story here. and what trump wants is it to be he said, she said. no, there is one person and one group of people who are under investigation for potentially undermining our democracy and it is not john brennan. >> thanks for joining me twice today. still ahead, the news the white house would want everyone not to talk about. omarosa reeking havoc. right after this. this wi-fi is fast.
i know! i know! i know! i know! when did brian move back in? brian's back? he doesn't get my room. he's only going to be here for like a week. like a month, tops. oh boy. wi-fi fast enough for the whole family is simple, easy, awesome. in many cultures, young men would stay with their families until their 40's.
i get so upset when i hear mr. trump denigrate the work of national security and intelligence professionals when i know they have a very, very challenging job and juggling their professional responsibilities along with their personal responsibilities. this i think is a sad time. >> former cia john brennan. >> this had an erie memory. to me smacks of nixonian type practices. that puts us again in uncharted territory. >> senator warner isn't the only one deeply concerned by the
president's actions today. joined by congressman swalwell. on one hand i am hearing people saying this is petty. it is all weird, but kind of more scarey than weird. >> good evening ali, certainly more scarey than weird. and all of those things. but worse, and i think the big picture here, it makes us less safe. the security clearance is not to benefit john brennan, or any other administration officials from the obama administration. it is to benefit us. people like cia director or mike pompeo or general mattis consider threats against the united states, they are able to
reach back and talk to people who face the same threats and get their candid advice. that is why it is in place. and i called a former secretary. and he said i all the time would call on prior administration officials to get their advice. so it makes us less safe >> and john mclaughlin made an interesting point. john brennan was in the room, in on the decision to go after osama bin laden. this was a guy in a world where terrorism is one of our greatest threats that you want to tap into. >> a lot of people just like john brennan who are speaking out against the president and who may make this enemy list. the list of advisors, will shrink to only include sycophants of the president. and that makes us less safe. and someone who looks at these threats every day.
there are a number of decisions that have to be made that include information that prior administration officials had access to and where we would want their input if it came to a life or death situation. >> you and i have had similar conversations you are our representative, the voice of the people in the nation's capital. last month somebody asked paul ryan what you thought about the threat and here is what he had to say about it. >> the president had said he wants to revoke security clearances from some former national security officials who still hold them and made political remarks is it dangerous to go down the road. >> i think he is trolling.
>> he says it is trolling. it is a big deal. >> also, senator corker when this was proposed by the president, he said this is something that would be done in venezuela and so now i ask senator corker and senator flake, other people who have honorably spoken out against the president what are you going to do action wise. we are slipping toward banana republican and they have the power, we are not helpless, to stop that from happening. >> the official statement from the white house says mr. brennan has leveraged his status. to make a series of unfounded allegations wild outbursts on the internet and television about the administration.
erratic, outrageous, this, as you said, we are sliding toward a banana republic. this is the stuff you become accustomed to in dictatorship. >> he is a private citizen now, he has the right to say it. this clearance does not benefit former director brennan. >> good to see you. thank you for joining us. >> my pleasure. still to come. the growing headaches. the new fallout next .
donald trump revoking the security clearance on one of his toughest critics. it serves to put other detractors on notice. second, it grabs the headlines back on what has been a disastrous news week. between omarosa's book and the trail of paul manafort. jennifer rubin joins me now as does associated press white house reporter jonathan lemire. i have to say, at some point, we are not all fools. we can cover the story of what donald trump did today, it doesn't suddenly make us all forget about the fact that omarosa has tapes and manafort's jury is going tomorrow. >> they are not going go away
just because donald trump does another thing that is outrageous. i think he is making the predicament of republicans even worse. each time he does one of these things in advance to the midterms he reminds of how spineless these people are. he is not simply trying to detract for his benefits, he is harming hiss own party's chances which he does just about every day. >> i was surprised at senator kennedy's responses. jonathan, giuliani's series of interviews, to bloomberg he said about mueller in the investigation, if he doesn't get this done in the next two or three weeks, we will unload on this like a ton of bricks.
does a few things here and there to let the public or the mueller investigation or whomever know. >> giuliani is a great quote if nothing else. the president himself, the reporting that we have done suggests he is anxious. he sees it is the special counsel and feels like it is a warning shot toward him. he is concerned about the legal fortunes of some people close to him. particularly don junior. he feels he could be next. rudy giuliani on the attack or an attempt to change the conversation which we saw today. it must be pointed out, the official letter put out is dated july 26. why drop it now if not to be distraction to change the story.
>> almost like a filing cabinet or a closet or a bag of distractions at the white house which is interesting because in the press briefing yesterday, sarah sanders said nobody than the people in the room care about this omarosa thing. they need to look to the president. >> they don't have anything else to talk about. the economy is baked into this election cycle. the president isn't doing anything frankly between now and the end of the year. so all they do have to talk about are these things. and i want to pick up on something that john was saying. i think what is significant
about the trial is i think the president correctly sees that in this case, a prosecutor armed with the facts up against a defendant who is screaming unfair is a formidable factor. he is seeing what an actual case looks like when all of his theatrics and nonsense are ineffective. he is intimidated. we should all stop listening to and taking direction from rudy giuliani. they are going unload on him. what does that mean? this is what he passes off as legal advice. >> we have to figure out what we do when it comes the president changes the news cycle. we can probably expect more of the same over the coming few days. might be more in the file of three-week memos. >> these tweets are presidential statements.
they can't just be ignored. you can judge each one on their merit. no collusion. we have to make a decision what is news. this is what he does, he changes the subject, and goes on the attack. he plays to the base. let's remember, it was only ten-days ago before the omarosa, these tweets about lebron james. that unfewerated some people and delighted others. and 24 hours later we are talking about something else. that is what he does. the challenge is to make sure we keep it all in context. and clear, the mueller probe is what hovers over the white house throughout. that is what he is focused on and we will be too. >> a sense that the tweets coming out of the white house,
there is a level of desperation settling in. >> you can only have rudy giuliani on television hollering nonsense so often. what do you do the next day? so in some sense, i think frankly this is the pressure he is feeling that if you think about it, most likely in the final months of a republican congress. and when the congress and i think the house inevitably flipped now, 60, 70 seats in place. they will have the subpoena power and the oversite power. he better enjoy this freebie. come january, i suspect life is going to be difficult. >> thanks both of you for your time. >> deliberations beginning just hours in the manafort trial.
what it means, next. from the very beginning ... it was always our singular focus, a distinct determination. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. specialists focused on treating cancer. using advanced technologies. and more precise treatments than before. working as hard as we can- doing all that we can- for everyone who walks through our doors. this is cancer treatment centers of america. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. treating cancer isn't one thing we do. it's the only thing we do. expert medicine works here.
learn more at cancercenter.com cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. the president of the united states used his executive power to retaliate against a former cia director who would dare to criticize him. the first trial in the era of robert mueller wrapping up. in summing up his case, the lead prosecutor said "mr. manafort lied to keep more money when he had it and lied when he didn't. this is a case about lies." >> mr. manafort was happy about how things went today. pointing out the shortcomings in the government's case. the government has not met their burden of proof.
>> i am joined by news national security and justice reporter julia ainsley who was in the courtroom. last best chance. how did it go for them? >> not quite as well for the prosecution. they were picking and choosing around the edges here. one of the things they said that might have stuck if the judge hadn't instructed the jury to ignore it is the argument that we will only be in this courtroom because of the special counsel. banks could have complained that they had been lied to. none of those people chose to report it because they didn't think it was a problem or only listening to this case because of the special counsel. that argument is not something that the jury is supposed to consider because the judge, and this is a judge who has not been
kind to the prosecution as you know. actually said you shouldn't think about the justice department's motivation and just because someone has not been a subject of an audit does not preclude them to becoming a part of the investigation. he laid that out in the lengthy jury instructions today. go after rick gates. they wants to paint him as someone who had his fingerprints all over. didn't you find it surprising that rick gates could name off all but two of the banks. he had his hands all over this. the prosecution had a good rebuttal to that. wouldn't it be so lucky, all be so lucky to have somebody set up foreign bank accounts so we could benefit as well as paul manafort did. so i think the prosecution laid out a good case here. at best for the defense, there could be one or two counts where there are hold out jurors who don't think it meets the legal bar.
hit home when they said the star witness in this case is the documents. just look at the documents they corroborate what they said. and this is a case about documents. >> this judge as you mentioned before, tries to get everybody home for dinner, so he didn't allow deliberations to start to want. is that the first thing that happens in the morning. >> yes, it starts at 9:30 tomorrow. jury got their instructions and then they have a night of sleep to go home and come back without those arguments fresh in their minds. but they will get this tomorrow. it could be a slam dunk case and they come out with a verdict right away. we will see what they do. >> thank you so much.
we've got some breaking news tonight. the "washington post" saying trump's lawyers nearly completed a memo opposing a sympathy from robert mueller for donald trump to answer questions about possible obstruction of justice. they say they are prepared to fight their case all the way to the supreme court. the news follows closing arguments of paul manafort, trump's former campaign chairman. regardless of the outcome of that trial, guiliani is telling mueller to end it soon. if he doesn't get it done within the next few weeks we will unload on him like a ton of bricks. guiliani is pointing to a darm of justice policy of employees taking action to interfere with
or affect the result of an election. >> we are running into a real big problem for them. if they try to drag this thing much into september you have a very clear violation of the justice department policy not to interfere with elections. >> it looks like, brace yourselves for this, by the way, guiliani is wrong. current officials say mueller can continue his investigation up to and after september 6 without violating policies. while many legal analysts expect a guilty verdict in the manafort trial, what would this mean for the mueller investigation? are they further ahead as a result. will they tell them something they want to know once he's staring a long jail sentence in the case. former congressman who voted to impeach president nixon as a member of the house judiciary committee tells me and frank, former assistant director for counter intelligence at the fbi.
thank you both for being here. frank, let me start with you. rudy guiliani somehow manages to convince people he wasn't really a good prosecutor when he says nonsense like this. that informal justice department rule is not actually about somebody investigating serious crimes, about people fiddling in an election. >> that's exactly right. nor is there a hard and fast violation documented. there's a guideline and suggestion, unwritten understanding you don't mess with an election by starting an investigation or announcing something during an election period, but there's nothing here to be violated. >> elizabeth, let's talk about what happens tomorrow, maybe as early as tomorrow we get a vert in this trial. let's say, as some experts say, that it's guilty. paul manafort has a conviction. what does the government do at
that point? what does the mueller investigation do with that? they can't unconvict him at that point as part of any deal they make with him? >> well, he's facing another trial. they can try to work something out with him. the point is manafort has held out all this time. why has he done that? i personally think it's because he's waiting for a pardon from the president. i think he will -- i think likely he'll be convicted but in any case he has another trial. what mueller has in terms of leverage over manafort is a huge number of years for a conviction in the virginia case and then a huge number of years for a conviction in the d.c. case. is manafort going to break? he's 69 years old. does he want to spend the rest off his life in prison? i think he's enjoyed life outside prison too much. >> apparently. we learned that in the last few weeks. >> he won't get any more ostrich jackets. i think he likes being out of prison. most people do. i think the government has a
huge about of leverage over him. he has very important things to tell the government. right now, we have an issue whether donald trump knew beforehand that the trump tower meeting was going to take place and did he approve it. >> manafort would know that because he was in that meeting. >> correct. >> manafort is key. richard gates is key. manafort has a lot to tell about that and there may be other issues with respects to the russians and may be other things he knows. mueller needs him. mueller is putting together his case brick by brick by brick and is very methodical and very careful and the noose is tightening. >> frank, guiliani said it tonight, trump's name was not mentioned, had nothing to do with trump, i heard this from people. elizabeth is saying if manafort is convicted this make the mueller case stronger. >> a verdict in the manafort case is not an all or nothing equation for the special counsel.
it's absolutely important for at least three reasons, first, as you already discussed, is a possibility manafort at some time, even post conviction could indeed flip. he could have enough of the baloney sandwiches and protein loaf in prison and he could get a reduction for significant cooperation. secondly, gates. to the extent the manafort case used gates as a key witness, gates is still important for the next manafort trial being a foreign agent. i think gates has volumes to say about that. if we lose the first trial, if they get an acquittal, gates is a credible witness. third, the public perception issue lost in the manafort case will be a drumbeat for the others to say there's nothing here, they can't put a case together and that all important public perception is about what impeachment becomes and proceedings and articles of impeachment.
an essential verdict for the special counsel. >> rudy guiliani continues to have deadlines for robert mueller and talk about what they're going to do and fight it to the supreme court. do you think any of this has any influence on robert mueller at all? >> not at all. i think he has a checklist every time guiliani gives him a threat, like we will come down on you unless you listen to us. you can't tell a prosecutor how to handle a case. you can't tell a prosecutor to cut short is investigation. we don't know what mueller is looking at. maybe he has another 32 russians to indict. guiliani wants him to cut that investigation short. mueller has a little list of these things and they could be all obstruction of justice. >> frank, what's the decision tree for mueller as of tomorrow. obviously, they don't have any information anybody isn't going to have. we will hear the jury and their verdict all at once. what's he thinking?
if there is a conviction tomorrow, what's the next step? >> i think he becomes emboldened and makes a move on this potential interview with the president. i think we will see that if ere strong move towards demanding an interview or heading towards a grand jury subpoena of the president. that's headed right to the supreme court. >> i was going to say that will get mess. i no way the president will say, sure, let's sit down, when and where. >> by the way, who would then be interfering with an election. the president could short circuit that by complying with the subpoena. he's not going to do that. i think he's too afraid and too much of a coward ever to appear before mueller. >> that would get us to a place in the supreme court we haven't seen before. it's been tested. we've seen it with nixon and clinton but never gone to the idea of an actual sit-down subpoena. >> but the theory is still the same. we have a criminal justice system. the president is not above the law. if he has critical information
he has to give it. it's not that much of an interference. >> frank, you said it goes straight to the supreme court. how do you see this playing out in the short term. we're 80 some odd days to a midterm election. this obviously would become central to that election. >> it will be front and center. boy, we are in for an ugly time. trying to get inside mueller's head and his team's head, what i've come up with is, look, they would be remiss and extremely criticized if they just acquiesced to a denial of interview by the president. they're going to have to push this. they need to do it, win or lose, they're probably going to move ahead and try to get a subpoena if he says no. >> how does that look, they insist. they ask first. >> they've been asking for mou many months? eight months already. >> now he has subpoenas in hand. he actually subpoenas the president. is that how it works? >> yes. then the president will say, no, i can't be subpoenaed. i'm the president of the united states. you can't dear subject me to the process of the court, i'm above everything. >> they will base it on executive privilege?
>> i don't know. i don't want to predict what kind of arguments will come out of his mouth or guiliani's mouth, whatever, will the supreme court even take it? who knows? maybe they will rely on precedence here. >> what could be interesting he could assert a fifth amendment right of self-incriminating saying, i'm guilty and i can't talk about it. >> that would be interesting. the issue is going to be jurisdiction. the president is going to argue he can't be caused to sit down. they argue the court doesn't have that jurisdiction, the court overruled that. >> the court says, you have a subpoena from a grand jury. that takes precedence over a president's arguments about national security or executive privilege. we have a criminal justice system that has to function in this country. that's first. >> thanks for joining us. frank, great to see you. thank you both for seeing me tonight. that's it for "all in" this evening.
>> tonight anything to change from omarosa's recording. rudy giuliani tells the washington post he's almost finished his rebuttal on a potential subpoena fight and the trump's legal team is ready to go to the supreme court. just hours away now in the case of paul manafort, the first big test of the mueller era as "the 11th hour" gets away. day 583 of the trump administration. today we saw the rare hybrid in the short history of this white house. a big shiny object, a giant political attraction distracting