Skip to main content

tv   Deadline White House  MSNBC  March 28, 2019 1:00pm-2:00pm PDT

1:00 pm
will be streamed on all nbc news digital properties. see you back here at tomorrow 1:00 p.m. eastern and 3:00 p.m. eastern. you can always find me on cerebral modsocial media, twitter, facebook, snapchat and linked-in. thank you for watching. "deadline: white house" with nicolle wallace starts now. hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. a cloud shows no signs of lifting. the mueller probe a employ for the president in public opinion. a new poll shows the majority of americans, 56%, i believe donald trump is not exonerated of collusion. and news today the president's son-in-law, jared kushner, is back on capitol hill meeting with the senate intel committee as part of its russia investigation. and the big news today about the actual mueller report, which no one outside of the barr justice department had seen is it is at least 300 pages long.
1:01 pm
"the new york times" today reporting, quote, the total of 300-plus pages suggests mr. mueller went well beyond the kind of bare bones summary required about the justice department regulation governing his appointment and detailed his conclusions at length. it raises questions about what mr. barr might have left out of the four dense pages he sent to congress. this news comes as adam schiff, top democrat on the house intel committee, presses on with his investigation into whether the president has been compromised by russia, despite an orchestrated smear campaign from the white house and congressional republican. trump tweeting this morning that schiff should be forced to resign from congress. hours later trump's lawyer rubly called for schiff's resignation at a public committee hearing. schiff responded defiantly and forcefully, reminding his republican colleagues why his persistence matters. 1. >> my colleagues may think it's
1:02 pm
okay that the russians offered dirt on a democratic candidate for president as part of what was described as the russian government's effort to help the trump campaign. you might think that's okay. my colleagues might think it's okay that when that was offered to the son of the president with a pivotal role in the campaign, that the president's son did not call the fbi, he did not adamantly refuse that foreign help. no, instead that son said he would love to help with the russians. you might think it's okay that he took that meeting. he might think it's okay that paul manafort, can the campaign chair, someone with great experience in running campaigns, also took that meeting. you might think it's okay that the president's son-in-law also took that meeting. you might think it's okay that they concealed it from the public. you might think it's okay that
1:03 pm
their only disappointment after that meeting was the dirt they received on hillary clinton wasn't better. you might think that's okay. you might think it's okay that when it was discovered a year later, that they lied about that meeting and said it was about adoptions. you might think it's okay the president helped dictate that lie. you might think that's okay. i don't. i think it's immoral, i think it's unethical, i think it's unpatriotic, and, yes, i think it's interrupt. and evidence of collusion. i have always said the question of whether this amounts to proof of conspiracy was another matter, whether the special counsel could prove beyond a rm doubt the proof of that crime would be up to the special counsel and i would accept his decision and i do. honorable ma and good prosecutor. but i do not think that conduct,
1:04 pm
criminal or not, is okay. the day we do think that's okay is the day we will look back and say that is the day america lost its way. >> powerful, forkful worceful w reminders for all of us when the special counsel was looking for crimes, appointed to investigate and prosecute crimes, abnormal behavior is all around us. that is the chairman of the house intelligence committee today and where we start with some of our favorite reporters and friends. reporting from outside the department of justice, julia ainsley, nbc news and national security avufter, former deputy assistant attorney general ellio elliott williams is back. msnbc political analyst robert costa. with us on set white house reporter for "the l.a. times," eli stokols and memia roca, former u.s. attorney and msnbc legal analyst. it's so funny how the roles swapped become a
1:05 pm
swapped back and forth. i remember rudy giuliani screaming at the top of his lungs, collusion isn't a crime! and now rudy giuliani, collusion isn't a crime! intentional conspiracy was not proven, or establish, the word of special counsel used, and all of that conduct is undeniable. all of that conduct we should expect to be detailed in devastating and anecdotal and perhaps narrative when we see it. nothing adam schiff said was something trump was cleared of. >> exactly. that's a great point about giuliani. one thing has been taken off the table by what we know so far by barr's summary of the mueller reports, and that is as adam said, as you said, it's the charging of a criminal conspiracy against trump and people in his campaign about very specific things, election interference with the russian government. there's still a lot on the
1:06 pm
table. that takes one thing off the table. an important thing, and something that, yes, people should accept, i think once we see it from mueller but we should accept and that's a good thing, leaves on the table all of this conduct that needs to be explain. conduct congressman schiff did a great job of marshaling and it shows us why it's so important to see the mueller report. because what he was doing is marshaling the evidence. that's what prosecutors do. they investigate and then lay it out in a way that makes it more comprehensible, even if there's argument or conclusions drawn. just seeing it in a form and somebody like robert mueller, who is so experienced and has so much, sort of context to put it in, to marshal it together, summer rise it in the way he obviously did in a very detailed report, that will be invaluable for how we understand what happened. and it shows, again, why it's so important for us to see the
1:07 pm
report >> julia ainsley, the justice department going a little farther today than they had so far this week. in confirming at least for news organizations the report is at least 300 pages long. i'm told by a source familiar with the investigation and final product that a lot of that will not -- this story is as good as it's going to get for donald trump right now with the 3 1/2-page summary being all that we know of mueller's twoli two-year-long work. >> that very well can be. what we expect to be in this document, which is over 300 pages, is more evidence. the evidence weekend as he decided to write that report and that letter that he sent to congress. one of the things that barr says in there that that there is evidence on both sides of the obstruction case. robert mueller laid out enough evidence to explain the thing that none of us can understand, jim comey said he can't understand it. that's why he essentially left
1:08 pm
it as a jump ball over the issue of obstruction. the amount of information that someone like robert mueller would include in that, we would assume to be voluminous. we heard that word before. now we know it's over 300 pages. somewhere over 300 and less than 1,000 based on our reporting from "the washington post." that's a large range and i tried to get it narrowed down but had a hard time getting it nailed down. not only has he gone over the bare bones report to the justice department but it might reignite calls to see more trajz parnsy in this report. we know it's going to leave out grand jury information. it will leave out evidence that can be used and further investigations and further criminal proceedings that might spin off of this. i think now that we know there's so much more in there that explains what so far is unexplainable, the calls to see more of this report are just going to get louder >> let me follow up with you and ask you about the evidence on both sides.
1:09 pm
i understand that the evidence on the side of not calling it a crime is really very much steeped in the law. that they're understanding an analysis of the law was that the article 2 authorities gave the president a lot of running room. but that the evidence, what we may very well see, is conduct that will be clear to anyone who looks at it as pretty damning. >> right. well one of the things barr said he is did not consider the justice department's decision whether or not you could indict a sitting president. but you would think if mueller did say that, if they had ruled it out, because they kplaupt complain that decision. could it be they knew robert mueller left it up to him and he left it up to barr.
1:10 pm
and barr couldn't prove intent because there was no underlying crime. i saw the person who started the whole investigation in the first place and he said it's not a justice department tradition to believe you can't charge obstruction without an underlying crime. i know media many others can speak to that. the very essence of that really would make the obstruction statue os sa leet. what if you can obstruct a revelation but can't pinpoint that? >> yes. elliott, the substance exists for a very set of crimes for the reason if you never can charge obstruction without an underlying crime, everybody would struck an investigation into themselves or campaign or company or administration, is that right? >> right. the intent has to be there to impede the administration of justice. absolutely, you may not be able to find the underlying crime but an individual can be trying to impede the administration of justice. once again, mimi is spot on. there is evidence of
1:11 pm
obstruction. he's said to -- the president of the united states said in the lfter holt interview he intended to get rid of jim comey, get rid of quote/unquote this russia thing was the language he used. that may not have risen to the level to convict somebody beyond a reasonable doubt under the federal criminal instructions statute but he's clearly trying to stop an investigation and about that should be abundantly clear to everyone. the fact is a 300-page report details the evidence to the president is evidence of the fact that they uncovered information about this. the fact that they spent -- even if this four pages, this new obstruction section, is incredibly instructive? terms of hue barr talks about reasonable doubt as a hard standard to meet and the president is not exonerated. it's abundantly clear to me and many people when you look at it, there's evidence there. again, could you convince an individual of a crime?
1:12 pm
that's an open question or at least barr and special counsel have found so. but the bigger question is for people in the public trust, what's the standard? i think the standard for is it a crime or is it not can't be where the conversation ends. we're talking about the president of the united states. we have to have a different standard then. he really didn't commit a crime so it's all fine, turns our hands up and call it a day. we demand more as a populous from ou elected officials. there you go. it's a little disconcerting to see that because of the fact there's been finding or at least a four-page summary of a finding, because there was no chargeable crime, the conversation should end with respect to the president. but that just can't be in. >> robert, that won't be it. the mueller report, you know the politics in that town better than i do, but the crush of the
1:13 pm
political energy on both sides of the aisle as long as republicans are claim something sort of exoneration and democrats want more information because of mueller, what everyone's talking about, mueller's refusal to exonerate or charge t. seems the political pressure will be on releasing this report. it would appear that the strategy at this point from the president's allies would be to get themselves somehow on offense. but if they think they've been exonerated y. do necessity need to keep the court going against the rule of law and proceed to enemies in congress? >> there's a fear among many of my republican sources about the instruction side of robert mueller's report. they're unsure of what's in there, different actions that have not been propertied publicly. they're not really ready too move on. know they this report should be brought up any time. should it be leaked or in the hands of congress or could mr. mueller be called to testify. so they're bracing for different kinds of questions about the president's conduct to come up
1:14 pm
in the coming weeks even if they feel a little better about the conspiracy in the trm campaign. >> are you at all i volked with this man, jim comey? let me play some of the interviews with lester holt last night. we will talk about it on the other side. >> close your eyes. change the names. let me make one up for you. the iranians -- totally made up -- interfered in the election to help elect barack obama because they think they will get a better nuclear deal from him. during that election, an oen aide meets with with the iranian and talks about the dirt they have that will help obama get elected and the field goal finds out about that. we should not investigate that? and then president obama's naks security adviser lies to the fbi about contacts with the iranians and the president asked me to drop an investigation of that and fires me and says i was thinking of the iranian thing. and then drives them to the oval officep said my nba director was
1:15 pm
a nut job. i lift aid lot of pressure by firing them. who on earth doesn't think the fooib should investigate that? a hypocrisy was revealed by changing the names. fbi did what it absolutely had to do. the american people should be glad it's there and proud of it. the rest is just lying and noise. >> he's making a great point. sitting here, you know trump tells, you know this white house and cover this president, woe do that and more. david nunls would streak across the capital to get the attention of everybody under the son to do exactly what jim comey just detailed. >> as an interesting and smart point with we make. as we all know, these are situational at best. there's not a lot of consistency and they don't care about people pointing out the discrepancies or hypocrisies. bob is right, there are republicans and there are people at the white house ha are concerned about the details that are going to eventually come out, especially pertaining to
1:16 pm
the obstruction side of this. i was at the white house a day or two ago. it's like being in the locker room after they win a game in overtime. the president is also jubilant. i think we know that because he took a break fre treating for much of the weekend. you could tell something wasn't eating at him after he had pleasure relieved. inside the white house they printed on the paper the headlines from fourth major newspapers on monday all saying mueller, no collusion. they think that top line is enough, at least politically. that's the sense. yes, they are concerned. they know there are other details that are not good but by and large, they feel satisfied the top line, headline, superwhat people are going to take away. the public is not going to read through hundreds of pages and isn't all that plugged in kind of already has their mind made up. the polling reflects that. they think this is enough for them to go out and oversell total exoneration to go
1:17 pm
completely on and try to bully adam schiff and the democrats. because there is a presidential election coming unand they're aware of the delicate nature of this for democrats who also don't want to come across as only out to get president, having nothing else to offer. i think that's why you see reluctance from speaker pelosi to go full bore into impeachment proceedings and they've tried to, the least on the leadership level, be jie dishs. donald trump will be out there. out there tonight in michigan railing about democrats, a witch-hunt. will he keep this up and they feel that headline from the barr letter is enough to give them fresh ammo to do that. >> robert costa, i see two mobs with that analysis. one, it's not bearing out in the polls yet. i was surprised to see the polls out today. it's been five days. 60% of americans don't believe the president is cleared of collusion despite the collusion headline being in all of those
1:18 pm
newspapers. that surprises me. this is not a light switch the republicans can turn on and activate and reach 45% of their base. northern that doesn't believe them. more than that was convinced seeing jim commey and adam schiff and others point out simply the misstreerous contacts. i think people talk about low-tech crimes, possibility even if there wasn't a criminal conspiracy, there was enough unseeming conduct to have done the harm this investigation is going to do. is that reality setting in there? >> the reality is setting in among republicans in the sense they know the president's conduct, even if not deemed legally a conspiracy by robert mueller based on the attorney general's summary. we have not seen the full report. even though he's a legal clear, he could not be a political clear. if you take the trump moscow meeting for example, there are
1:19 pm
questions of judgment, perhaps conspiracy in the eyes of many democrats who do see a corrupt intent of in that meeting to acquire information about secretary clinton, to use foreign powers, to try to influence an election. republicans at the least see bad judgment in that meeting. they see bad judgment in other decisions that were made during this campaign and by this president. the question they have is, is this all noise to most voters or are voters truly engaged, paying attention to these data points and amassing a judgment on this presidency that could become a reckoning in 2020? >> for you robert costa and you, julia, what do we know about jared kushner's trip to capitol hill? as much as they're willing to forgive the president bad judgment, i understand a lot of people are running out of patience. someone said he's one scandal away from being someone we wish the president would cut loose. robert, you first and then you, julian. >> we heard that about mr. kushner for two years now. he remains the president's
1:20 pm
confidante because he's married to miss trump and he's a close adviser to the president but his security clearance do alarm many republicans. his financial disclosure reports alarmed many republicans but he's been able to survive. he's worked on criminal justice reform and other issues and plows forward nonetheless. >> julie, do we know anything about his trip to capitol hill to meet with senators on the intel committee about their russian investigations? >> we know it was closed door, nicolle. and they don't call people in often on that committee. so it could be more significant than we know. but so far we're only able -- our colleagues on capitol hill were only able to get a peek at him but it certainly raised a lot of questions, especially the recent news about the security clearances. is there something more here. but i think the white house is more confident as they deal with congress and inquiries after the post-mueller report world and what they're considering a post-mueller report world. the rest of us still have
1:21 pm
questions about it. >> to be technically accurate, it is still a pre-mueller report world for them too. they haven't seen it as far as we know. thank you all so much for starting us off and spending time with us. when we come back, breaking news today in "the washington post" about the size and scope of donald trump's lies, about his net worth. the reporter who broke that story joins us. also ahead, protecting the president's daughter ivanka at all costs. new reporting on the role played by ivanka trump's lawyer in michael cohen's original false testimony. and donald trump seeks to command the fbi as his own personal police force, injecting the politics of trumpism into an already-fraught legal case out of chicago. all of those stories coming up. p - [woman] with shark's duo clean, i don't just clean, i deep clean carpets and floors, so i got this. yep, this too, and this, please. even long hair and pet hair are no problem,
1:22 pm
but the one thing i won't have to clean is this because the shark's self-cleaning brush roll removes the hair wrap while i clean. ♪ - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans now cleans itself. whooo!
1:23 pm
want to take your next vacation to new heights? tripadvisor now lets you book over a hundred thousand tours, attractions, and experiences in destinations around the world! like new york! from bus tours, to breathtaking adventures, tripadvisor makes it easy to find and book amazing things to do. and you can cancel most bookings up to 24 hours in advance for a full refund. so you can make your next trip... monumental! read reviews check hotel prices book things to do tripadvisor but i can tell you liberty mutual customized my car insurance so i only pay for what i need. oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no... only pay for what you need. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
1:24 pm
the biggest week in television is almost here. xfinity watchathon week. starting april 8th, enjoy free access to the best shows and movies from hbo, showtime, epix and more. what! whether it's more jaw droppers, standing o's upon standing o's or tv's biggest show stoppers. get more into what you're into. get ready to watch with xfinity x1 or the xfinity stream app. xfinity watchathon week. free starting april 8th. boop!
1:25 pm
it was my experience that mr. trump inflated his total assets when it served his purposes, such as trying to be listed amongst the wealthiest people in "forbes" and deflated his assets to reduce his real estate taxes. >> follow the money. it's one of the oldest rules of the road for understanding any investigation into fraud or corruption. when it comes to donald trump, it's proving fertile ground. "the washington post" out with a report today of exaggerating his possible wealth. when donald trump wanted make an impression on a lender, business partner or journalist, he sometimes sent them official looking documents called statement of financial condition. these documents sometimes ran up to 20 pages.
1:26 pm
they were full of numbers laying out trump's properties, debts and multi billion net worth. but for someone trying to get a true picture of trump's net worth, the documents were deeply flawed, some simply omitted properties that carried big debts. some assets were overvalued and some key numbers were wrong. here's the kind of key numbers we're talking about. trump at one point added ten stories on top of trump story. he said there were 68 floors when there are in fact 58. he slapped an extra 800 acres on his winery in virginia and his financial statements in 2011 exaggerated the number of home lots ready to sell at his golf course in southern california by '24. joining our conversations, the sirius xm director of progressive programming and rick stengel, former under secretary of state and we will admit coreporter with this blockbuster report we've been telling you about. david, it seems that -- and this
1:27 pm
is just a political note. if you have any thoughts, i'm eager to hear them. whenever the president seems to get himself into the clear with the pivot or stroke of fate in one investigative front, a bombshell comes clapping back down on him and your story is a perfect example of that. >> it's kind of the fact that so many of the areas of the president's life is under investigation. the mueller investigation got a lot of ink and press but it was only one of many. his business, charity, inaugural committee, his transition, basically every organization he's led through his adult life is now under investigation all at the same time. so the end of the mueller investigation takes away one little piece of that but a lot more is going on. >> it's such a good reminder but i wonder if you can take us through what you're reporting today. >> we focus on documents called state of financial condition. the reason we care about them is they seem to be in the middle of
1:28 pm
inquiries now on capitol hill and new york state. they both stem out of what michael cohen said, and you played some of that tape earlier. cohen said trump would send these statements out to potential lenders, to insurers to say look, i'm a rich guy. this was a written down, official looking version of a brag. i'm so rich, you should do business with me. you should give me money. there's rules about what you can say to your lenders and insurers and how far you can mislead them. these documents in many cases are misleading. they have wrong figures and exaggerations and give an inaccurate picture how wealthy trump was. >> i'm always curious and keeping an unofficial tally about how many crimes he's protected from treated like you or i would be treated, is this another case where the office of the president could inflate him or does he have more exposure here? >> he could have more exposure. there's always a question whether a president can be indicted or sued in straight
1:29 pm
court but we're a long way from knowing whether he has criminal liability here. there's a lot of questions to be asked, did deutsche bank, did his insurers take action as a result of these misrepresentations? was it enough to move the needle otherwise? until we know that and see the full picture, it's hard to know what exposure he has. >> is it a safe assumption the documents you saw that corroborated your reporting are in the hands of congressional investigators? >> yes, they are. and that congressional investigators are trying to get a lot more. we have these documents from the years 2011, 2012 and 2013. yesterday it was revealed the house oversight committee asked trump's accountants to produce these documents over the last ten years as well as all of the documents they relied on to produce them. congress wants a much bigger picture than they've got. >> mimi, it's the less sexy end of this investigation. nothing called a dossier. nothing that's out of a spy novel. but it feels like a tortoise and
1:30 pm
he hare kind of dynamic. david does this meticulous reporting which he said is very much on the radar of congress and represent a very real threat to this president. >> absolutely. in some ways this is the bread and butter of what prosecutors at the federal and state level do. i mean, you know, we refer to them in federal prosecutor's offices anyway as fraudsters, people who serially inflate assets, misrepresent assets, make false statements to heavily regulated industries like banks, mortgage lenders and insurance companies. i'm not saying right now he can be charged or there's enough to say he committed a crime. we don't know. but, boy, this gives you -- it's not digging for a needle in a hay stack. it's more like shooting fish in a barrel. and i've said this before and i will keep saying it, donald trump let his life not as
1:31 pm
someone who was expecting to be under a very strong microscope in the form of the southern district of new york, new york attorney general's office, and many other prosecutor's offices. and that's going to catch up with him. and it should. there are people in prison right now, paul manafort is just one example, and a high-profile one and frankly he's on the extreme version. i think he was more of a career fraudster. but people go to xray for this stuff eve -- jail for this stuff every day. if it can be shown he tried to get people to rely on false statements in the form of making money, getting money to him, getting something out of it, whether or not they actually gave it to him but that he was trying to get them to rely on it, there's a whole criminal -- series of criminal statutes that could apply. >> making fraud great again. >> i'm going to make a different point about it. in the 1980s it was said of henry kissinger he doesn't lie because it's in his interest, he
1:32 pm
lies because it's in his nature. that is donald trump. he lies about everything. he has corrupt intent about everything. yes, why does he have to make trump tower ten stories higher? because he has to say he's 6'3" instead of 6'2". this is part of the reason -- and i will do a little bit of a dogleg here, why the mueller report was unable to come up with collusion. i know i have been on the show and talked a lot in the past collusion would be part they had corrupt intent both sides. the problem was they were in heth and compete aechincompeten. coordination wasn't established because they're uncoordinated. it's a corrupt organization. they're incompetent. the russians, who i dealt with a lot, were not able to do these things. we got the story that came out the other day or yesterday, when mueller indicted the 13 people from the agency they came to america and a couple said maybe
1:33 pm
we should go to purple state. somebody told us that. that was a great revelations for the russia. russians are incompetent, trump people are incompetent. both people lie. that's why it's hard to establish collusion. >> so eli, we don't have to worry about learning russian to survive in trump's america? >> i don't think you have to learn russian but rick is right about this. can you look at all of the stuff with trump through this prism. >> incompetence defense? >> i think so. >> david, congratulations on the reporting. it's remarkable, as all of your reporting seems to be these days. eli, thank you for spending some time with us. after the break, what did she know and when did she know it? new reporting sheds light on the steps taken to manage michael cohen's testimony about ivanka trump's role in trump tower moscow. ump tower moscow the only fda-approved 3-in-1 copd treatment. ♪ trelegy. the power of 1-2-3 ♪ trelegy 1-2-3 trelegy
1:34 pm
with trelegy and the power of 1-2-3, i'm breathing better. trelegy works 3 ways to... ...open airways,... ...keep them open... ...and reduce inflammation... ...for 24 hours of better breathing. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling,.. ...problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. think your copd medicine is doing enough? maybe you should think again. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy and the power of 1-2-3. ♪ trelegy 1-2-3 save at trelegy.com.
1:35 pm
itso chantix can help you quit "slow turkey." along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix. you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life- threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. talk to your doctor about chantix.
1:36 pm
who are the family members you briefed on the. >> translator: tower moscow project? >> donald trump jr. and ivanka trump. >> okay.
1:37 pm
now were these in the regular course of business, or did the president or family request the briefings? >> this is the regular course of business. >> do you recall how many of these briefings there might have been? >> i think approximately ten in total. >> there was one of about a thousand different explosive claims michael cohen made in his testimony last month, that he briefed two of the trump children on the trump tower moscow project. that was backed up by cohen's renewed plea deal with robert mueller last year when he insisted, quote, he briefed family members of individual one within the company about the project. don't forget, the letter of intent signed by donald trump included an opportunity to name trump tower moscow spa after his daughter ivanka. that's why this latest reporting from our friend, emily jane fox, is so remarkable. as it turns out back in 2017, ivanka's lawyer abbe lowell was one of the people to review cohen's now admittedly false testimony in front of the senate intel committee before cohen
1:38 pm
delivered it. no evidence that lowell weighed in on what proved to be false in that testimony but he did have a few notes with suggestions, things to add. that's what emily's reporting. all of them designed to put as much space between ivanka trump and the project as humanly possible. joining the panel with this brand-new reporter, emily jane fox, reporter from "vanity fair" and msnbc contributor. take us through this new scoop. >> one of the explosive things, one of the thousand explosive things cohen said to congress -- >> a good number. >> fair estimate. the president's lawyers and abbe lowell had made changes to his original testimony in 2017. and until now we didn't really have proof that was true. jay sekulow, the president's attorney, came out with a statement immediately after cohen's testimony and said we did not make any changes to the testimony. this is not true. i reviewed an e-mail between cohen and his attorney talking about the changes abbe lowell did make to his testimony and
1:39 pm
they were very specific changes. and i don't know that those changes were untrue. they were certainly not what cohen was charged with lying about. it's very possible every change he made wasn't completely and entirely accurate. the changes were designed to show that ivanka trump had very minimal involvement in the trump moscow planning. we do know the spa that was supposed to be in the bidding was going to be named after her. we do know she had e-mailed cohen a suggested architect for the project. >> in russia, right? >> in russia. we know she forwarded cohen an e-mail from a russian weightlifter that said he would set up a meeting between trump and vladimir putin. so there was involvement s. however minimal it was, we still do not know. but we do know now that abbe lowell did make changes. >> we also know she's not beyond lying, bald-faced lying to abby huntsman in an interview with
1:40 pm
abc about national security matters, sensitive matters where she lied to abby huntsman's face about the security process. the scrutiny that her lawyer changes the testimony is getting important it would seem with her now public history of being a boldfaced liar. >> in that same interview she also said she knew virtually nothing about the trump tower moscow project. so she was i think talking about reports about the security clearance and private e-mail use are correct, and we have all indications they are, she was untruthful not only about the security clearance stuff but potentially untruthful about her involvement in the moscow project as well. >> it seems questions around the businesses, questions around the children, if nothing else, get a little more attention now. >> they definitely should get more attention. i have been waiting this whole time for the moment we could focus on ivanka trump. jared kushner has a lot more visibility in terms of his
1:41 pm
exposure under his security clearance forms. ivanka is married to jared kushner. their finances are tied together. i was always wondering when was the moment we would get to the point where we scrutinized ivanka, who is a senior adviser with security clearance, who is tied up in the businesses who we are talking about having a lot of shady practices. i think ivanka trump could not get away with just acting ignorant in this moment. >> she is more than that, she lied. >> she lies. every narrative built around her is they distance her from everything, they act like she has nothing to do with everything. what is true, either she's a senior adviser in the white house with security clearance and should be scrutinized on that level or she doesn't know anything at all and she's just sort of a figure head with the last name trump? i don't know what the answer is but i do know there are a lot of questions around the financial ties and, you know, the national security implications with their security clearances, which doesn't have anything really to do with collusion specifically. i want to know what the back
1:42 pm
channel is for with jared kushner. i have a lot of questions in terms of the security implications. i think that's going to very main true. >> maybe she's a lot more than a figure head. he had her sit in his chair on trips. she was on the plane when they crafted the false statement about the trump tower moscow meeting. we don't know what's in that obstruction report but we at least know it was investigated. it would seem if her lawyer was changing the parts. testimony about ivanka, there's ate least some concern. >> the fact her lawyer was involved in this process at all is questionable to me. and it's actually surprising to me when cohen brought it up in his testimony and again when i saw the e-mail exchange. there was a joint defense agreement between cohen and >> translato trump's attorneys but i'm confused why that included ivanka and jared's personal attorneys. >> did he know that before? >> not until cohen brought it up in front of congress last month. i saw in the front row of that hearing room and that stuck out at me like a sore thumb.
1:43 pm
i was like this is something completely new and kind of got overlooked because there were so many new thing that's were brought up that day. seeing the e-mail exchange drove it home do me. to say ivanka trump is not involved in anything and she wasn't question, it's crazy to me. the fact the house judiciary committee asked for documents from 81 people. it didn't ask for documents from ivanka has been crazy to me too. i know 81 people in an organization were asked for documents, 52 were asked for documents about ivanka, but why not ask for documents from her herself? she's an adviser to the president, a grown woman. she can probably provide documents on her own. >> she has a lawyer abbe lowell who makes a lot of money an hour. what would the reason be? could she be a target? >> i don't know congress sort of follows that same we don't subpoena a target role as prosecutors p i'm still wondering why if they weren't
1:44 pm
donald trump jr. and jared kushner weren't interviewed about the trump tower meeting about mueller, maybe they were and we don't know. look, maybe people are saving that for sort of a last resort when you are going to go sort of to the kids. you got to be ready to bring charges or not. and maybe they got to a point with russia that they decided they weren't bringing charges so they didn't need to interview them. maybe they will ask ivanka for documents. but i just want to say one thing about emily's great reporting, which to me as a former prosecutor, when i hear about this e-mail, i think, hmm, corroboration of michael cohen. we don't know right now if what was being changed was -- was lies, right? is it directly contradictory to what the facts were? that's beyond our scope of knowledge. but we do know michael cohen said that the lawyers were the ones trying to get him to change his testimony about important facts about the trump tower being built. and now we have an e-mail where that is happening. in which it seems very different
1:45 pm
to what statements were being put out by the trump lawyers after cohen's testimony. i'm not saying it's enough to corroborate all of his testimony but as a prosecutor, that is one piece of important corroboration and if it's more, it's why you would be comfortable as a prosecutor relying on cohen's statements. to me that's the significance of it. >> and more documents backing it up. we will be right back with breaking news on the proposal to defund the special olympics. def. [zara larsson - "wow"] ♪ ♪ baby i'm not even in a gown
1:46 pm
♪ and the only thing u have to say is wow ♪ ♪ make you're jaw drop drop say oh my drop drop drop ♪ ♪ make u say oh my god my drop drop ♪ ♪ make you're jaw drop make u say oh my god ♪ ♪ and you never felt this type of emotion ♪ ♪ make you're jaw drop drop say oh my drop drop drop ♪ ♪ make u say oh my god my drop drop ♪ ♪ make you're jaw drop make u say oh my god ♪ about 50% of people with evesevere asthma k? have too many cells called eosinophils in their lungs. eosinophils are a key cause of severe asthma. fasenra is designed to target and remove these cells. fasenra is an add-on injection for people 12 and up with asthma driven by eosinophils. fasenra is not a rescue medicine or for other eosinophilic conditions. fasenra is proven to help prevent severe asthma attacks, improve breathing, and can lower oral steroid use.
1:47 pm
fasenra may cause allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue, or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. haven't you missed enough? ask an asthma specialist about fasenra. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family
1:48 pm
and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. pay attention, it sounds like donald trump may be throwing his education secretary betsy devos under the bus over her proposed tax cuts to the special olympics. here's the president just a few moments ago. >> the special olympics will be funded. i just told my people, i want to fund the special olympics. and i just authorized a funding of the special olympics. i have been to the special
1:49 pm
olympics. i think it's incredible and i just authorized the funding. i heard about it this morning. i have overridden my people. we're funding the special olympics. >> you know, my unified field theory of interpreting trump, and i will see if you agree with me, he's a pr person for himself. that's all he does. he sits and watches people on cable television, he sees what's on twitter. how is my brand doing right now? >> right. >> when he saw this thing about the special olympics, which by the way everybody supports, and the funding was about 12 trips to mar-a-lago. >> right. >> he's like this is not good for my brand, donald, and i have to do something about it. that is his entire career and his entire presidency. that is all that he does. >> but he does this thing where he takes credit for funding it when the question was, is he taking away the funding? are you cutting the funding? you don't get to take credit for
1:50 pm
reinstating the funding you were going to cut and everybody applauds. that's not how this works. >> it does beg the question though -- i have been involved in unpopular budgets. i've had the job of having to sellbudgets, i had the job of selling budgets that cut a lot of popular programs. >> and how is it taking three days for the president to just hear about it this morning? isn't that something the president should have known about? >> we know he watches capital on dvr. >> true, it could have been slightly delayed on it. but it is hard to believe that if it is true, what has he been doing for the last couple days. this should never have happened. >> maybe it was ivanka that told him about it. >> or melania. >> it will be interesting to see who tries to take credit for this reversal. >> if you're involved in the
1:51 pm
special olympics, i think tim driver was on tv, people are involved and there are so few things that all of our hearts are filled up by that have not been tainted by politics, it was like beyond the red line that nancy devos put out there. we have to points for putting back something that should have been one of the last sacred things in washington. >> as a nonpolitical person i read this and i thought really, is this a joke? what could be the rationale? as someone said, are we going to cut funding to or fins, too? >> don't laugh. if she is watching -- >> we are in an alternate
1:52 pm
universe in many ways. >> and in the federal budget any budget item under a billion dollars is an asterisk, it is too small to notice. so the fact that she was contemplating cutting it as if it would save money for something is an absurd idea. >> we're going to sneak in a break, don't go anywhere, we'll be right back.
1:53 pm
to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll removes hair, to clean this, while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans, now cleans itself. woman: this is your wake-up call. if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage.
1:54 pm
ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. vo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. 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. woman: help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira.
1:55 pm
1:56 pm
>> two days after charges were dropped against jussie smollett, the president weighed in on twitter. rahm emanuel responded to the president's tweet. >> the only reason he thought he could take advantage about a hoax is because of the toxic environment that donald trump created. he is perpetuating bigotry. president trump should literally take his politics, move it aside, he created a toxic environment and now a toxic vicious cycle in my view. the only reason he thought he could get away with this okay about a hate crime is because of the environment president trump created. >> i have not heard anyone make
1:57 pm
that case as so well and with such a great example. >> i do agree that he created an environment where hate crimes are on the rise. statistics show that. we believe it is out of the realm of what is possible. especialful especially in a city like chicago. i implore people to go back and look at the history, martin luther king said he never saw gapgs, riots, and mobs like he saw in chicago. that's a quote, right? the facts, we still don't know all of the facts, right? it's not smart to come down on one side or the other, but i think donald trump finally trusting the fbi all of a sudden today? >> that is my question for you, i can't imagine it goes over
1:58 pm
well with the fbi to find out what their marching orders are on any given day. i thought wait i thought the fbi was corrupt if goes to the challenge was done to the institutions by trump and people trying to protect him. you call them storm troopers, all of the tweets and now you're looking to the fbi to be a neutral arbiter coming in and fix the sit. we don't know what happened yet, but it seems like someone needs to get to the bottom of it. i don't know that it is the role of the department of justice. we're not talking about a civil rights issue. those are the cases where you deploy the department of justice to go in and look at shootings of unarms african-american men
1:59 pm
where no state prosecution is being brought. and review those. toow prosecute him, a first time offender, that seems like a strange use of resources. >> the only thing that i would say and i'm going to be even more meta shan the mthan the ma chicago. the thing is what trump does is make people question things that are genuine. he has corrupt intent, and he wants to believe everyone haes corrupt intent. crisis actors, that is the problem with the whole society right now, the person at the top that is seeping into everything. >> i imagine -- can i just bring us back to the last conversation, the president had time to weigh in on this case but didn't know that his own education secretary cut the budget for special olympics for
2:00 pm
two days and this is crazy to me. >> cable television devoted more time to jussie smollett than the special olympics case. >> in defense of cable television, that was not true yesterday. when out this lineup tonight. 6:00 on "the beat" senator kirsten gillibrand. at 7:00 "hardball" senator elizabeth warren stops by, followed auto8:00 amy klobuchar on "all in." "mtp daily" starts right now can katy tur. >> the president was just on the white house south lawn and asked about funding the special olympics and he say it's will be funded. >> we just covered that, a little good news. nicolle wallace, thank you so much, if it is thursday, it is a whole new ball game.

80 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on