evenings. rachel maddow starts right now. good evening, rachel. >> good evening, chris. thank you, my friend. appreciate that. thanks to you at home for joining us for this next hour. now we know how it went. the swearing in, the inauguration was on a friday, january 20th. we now know in retro aspect that that inauguration took place against the backdrop of an open and active fbi counterintelligence investigation into the russian attack on the election that made that inauguration possible. and on the key question of whether the new president's campaign had been in on the russian attack somehow. we know looking back that it was happening in the background. that swearing in happened on a friday. the very your neck week though, the whole thing started to shake and rattle within the first week we now know. the inauguration is friday. there's the weekend.

then the first tuesday after the inauguration, the national security adviser got interviewed by the fbi. when the fbi does that kind of interview, the agents who conduct the interview produce a written report about it. it's called a 302. swearing in was on friday, then there's the week, then the following tuesday national security adviser gets interviewed by the fbi. the consequences of that interview are still ringing out like -- i mean, church bells, air raid sirens, depending on your mfrlt adjustment towards these things. all these weeks and months later, what happened in that fbi interview still resent resident nating. it set off alarms so much so they didn't even wait for the agents who had interviewed mike flynn to write up their 302.

they didn't wait for those toogts write their report. >> did you have the 302 with you when you were in the white house? did you show it to white house counsel and had you seen it at the time you went up to the white house? >> no. the fbi had deducted interview on the 24th. we got readout from the fbi on the 25th, a detailed readout specifically from the agents that had conducted the interview. but we didn't want to wait for the 302 because we felt that it was important to get this information to the white house as quickly as possible. >> we won't not wait for the 302. we needed to get this information to the white house as quickly as possible. they didn't even wait for the fbi agents who did the questioning, didn't wait for them to write it up. it is hard to overstate how unusual it is that the serving attorney general of the united states would personally take over something like this, would personally handle it, but that's what happened here. inauguration friday, fbi

questions the nationals adviser on tuesday. wednesday those fbi agents go top brass of the national security division of the justice department and ultimately to the serving attorney general of the united states. they go to those top officials with whatever it is that happened in that interview, and then the very next morning, not even one week into the new administration, the acting attorney general of the united states calls the white house and says, hey, we got problem. we cannot talk about this on the phone. we need to meet on this personally and directly, now. >> ms. yates, what did you tell the white house about mr. flynn? >> i had two in-person meetings one phone call with the white house counsel about mr. flynn. the first meeting occurred on january 26th. i called done mcbegan first

thing that morning and told him that i had a very sensitive matter thievd discuss with him, that i couldn't talk about it on the phone and i needed to come see him, and he agreed to meet with me later that afternoon. infield i took a senior member of the national security division who was overseeing this matter to meet with me. we met in his office at the white house which is a skiff so we could discuss classified information in his office. >> again, it is remarkable here that this is not even one week into the new administration. swearing in was a friday, this is the thursday after the inauguration. this is six days into the new presidency. and the serving attorney general, the act attorney generally, has gone to the white house counsel's office which has a sensitive kpartmented information facility a skiff where they can handle classified material inside that office. this is dwods after the fbi questioned the national security zrierds and now it's the acting

attorney general along with somebody you could reasonably include is the other senior kreerd justice department person there, the person who was then serving as the acting chief. that person is a career justice department official who was only leaving that job now. but in that job, she has been overseeing all the trump and russia investigations, so it's we believe the head of the national security division at the department of justice, the act attorney general, they go to the white house. unbelievably senior people handling this personally. they go to the white house, they go to the office the white house counsel. this is the white hse counsel, done mcbegan. again, attorney genel, we believe the national security division chief at doj, they rushed to the white house without even waiting for the fbi agents to write up their report

on their questioning of mike flynn. they rush to the white house to notify the white house counsel about what they have learned about the national security adviser mike flynn. heading into today, everybody thought this was going to be testimony that would be kind of a letdown, that we already knew everything sally yates was going to say. but right off the bat, she gives you that incredible timeline and that incredible you do about how they went to the white house and how fast. and then she said this. i don't think anybody has any idea what this means exactly. >> so i told them again that there were a number of press accounts of statements that had been made by the vice president and other high ranking white house officials about general flynn's conduct that we knew to be untrue. and we told them how we knew -- how we had this information, how we had acquired it and how we

knew it was untrue. and we walked the white house counsel who also had an associate there with him through general flynn's underlying conduct. the contents of which i obviously cannot go through with you today because it's classified, but we took him through underlying conduct, and then we talked will you the various press accounts and how it had been falsely reported. >> we walked him through general flynn's underlying conduct are, what general flynn had done. i cannot go through that with you today because it's classified. we walked him through general flynn's underlying conduct. what underlying conduct? what we had known before today, what at least had been reported before today is sally yates became aware that mike flynn was not telling the truth about his contacts with russian officials. today she said aside from him not telling the truth, his underlying conduct itself was

problematic. what underlying conduct? >> the first thing we did was to explain to mr. mcbegan that the underlying conduct that general flynn had engaged in husband problematic in and of itself. >> on january 24th you just testified nafgs advisor flynn was interviewed by the fbi about his underlying conduct and that that underlying conduct was problematic because it led to the collusion the vice president was relying on falsehoods. what was that underlying conduct and are you convinced that the former national securities adviser was truthful in his testimony to the fbi on january 24th? >> again i hate to frustrate you again, but i think i'm going to have to because my knowledge of his underlying conduct is based on classified information, and so i can't reveal what that underlying conduct is. it's why i had to do sort of an artificial description of events without revealing that conduct. >> my knowledge of his

underlying conduct is based object classified information so i cannot reveal what that underlying conduct is. but apparently she told the white house that underlying conduct was problematic in and of itself, in addition to the fact that he was lying about it. what was the underlying conduct? when the narnls adviser was fired 24 days into the new administration, after what we know was an simplicity warning from the outgoing president that mike flynn should not be hired, that there were serious concerns about him. after he was hired anyway, the white house line was that he had to be fired because he lied to other people at the white house, particularly the vice president about his contacts with the russian government. well, now we know from the act attorney general at the time that in addition to mike flynn lying about his contact with the russian government, there was also something problematic about his ubds lying conduct and it's

something that cannot be discussed in an unclassified setting. what did he do? the other problem with the white house line on mike flynn that has never made sense is the timing. if you want to know whether the white house has anything to hide here, whether they're covering anything up here, then you have to ask whether their explanation for firing mike flynn makes any sense. and part of it that makes no sense is why after this extraordinary in-person warning fromhe attorney general heelf, after this extraordinary warning they say we cannot discuss this on the phone. i'm coming tot white house today. get the skiff ready. after that remarkable warning why is it the white house didn't do anything about flynn for weeks? >> do you believe the administration took your warnings seriously when you made this extraordinary effort to go

to the white house and in person brief the white house counsel on the 26th and 27th? do you think they took appropriate steps with regards to general flynn as the national security advisory given he remained a frequent participant in very high-level national security matters for two weeks? >> well, certainly in the continuous of the meetings mr. mcbegan certainly demonstrated that he understood this was serious. so he did seem to be taking it seriously. i don't have any way of knowing what if anything they did. if nothing was done, then certainly that would be concerning. >> so you don't know whether they took any steps to restrict his access to classified information torsi investigate h further? >> again, i was gone after the 30th. i wouldn't know if any steps has been communicated to the department of justice, but i was not aware of any, no.

>> had you not been fired, would you have recommended to the white house counsel that they begin further investigations into the national security adviser or that they restrict his access to sensitive and classified information? >> it's a bit of a hypothetical. if i were turned impression nothing has been done, then, yes, i would have raised it again at the white house. >> had i still been will and had they done nothing to act on this informati i gave them, i would have raised it. had i still been there, yeah, i would have raised it again. luckily, they got rid of her. the president fired sally yates the monday after she had her two meetings about flynn. fbi interviews flynn on tuesday. department of justice pow wows about it on wednesday. on thursday, there's that meeting at the white house.

on friy a follow-up meeting at the house. following monday, ty canned her. so when the white house did nothing in response to sally yates' warning, she was out of government by then. while mike flynn stayed on as national security adviser as if nothing happened. that got al franken of minnesota slightly worked up today. >> and we have mcgan, doesn't understand what's wrong with this? and then we have spicer the press secretary saying the president was told about this. the president was told about this in late january according to the press secretary. so now he's got a guy who has been the former president said don't hire this guy.

he's clearly compromised. he's lied to the vice president, and he keeps him on, and he lets him but "b" in all these classified -- let's him talk with putin. president of the united states and the national security advisory sit in the oval office and discuss this with putin. >> we had known before today that whatever happened with mike flynn, the white house has been telling a story about him that does not add up or make sense. for example, just as one part of this, vice president mike pence, he was the head of the transition when the transition was notified multiple times, including in person twice by flynn's lawyers, and in writing by congress that mike flynn had taken foreign payments. foreign payments were also the subject of multiple press reports. nbc news reports that the trump transition had direct knowledge of mike flynn's payments from

foreign sources, but nevertheless, vice president mike pence, head of the transition, he pro-claims he was perfectly ignorant of that fact until weeks after mike flynn was fired. >> let me say hearing that story today was the first i heard of it. >> that is not credible. whether or not you care about what the vice president new about mike flynn, whether you care about that subject itself or not, the bigger question is why are they telling this lie about it? why are they lielg about this stuff? they are telling stories about mike flynn that make no sense a given we now know about the facts. and that was a problem for them before today, it became a much bigger problem for them after today. before today, we knew they had inexplicably waited 18 days after being warned about mike

flynn before they fired him. today that delay became all the more inexplicable and even a bit scary when we frernd sally yates what the quality of her warning was about mike flynn. >> we were concerned that the american people has been misled about the underlying conduct and what general flynn had done. and additionally that we weren't the only ones that knew all of this that the russians also knew about what he had done and the russians also knew that general flynn had misled the vice president and others. because in media accounts it was clear from the vice president and others that they were repeating what general flynn told them and this was a problem because not only did we believe that the russians knew this, but that they likely had proof of this information. and that created compromised situation, a situation where the

national security adviser essentially could be black mailed by the russians. we believed that general flynn was compromised with respect to the russians. to state obvious, you don't want your national security adviser compromised with the zblugsz what did you think would have if he were, and how do you believe he would have been compromised? >> we had two krngsz compromise was certainly the number one concern. the russians can use compromised material, information, in a variety of ways. sometimes overtly, and sometimes subtly. and again, our concern was that you have a very sensitive position like the national security adviser, and you d't want tt person to be in a position where, again, russians have leverage ove him. you don't want the national security adviser to be in a position where the russians have leverage over him. now, in terms of what impact that may have had or caused, i can't speak to that, but we knew that that was not a good situation, which is why we wanted to let the white house

know about it. >> we wanted to let the white house know about it. assuming they would do something about it. and then they did nothing with that information. they let him stay on in his job as national security adviser after this extraordinary warning about the kind of leverage that russia had over him, leverage they could conceivably use to control him. who is the top security adviser to the president of the united states -- they held onto him. most republican senators on this committee today were mostly concerned about fact that this ever ended up in the press. it's a remarkable thing in its own right. but despite those guys, we know a lot more about this investigation, specifically about the still unexplained behavior of this white house

when it came to this red-hot issue of their secret contacts with the russian government. and that is bad news. that is very, very bad news for this whi hous and as soon as this hearing ended today, the white house oated the news that they are considering basically redeclaring war in afghanistan, target the war there all over again in its 16th year, which had the practical effect of shoving the headlines on this hearing today down toward the bottom of the page, at least at the "washington post." and that is a cynical as i have felt about anything else in politics in many, many years. it has been 108 days of this presidency so far, that's it, and already we are at this level of coverup and scandal. stay tuned. if you've tried every pill on the shelf to treat your tough nasal allergies...

...listen up. unlike pills that don't treat congestion, clarispray covers 100 percent of your nasal allergy symptoms. clarispray. from the makers of claritin. after becoming one of the largest broadband companies in the country. after expanding our fiber network coast to coast. these are the places we call home. we are centurylink. we believe in the power of the digital world. the power to connect. and that's what drives us everyday. (vo) more "dper rollres for mom" bounty is more absorbent, so the roll can last 50% longer than the leading ordinary brand. so you get more "life" per roll. bounty the quicker picker upper there's nothing more than my vacation.me so when i need to book a hotel room,

i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. booking.com gets it. they offer free cancellation if my plans change. visit booking.com. booking.yeah. are made with smarttrack®igners material to precisely move your teeth to your best smile. see how invisalign® treatment can shape your smile up to 50% faster today at invisalign.com

but we've got the get tdigital tools to help. now with xfinity's my account, you can figure things out easily, so you won't even have to call us. change your wifi password to something you can actually remember, instantly. add that premium channel, and watch the show everyone's talking about, tonight. and the bill you need to pay? do it in seconds. because we should fit into your life, not the other way around. go to xfinity.com/myaccount

the question of shady business and financial ties that not only start out as bribery perhaps, or as highly favorable deals, secret deals with russians, but that in turn can turn into compromise. >> it could. >> and it's not just the carrot of i'm continuing to bribe you. at some point in time you have a stick that i'm going to out the deal unless you do this, correct? >> that's classic comp mont. >> that is classic comp not. they gave you sweet deal and then not only can they offer you more sweet deals if you do what

they want, even better, they can threaten to go public with the details of the sweet deals you already did with them, the stuff you already took from them. kompromat. in general, hypothetically speaking, not talking about anyone particular. not about anybody specific. maybe we are talking about something specific. >> general clapper, during your investigation of all things russia, did you ever find a situation where a trump business interest in russia gave you concern? >> not in the course of the appropriation of the intelligence community assessment. >> since? >> i'm sorry? >> at all, anytime? >> senator graham, i can't comment on that because that impacts the investigation. >> so there's an investigation that apparently relates to trump

business interests in russia? an active investigation? just as a no comment to a reporter doesn't mean yes or no in response to the reporter's questions. when someone says i can't talk about that here, that's all it means. it doesn't mean, yes, you're onto something and i'll tell you something juicy about it in closed session. it means i can't discuss it without getting into classified material or getting into talking about an ongoing investigation. that is really a lot means. sometimes it's hard to believe that's all it means though. >> isn't it a fact that michael flynn lied to the fbi? >> i can't reveal the internal fbi investigation, senator, even though that part would not technically be classified, it's an ongoing investigation and i can't reveal that. >> ms. yates, do you have any evidence, are you aware of any

evidence that would suggest in the 2016 campaign anybody in the trump campaign colluded with the russian government or intelligence services in an improper fashion. >> and senator, my answer to that question would require me to reveal classified information, and so i can't answer that. >> all that means is, it's classified. it's an ongoing investigation. i can't get into it, and so we don't know. but if you were someone who was not only read in on this investigation, clear to look at the highest levels of classified information, how would you take this today? would you have seen this hearing differently than us generic bow zoes saw it? congressman schiff, good of you to be here. can you tell us if you learned anything today that you did not previously know?

>> well, i think we learned more myself included about the precise details that led up to michael flynn's firing in the sense of the conversations that sally yates had with the white house, when those took place, the details about how often she went to the white house, what white house counsel had to say, all of that i think was new to the public and also new to members of the committee. it's one of the reasons why i think the open hearings are so valuable. yes, there are things they can't share in open session, but there's a lot they can. and i think it's important for the country to understand as much as possible. you put your finger on a lot of what's distressing. the attorney general warns white house counsel there's a problem with mike flynn and the underlying conduct is problematic, the lying is problematic, and what do they do? they end up firing her. and only later when it becomes public do they fire flynn as i

know in terms of the 18-day gap, sheldon opened up about the water gate tape which i thought was artful. but there is this 18-day period. we know that the house oversight committee asked the white house for documents related to flynn's time in the white house. and they asked in a specific way they were looking at. we know thehite house responded by handing over zero documents. is there a way to get at figuring out what was going on without delay? it is a remarkable thing for the act attorney general that warned about a national security threat and the person of the national security adviser, the white house spokesman did say the president was informed of the information and still they kept him for nearly three weeks. as an investigator, is there any way to get at what was going on? >> there certainly s. you can obviously bring people from the white house before an

investigative committee, you can request documents from the white house. on some of this they'll make a claim of executive privilege. but even in cases where there is an executive privilege that the administration has claimed in the past, they general allow themselves to waive that privilege when there's a crime that may have been committed. so if there's an issue whether mike flynn lied to the fbi during that interview, all we know publicly that she was interviewed by the fbi, but we also know he accepted money, he may or may not have been legally allowed to and didn't report the receipt of that money. so there are a lot of issues i think congress needs to delve into. some of those are plainly within the sphere of our investigation in the house intelligence committee, but there are a number of answers, plausible answers to why it took 18 days. it may be that as the white house would like to claimhey we doing their fact finding, or it may be the president was

witing of what mike flynn was doing or the president was approving of it, or the president was perfectly fine with mike flynn lying to the vice president, or the vice president misleading the country, all of that was perfectly fine as long as the public didn't find out about it. that certainly is part of the answer. but how much may also be involved in terms of the president's own knowledge or others in the white house, it's hard to imagine that sally yates conversation with white house counsel wasn't shared broadly within the white house. those are are things the public has a right to know. >> especially with the white house itself dmiegt that the president was informed about the nature of that discussion. i want to ask you about one thing that you actually singled out today. you singled out these frarkts united states united states about flynn's underlying conduct. i want to replay that piece from the hearing and get your comment on this. >> the first thing we did was to explain to mr. mcgahn that the underlying conduct that general flynn had engaged in was

problematic in and of itself. >> on january 24th, you just testified that national security adviser flynn was interviewed by the fbi about his underlying conduct and that the underlying conduct was problematic because it led to the collusion the vice president was relying on falsehoods. what was that underlying conduct? >> again, i hate to frustrate you again, but i think i'm going to have to because my knowledge of his underlying conduct is based on classified information, and so i can't reveal what that underlying conduct is. >> she will not reveal what the underlying conduct with, but she says that she explained to the white house that aside from separate apart from him lying to other white house officials and the vice president, the underlying conduct of general flynn was itself problematic. do we know what this is? dune of do you know what this is and we're not allowed to know? >> i'm under the same limitation that sally yates is. it stood out to me because most

people i think viewing this have taken a certain perspective on flynn's lying to the vice president. the vice president misleading the country, and those false statements by the national security adviser highly problematic, the fact he could be compromised by the russians, highly problematic. but she says the underlying conduct, the conduct about which he was evidently lying itself was problematic, and that is significant. hopefully in time the investigation can declassify or reveal the conduct that concerned her or the administration can declassify it because i think as much as the public can be informed of these matters, they should be informed. >> to me -- anyway there's a lot of headlines that came out of today, but the fact that separate and apart from what he was lying about, the thing he was lying about was a new

revelation. congressman adam schiff, thank for being here, sir. appreciate it. much more to come on the days's other news and more of this. stay with us. it comes to technology, i need someone that understands my unique needs. my dell small business advisor has gotten to know our business so well that is feels like he's a part of our team. with one phone call, he sets me up with tailored products and services. and when my advisor is focused on my tech, i can focus on my small business. ♪ ♪ if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, isn't it time to let the real you shine through? introducing otezla, apremilast. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. some people who took otezla saw 75% clearer skin after 4 months.

and otezla's prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't take otezla if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. otezla may increase the risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. side effects may include diarrhea, nausea upper respiratory tract infection, and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ask your dermatologist about otezla today. otezla. show more of you. you're going to be hanging out in here. so if you need anything, text me. do you play? ♪ ♪ use the chase mobile app to send money in just a tap, to friends at more banks then ever before.

you got next? chase. helping you master what's now and what's next.

is the president or someone close to him new a white house official failed to disclose work on behalf of a foreign government and chose to cover that up, again, can you reiterate again the possible

repercussions to this person? >> to the individual? >> the individual. let's say the allegations are proven true. >> that they failed to disclose their activity and the press covered it up or the individual did. >> the individual covered it up. >> coverups are bad. that usually is evidence of intent so that's something we look at in making determinations about whether it's something that should be criminally prosecuted. >> coverups are bad. today's hearing was only the second time that former act attorney general sally yates has made comments since she was fired just days after she warned the new administration their are national security adviser had been compromised by the russian government. today was the only second time she made any public comments since she was fired.

the first time was back in march when shifrs broke her silence after being fired, it was to do a nice thing for one of her former colleagues. it was to prays her deputy from the department of justice, matt axelrod. he also left the justice department roughly when she did. sally yates in march praised him for a, quote, remarkable combination of intellect, drive, judgment and integrity. he had the most demanding job in all the department of justice, including managing many of the department's most vexing and sensitive matters. that was the the first public comment of any kind she made after she was fired by the trump administration. second comment was today, her hours of very careful testimony alongside former director of national security intelligence, james clapper. but because she took that step of speaking today, her deputy, matt axelrod is willing to talk with us tonight about her testimony. and about what he knows. and he joins us live for the interview next. and about what h

knows. and he joins us live for the interview next. and about what h knows. and he joins us live for the interview next. and about what knows. and he joins us live for the interview next. when you booked this trip, you didn't know we had over 26,000 local activities listed on our app. or that you could book them right from your phone. a few weeks ago, you still didn't know if you were gonna go. now the only thing you don't know, is why it took you so long to come here. expedia. everything in one place, so you can travel the world better.

ltry align probiotic.n your digestive system? for a non-stop, sweet treat goodness, hold on to your tiara kind of day. get 24/7 digestive support, with align. the #1 doctor recommended probiotic brand. also in kids chewables. ayou don't have to choose just one thing. choose your trio with any 3 of 9 selections for $15.99. like new creamy lobster pasta toasted parmesan shrimp and southern-style crab cakes. come create your trio before it ends.

how many people can request unmasking of american citizen of inn our government, general clapper, how many? >> i want to discuss unmasking. you said i don't know what you said to answer my question about if you were involved in any unmasking. were you involved? >> republican senators today at times had kind of a different focus, different interests.

at one point the former director of national intelligence james clapper became over it. >> i understand how critical leaks are and unmavgds and all these ancillary issues, but to me, the issue here is the russian interference in our election process and what that means to the erosion of the fundamental fabric of our democracy, and that to me is a huge deal and they're going to continue to do it and why not? it proved successful. >> it approved successful, at least so far. joining us for the interview is matthew axelrod. he served under sally yates. he also left the justice department january 30th, 2 day his boss was fired. i know you are not in the habit of doing interews. thank you for doing this one. >> thank you for having me on. >> you were right in the middle

of everything at the justice department for the last the sisters, working two years as sally yates' prince deputy? >> that's correct. >> you've seen a lot of critical, sensitive, classified matters in your time can you ask you how it felt you to today watching this hearing, watching her handle questions about this matter? >> sure. i was gratified today that the american people got to see the woman i saw up close every day for two years. sally yates is a paragon of character, integrity, judgment. she had a 27--year career at the department of justice and really exemplarilyifiesed the department of justice and the law and doing the right thing. folks got to see that in her and that's what i saw every day working with her. >> the administration, the

president specifically, took a swipe at her today before her testimony kplig he leaked classified information to the press. the administration more broadly has sought to portray her as an earring partisan who has both personal politics that played into this and some sort of personal grudge against the new administration or the president what's your response to that? >> that's not the sally yates i know. she served in leadership positions in both republican and democratic administrations as a career prosecutor, she did hie profile public corruption cases one of the most high profile was against the democratic mayor of atlanta. she was improved at her confirmation meeting by a conservative senator from georgia, and a civil rights icon from atlanta. she's not a partisan person.

by the way, she was confirmed by a wide bipartisan majority. she's not a partisan person. she's a person who does the right thing by the book. that i think came through in her testimony today. >> watching this as an observer, i'm not a lawyer or have any insidenformation about the working of the department of juice, but it seemed to me she was trying to underscore the gravity and the rarity and the seriousness of this visit to the white house, that a senior career justice department official and the act attorney general of the united states went in person to the white house to raise this alarm about somebody in a very sensitive national security position who they felt might be compromised. the way i read that is she was trying to say this never happens. is it fair to interpret it that way? is that true? >> i guess what i would say is i

think that this is exactly what the american people would expect their act attorney general to do in a situation such as this regardless of the party that nominated that person and the party that's currently in the white house. that's what you want when there's a serious situation, you want the act attorney general to take it seriously and bring it to the white house's attention as appropriate. there are rules as there should be, as to how contact between white house and the department of justice occurs. and thoochb contact occurs through the office of the deputy attorney general. remember, at this time sally yates was the act attorney general, but she was still the deputy attorney general. it's not extraordinary that she would be the one that have the communication. i think what's extraordinary in this circumstances and as she testified today is what the communication was. >> and the communication in this case was specific to the foreign ties of the national security adviser that he had been lying

about? >> i believe that she testified today, i believe what her testimony was the communication was about her concern that the national security adviser was in a compromised position. >> one last question that i think you're not going to answer. today she talked about the underlying conduct being itself problematic in addition to any lies he might have told about his past behavior or statements. what's she talking about? >> obviously the same rules that apply to classification i'm bound by as well. unfortunately i'm not going to be able to answer that one, rachel. >> matthew axelrod served under sally yates which meant he was in charge of everything at the justice department for a significant amount of time thank you, sir i appreciate you doing this? >>. >> you think thanks. certain vibe you get when you talk to people who don't do tv interviews because it's the last place they would like to be in life. and for those folks i'm particular grateful for their

trust to do these it's more complete allergy relief in a gentle mist you may not even notice. using unique mistpro technology, new flonase sensimist delivers a gentle mist to help block six key inflammatory substances that cause your symptoms. most allergy pills only block one. and six is greater than one. break through your allergies. new flonase sensimist we'll be right back. drink ensu. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. drink ensu. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you. "how to win at business." step one: point decisively with the arm of your glasses. abracadabra. the stage is yours. step two: choose la quinta. the only hotel where you can redeem loyalty points for a free night-instantly and win at business.

are making the move to nissan. ♪ because of rogue, the best selling suv in america. ♪ titan, with america's best truck warranty. ♪ and the most advanced safety features on altima and other best selling models. ♪ that's why we're america's fastest-growing auto brand. get 0% financing for up to 72 months on 11 models. ♪ i wanted to know where i did my ancestrydna. the most shocking result was that i'm 26% native american. i had no idea. it's opened up a whole new world for me. ♪ p3 planters nuts, jerky and whaseeds.at? i like a variety in my protein. totally, that's why i have this uh trail mix. wow minty. p3 snacks. the more interesting way to get your protein.

aleve with direct therapy- tens device- a relief from lower back pain. that's good, cause i need it. i put it on my back. ok, this is interesting.o. therthere's the littl. i feel this electrical pulse grabbing at my muscles. level 3. 5. i'm pleasantly surprised. it was more powerful than i was expecting it to be. it worked, what can i say? i believe aleve. learn more and read reviews at aleve.com.

people on medicaid except dying. you are making them -- >> no one wants anybody to die. that line is so indefensible. nobody dies because they'll have access to health care. >> republican congressman raul labrador at home in idaho on

friday, trying to explain his vote to repeal the affordable care act to his constituents who are obviously not having it. in trying to make his explanation, he said that no one dies from nothing having access to health care. congressman labrador later explained that that comment, quote, wasn't very elegant. turns out republicans have a lot of explaining that their constituents want to hear from them on this vote. but now democrats are starting to do some of that explaining for them. in republicans' home districts. this is something that was sort of birthed on our show on friday night. it is now coming to fruition in at least a couple of districts around the country. we've got more on that. it's very dramatic, straight ahead.

a naturally aspirated 5.0-liter v8 engine. a 10-speed direct-shift transmission. a meticulously crafted interior. all of these are feats of engineering. combining them with near-perfect weight distribution... ...is a feat of amazing. experience the first-ever 471-horsepower lexus lc 500 or the multistage hybrid lc 500h. experience amazing. when i feel controlled by frequent, unpredictable abdominal pain or discomfort and diarrhea i tried lifestyle changes and over-the-counter treatments, but my symptoms keep ming back. it turns out i have irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, or ibs-d. a condition that's really frustrating. that's why i talked to my doctor about viberzi...

...a different way to treat ibs-d. viberzi is a prescription medication you take every day that helps proactively manage both abdominal pain and diarrhea at the same time. so i can stay ahead of my symptoms. viberzi can cause new or worsening abdominal pain. do not take viberzi if you have no gallbladder, have pancreas or severe liver problems, problems with alcohol abuse, long-lasting or severe constipation, or a bowel or gallbladder blockage. pancreatitis may occur and can lead to hospitalization and death. if you are taking viberzi, you should not take medicines that cause constipation. the most common side effects of viberzi include constipation, nausea, and abdominal pain. stay ahead of ibs-d with viberzi. but i keep it growing by making every dollar count. that's why i have the spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on all of my purchasing. and that unlimited 2% cash back from spark means thousands of dollars each year going back into my business...

which adds fuel to my bottom line. what's in your wallet? less than 36 hours after republican congressman tom reed of new york voted to kill the affordable care act last week, he had one other very exciting thing to look forward to, three separate town halls in his home district where he got the pleasure of explaining that vote to his constituents. >> the standards and the requirements that are in there are to provide the innovation and flexibility for states to provide more health care, cheaper health care, and to implement innovative tools to do things on health care side, not just health insurance, but on health care side to promote lower health care costs on top of it. so -- so -- what's that? >> i am a type 1 diabetic.

i am a cancer survivor. i pay a thousand dollars a month just for my insulin if i lose my insurance. we stood up and we said to the pledge to the united states of america. why should it matter what state i live in? [ applause ] >> congressman tom reed in western new york facing his constituents on that vote. here was republican congressman rod blum of iowa facing his constituents tonight. >> you're getting your health insurance through medicare, nothing is going to change. nothing is going to change. nothing is going to change. if you're getting -- if you're currently getting your health insurance through medicaid, nothing is going to change.

>> congressman rod blum of iowa getting heartily booed tonight at a packed town hall in dubuque, iowa. congressman john faso is one of the republicans who has declined to host a town hall meeting while home this week. tonight some of his constituents, over 450 of them held a town hall meeting without him. this is sort of a new form of otest in districts across the country. where if a member of congress declines to show up to a town hall event, folks put up a cardboard version or they hang an empty suit there in his or her place. tonight in new york's 19th congressional district, those constituents did get a real life member of congress to show up. it just wasn't their member of congress. this was john faso's district, but john faso's constituents got democratic congressman sean patrick maloney to show up. he represents the district next door. congressman maloney told us on this show friday night if john faso wouldn't explain his vote to his constituents, then congressman maloney would.

and sure enough, tonight he went to john faso's district, and that's what he did. >> this guy should not be on some milk carton, he is your congressman, right? he should be here. don't take this the wrong way. have i my own district. i shouldn't be here. i love you all. i will wave to you as i drive by to my district. >> congressman maloney tonight filling in for republican john faso, answering questions from john faso's constituents about the new health care line. the line to get into that event was out the door tonight. democratic congressman maloney is encouraging other democrats to do this too. if a republican member of congress won't answer for their vote to kill the affordable care act, then neighboring democrats should go in their place. adopt a congressional district, where their constituents need answers. at least one other member of congress has agreed to try it. in arizona, congresswoman martha mcsally has been the target of a bunch of health care-related

protests. she represents the second district in arizona. so far she has not agreed to a town hall during this congressional recess. but now democratic congressman from arizona's 7th district, ruben gallego is stepping up to her plate. he is going to answer her constituents' questions about her health care vote at a town hall tomorrow in her district, a town hall she won't go to. but that a neighboring democrat will. so there is a new congressional system at work when it comes to that vote to kill obamacare. i don't know who will get paired up next. watch this space. that does it for us tonight. we'll see you again tomorrow. now it's time for "the last word with lawrence o'donnell." >> it sounds like fun you. should try it. you should pick a congressional district and have a town hall. >> thought you were going to say i should pick a fox news show. >> that too. there is some openings over there. >> thank you, lawrence. >> thanks, rachel. well, we have a panel of experts that will join us tonight to analyze what we heard in that senate hearing