defunds planned parenthood, given that was the largely the work of white males, it's already been noted that not one of the five female republican senators is in this working group. with a 52-seat majority, the republicans can only afford to lose two vote it is they want to pass their health care replacement bill. as to when we'll see anything from the senate, that seems to be anybody's guess. there's talk of getting started right away and start we won't see anything before the summer recess. there's talk we'll see something by the midterm elections. and because it's washington, as of tonight, it's all just talk. that's our broadcast for this monday night as we start a new week. thank you for being here with us. good night from new york. now we know how it went. the swearing in, the inauguration was on a friday, january 20th.

we know in retrospect 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 wearing happened on a friday, january 20th. the very next 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 weekend, 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 meta forrical adjustment towards these things. all these weeks and months later, what happened in that fbi interview still resonating. it set off alarms so much so that the top levels of the justice department didn't even wait for the agents who interviewed mike flynn to write up their 302. they didn't wait for those agents to 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 conducted the

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 e 30because we felt that it was important to get this information to the white house as quickly as possible. >> we did 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 national 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've got a 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 and one phone call with the white house counsel about mr. flynn. the first meeting occurred on january 26th. i called donald mcgahn first thing that morning and told him that i had a very sensitive matter that i needed to 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. i took a senior member of the national security division who

was overseeing this matter to meet with him. 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 this is six days into the new presidency. and the serving attorney general, the acting attorney general, has gone to the white house counsel's office which has a sensitive compartmented information facility a skiff where they can handle classified material inside that office. this is after the fbi questioned the national security adviser and now it's the acting attorney general along with somebody you could reasonably include is the other senior careered justice department person there, the person who was then serving as the acts chief of the national security division at the justice department.

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 acting attorney general, they go to the white house. unbelievably senior people handling this personally. we will not talk about this on the phone, we will do this personally. they go to the white house, they go to the office the white house counsel. this is the white house counsel, don mcgahn. again, attorney general, 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 urgen si 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 rking 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 walked through the various press accounts and how it had been falsely reported. >> we walked him through general flynn's underlying conduct, 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. 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 underlying conduct was problematic, because it led to the conclusion that vice president pence 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 on classifd information, so i cannot reveal at 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 national security adviser was fired 24 days into the new administration, after what we know was an explicit 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 acting 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 underlying 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 from the attorney general herself and a senior national security person at doj, after this extraordinary warning, they say we cannot discuss this on the phone. we need to meet about this 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, certain in the

continuous of the meetings mr. mcgahn 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 to investigate him 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.

had i remained at the justice department, and if i were under the impression that nothing had been done, then yes, i would have raised it again with the white house. >> had i still been there and they done nothing to act on this i gave them, i would have raised it. if nothing was done, certainly that would be concerning. 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. so the inauguration on friday, fbi interviews flynn on tuesday. department of justice pow wows about it, what are we going to do about that on wednesday? thursday, there's the meeting at the white house. on friday, a followup meeting, following monday they 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 had happened. that got senator al franken of minnesota slightly worked up today. >> and we have mcgahn, 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 be in all these classified -- lets him talk with putin. president of the united states and the national security

adviser 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 proclaims 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 knew abt mike flynn, whether you care about that subject itself or not, the bigger question is why are eyelling this lie about it? why are they lying about this stuff? they are telling stories about mike flynn that make no sense given we now know about the facts. it is not good for the white house that they cannot come up with a story about mike flynn that has the benefit of being true. 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 learned from 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. that created a 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 the obvious, you don't want your national security adviser compromised with the russians. >> what did you think would happen if he were, and how do

you believe he would have been compromised? >> we had two concerns, 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 don't want that person to be in a position where, again, russian have leverage over 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. and there by to influence the behavior of the national security adviser. who is the top security adviser to the president of the united states -- they held onto him. for 18 days until it ended up in the press. then they got rid of 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 white house. and as soon as this hearing ended today, the white house floated the news that they are considering basically

redeclaring war in afghanistan, starting 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 war -- "the washington po " 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. 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% cash back fr spark means thousands of dollars each year going back into my business... which adds fuel to my bottom line. what's in your wallet? 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, in case i decide to go from kid-friendly to kid-free. now i can start relaxing even before the vacation begins. your vacation is very important. that's why booking.com makes finding the right hotel for the right price easy. visit booking.com now to find out why we're booking.yeah tand, our adulte children are here. so, we save by using tide. which means we use less. three generations of clothes cleaned in one wash.

those are moms. anybody seen my pants? nothing cleans better. put those on dad! it's got to be tide. 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. ♪

the shlike a bald penguin. how do i look? [ laughing ] show me the billboard music awards. show me top artist. show me the top hot 100 artist. they give awards for being hot and 100 years old? we'll take 2! [ laughing ] xfinity x1 gives you exclusive access to the best of the billboard music awards just by using your voice. the billboard music awards. sunday, may 21st eight seven central only on abc. 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 over the individual that i'm going to out the deal that we have unless you do this, correct? >> that's classic kompromat. >> that is classic kompromat. that's one of the ways they get you. 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 in particular. not about anybody specific. maybe we are talking about something specific. well, maybe we are talking about somebody in 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 all it 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, if you were cleared 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 bozos saw it? congressman schiff joins us now. good of you to be here. >> good to be with you. >> i know you never talk anything about you can't talk about. 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. here we have a situation where 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 mike palestinian. >> in terms of that 18-day gap, sean spicer opened up about the watergate 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 the white 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

acting 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? ore what might have motivated that delay? >> 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 is that he was interviewed by the fbi, but we also know he accepted mone 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 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 claim they were doing their fact finding, or it may be the president was witting 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 seems to be 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 admitting 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 remarks from sally yates about flynn's jumd lying 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 is, 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? do you know what this is and we're just not allowed to know because it's classified? >> i'm under the same limitation that sally yates is. i can't go beyond what she had to say. it stoodut 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 what sally yates also said is 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 for those of us observing this. 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.

"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. it's time for you and your boys to get out of town. (laughing) left foot. right foot. left foot. stop. twitch your eyes so they think you're crazy. if you walk the walk you talk the talk. it's what you do. if you want to save fiftee percent or more on car insurance you switch to geico. hide the eyes. it's what you do. show 'em real slow. surfing is a sport that takes a lot out of you ♪ physically. from the moment i wake up on my tempur-pedic mattress i feel like i'm ready to take on the day.

i don't have aches and pains from the previous day's training. and i feel like myself. i wake up feeling stronger, a better surfer a better me. ♪ find your exclusive retailer at tempur-pedic.com i'start at the new carfax.comar. show me minivans with no reported accidents. boom. love it. [struggles] show me the carfax. start your used car search at the all-new carfax.com. 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 knew 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? >> say the administration knew and the individual also 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. >> speaking hypothetically, of course. coverups are bad. today's hearing was only the

second time that former acting attorney general sally yates has made comments since she was fired over the president's muslim ban just days after she warned the administration the 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 she first broke her silence after being fired, it was to do a nice thing for one of her former colleagues. it was to praise 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 intelligence, james clapr. 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. ray's always been different. last year, he said he was going to dig a hole to china. at&t is working with farmers to improve irrigation techniques. remote moisture sensors use a reliable network to tell them when and where to water. so that farmers like ray can compete in big ways. china. oh ... he got there. that's the power of and.

when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night. hold on dad... liberty did what? yeah, liberty mutual 24-hour roadside assistance helped him to fix his flat so he could get home safely. my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. don't worry - i know what a lug wrench is, dad. is this a lug wrench? maybe? you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

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 i mwell, what are youe to take care odoing tomorrow -10am? staff meeting. noon? eating. 3:45? uh, compliance training. 6:30? sam's baseball practice. 8:30? sam's batai chi.ractice. yeah, so sounds reling. alright, 9:53? i usually maheir lunches then, and i have a little vegan so wow, you are busy. wouldn't it be great if you had investments that worked as hard as you do? yeah. introducing essential portfolios. the automated investing solution that lets you focus on your life. it'that can make a worldces, of difference. expedia, everything in one place, so you can travel the world better.

its raised 1 dare devil, 2 dynamic diy duos, and an entrepreneur named sharon. its witnessed 31 crashes, 4 food fights, and the flood of '09. it's your paradise perfected with behr premium plus low odor paint. the best you can buy starting under $25. unbelievable quality. unbeatable prices. only at the home depot. how many people can request unmasking of american citizen of 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.

that were not related to the topic of today's hearing. at one point the former director of national intelligence james clapper became over it. >> i understand how critical leaks are and unmasking 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 thenterview is matthew axelrod. he served under sally yates. he also left the justice department january 30th, the day his boss was fired. i know you are not in the habit of doing interviews. 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 i ask you how it felt 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 exemplifies the best of the justice department, following the facts and the evidence and the law and doing the right thing. i think folks who watched her testimony today 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 implying she had 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. i think that's belied by her 27-year record as an employee of the justice department. she served in leadership positions in both republican and democratic administrations as a career prosecutor, she did high profile public corruption cases one of the most high profile was against the democratic mayor of atlanta. she was into deuced at her confirmation meetingy 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. and she plays it straight down the middle. i think that came through in her testimony today. >> watching this as an observer, i'm not a lawyer or have any inside information about the working of the department of justice, 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 acting 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. this was pulling out all the stops. this was us raising as big a red flag as we could. 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 acting 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 acting 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 often that contact occurs through the office of the deputy attorney general. remember, at this time sally yates was the acting attorney general, but she was still the deputy attorney general. it's not extraordinary that she would be the one to 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. >> thank you. >> thanks. there's a 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

particularly grateful for their trust to do these q & as. we'll be right back. w where i was from ethnically. so we sent that sample off to ancestry. my ancestry dna results are that i am 26% nigerian. i am just trying to learn as much as i can about my culture. i put the gele on my head and i looked into the mirror and i was trying not to cry. because it's a hat, but it's like the most important hat i've ever owned discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com. ykeep you sidelined.ng that's why you drink ensure. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you. dry mouth can affect how your mouth feels and how you feel. discover act dry mouth, specially formulated to soothe and moisturize your mouth. and try new act dry mouth spray

for relief when you need it. and try new act dry mouth spray anyone ever have occasional y! constipation,diarrhea, gas or bloating? she does. she does. help defend against those digestive issues. take phillips' colon health probiotic caps daily with three types of good bacteria. 400 likes? wow! try phillips' colon health.

i love how usaa gives me the and the security just like the marines did. at one point, i did change to a different company with car insurance, and i was not happy with the customer service. we have switched back over and we feel like we're back home now. the process through usaa is so effortless, that you feel like you're a part of the family. i love that i can pass the membership to my children, and that they can be protected. we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life. call usaa today to talk about your insurance needs.

people on medicaid except dying. you are making them -- >> no one wants anybody to die. that line is so indefensible. nobody dies because they don't 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 obviouy 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.

what if we pull customer insights from the data in real time? wait, our data center and our clouds can't connect? michael, can we get this data to...? look at me...look at me... look at me... you used to be the "yes" guy. what happened to that guy? legacy technology can handcuff any company. but "yes" is here. so, you're saying we can cut delivery time? yeah. with help from hpe, we can finally work the way we want to. with the right mix of hybrid it, everything computes. 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.

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 coming 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. 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 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 protest 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. i have 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 law. 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. 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 today, including intellen