quantitative easing and start selling those bonds. hope to see you back here tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. with stephanie ruhle and then at 3:00. "deadline white house" starts right now. >> hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. we're covering breaking news on multiple fronts this hour. hurricane maria made landfall this morning in puerto rico as a category 4 storm. we will take you there. and the death toll in mexico city is still rising. 7.1 earthquake has taken the lives of more than 200 people, including more than two dozen children who died in a school that collapsed. and later in the hour, we'll bring you the breaking news on the russia investigation. the special counsel now reportedly looking at the actions of the president. and we will speak to a presidential confidante about explosive new reporting from "the new york times" that paul manafort has been informed by bob mueller's prosecutors that they plan to indict him.

but first, al roker joins us to tell us where hurricane maria is at this hour and what we know about the destruction she's done to puerto rico. al? >> it has been extensive as you've been reporting about. we've had reports that the entire island of puerto rico is without power. and to be honest, it's not surprising given that the damage they already suffered from irma and now this, a category 4 coming onshore now. category 3 storm as it pulls away. right now, 95 miles east of punta cana in the dominican republic. 115-mile-per-hour winds. it is moving northwest at 12 miles per hour. some of the impacts that they've had, the winds, reports of wind gusts of 190 miles per hour. the gusts still very, very strong. plus the surge, while probably lessening as it moves away from the southern tip and also the northern half of the island because of the return flow,

we're probably going to be seeing storm surges on the western side of the island. and river and highway flood, mud slides. we've seen video of streets turned into raging, muddy rivers. highest totals 20 to 25 inches of rain out of this. as it pushes away, the impacts for the next 48 hours, for puerto rico and also for hispaniole adamaging wind, flooding rain. it's a big storm we'll show you in a second. so that rain is still going to be hanging around. dangerous seas and large swells. destructive storm surge. and look at this. so right now we've got an -- in diameter, 300 miles, the tropical force winds extend out. look at that return flow. this is where you'll see storm surge still continuing in puerto rico. and as the day wears on and we get into tomorrow, now you've got this return flow so probably storm surge here in parts of santiago and also down to the

south in santo domingo and we continue to push through to the turks and caicos. they'll be looking at very severe weather. heavy rains and a big, big storm surge. so they're not out of the woods yet. friday will be the next danger spot to talk about. >> al, i have been watching you around the clock. it feels like i'm sure for you, too. this is the most powerful storm to hit puerto rico in years. they'd already been saturated by winds and rain from irma. how is that island prepared to deal with what's happened there today? >> i don't think they purpose they did the best they can but they already had an influx of people from the other parts of the caribbean who were hurt by irma. so now they are all there. there are about -- 60% of the island was without power from irma. now 100% is out. we heard reports that it could be four to six months before all power is restored to puerto

rico. and a lot of these areas need electricity to pump water. the basis of just the normal survival. so it is a very dire situation there. >> al, thank you so much for starting us off again. we're going to keep calling on you sadly this hurricane season. nbc's gabe gutierrez is in san juan. gabe, what is it like on the ground right now? >> hey there, nicolle. i can tell you, thankfully, the rain mostly has stopped here. the wind has died down for the most part but what we're seeing is a scene of utter devastation. where i'm standing at right now at the hilton, this isn't even the worst of it. we've had communications issues. we've gone out, seen some of the damage and had to return here to bring this live to you. there's debris here. the siding off the side of the building is gone. power is out to this entire area if my cameraman can walk with me

here a little bit. you can see trees are toppled and something we've seen over and over is power lines down throughout this entire area. residents are now going out and assessing the damage. what they are seeing is utter destruction. a lot of -- al mentioned this in his forecast, but there's a lot of flooded neighborhoods. that's something we ran across quite a bit. it's hard to get around, frankly, because of those downed power lines and flooded neighborhoods. this area, by the way, so this is a walkway that connects two parts of this hotel. you see up there that window is blown out. several of the window panels are blown out. the bottom of that structure, of that bridge does not look, obviously, we were in the other side of the building. we heard some of the cracks overnight and wondered what happened. now we know. now we were in this hotel. not on the ground floor. we rode it out through the morning. and those were the worst hit

around 7:00, 8:00. that's when we started to see the hurricane-force winds. and our room started to take on water so we went further down into a courtyard shielded by another concrete wall. and throughout the morning we saw the winds die down. the story right now is this is when people are starting to assess the damage here. we spoke with the fire department here. they are getting ready to go out and clear the streets. ready for any search and rescue missions. search teams from the u.s. mannland, from florida. the coast guard moved its assets out of here until the storm passed and they'll be kicking up into high gear. some of the damage you've already seen and we'll bring you some of that video shortly. homes obliterated. they just collapsed. and residents are stunned. and the power issue, as al mentioned, the mayor says there could be power issues here for four to six months. this is a very weak power grid. this entire area is without power. virtually the entire island is without power.

so certainly this is unfolding disaster that we're still trying to get a handle on how big the scope of it is. >> i'm struck and this is after watching you after hurricane irma passed through in these moments after the rains subsided. there were people on the streets and you were hearing from the people. i don't see any people in the shots you're showing us. have most people taken shelter in more secure structures, or how are the people doing that you've encountered? >> well, we have seen several people. in this area, there was a few. there's one gentleman over there driving his car. they are just starting to come out right now. in another neighborhood -- here we go. we look over here. there are cars over there kind of -- people trying to come out after the storm and figure out how this went. some of them are cheering that they survived this storm. others that we spoke with in another neighborhood, some were in shock. some of them had their roofs

blown off. some of them are just happy to have survived. and then this hits different people in different ways. some of them -- they are just thankful. some expected it to be this bad. others did not. again, more than 10,000 people at least are in emergency shelters. it's going to be a question some of these neighborhoods of when the structures, whether they needed the warningings and made it to those shelters. >> thank you for joining us. we go live to mexico city where another tragedy is unfolding. at least 225 people have died after a 7.1 magnitude earthquake hit the country yesterday. nbc news correspondent steve patterson is in mexico city where search and rescue operations are under way. steve? >> reporter: the signal here is tremendously poor. [ inaudible ].

>> we are having some audio problems, obviously. those images of pure devastation. we're going to try to re-establish our shot and we'll bring that to you as soon as we're able to do so. when we come back, we'll turn to the latest developments in the russia investigation. we'll ask one of president trump's closest campaign advisers to weigh in on explosive new reporting about former campaign chairman paul manafort and that no-knock search of his home. also breaking news at this hour. bob mueller's investigation has moved deep into the west wing. new reporting making clear that the special counsel is now looking at the president's actions in office. and shaping the debate. how late-night host jimmy kimmel is holding members of congress accountable for covering pre-existing conditions. please stay with us. for your heart...

your joints... or your digestion... so why wouldn't you take something for the most important part of you... your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is now the number one selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember. wemost familiar companies,'s but we make more than our name suggests. we're an organic tea company. a premium juice company. a coconut water company. we've got drinks for long days.

for birthdays. for turning over new leaves. and we make them for every moment in every corner of the country. we are the coca-cola company, and we're proud to offer so much more.

they save us from gettingones? lost, getting hungry, and getting tired of places like this. phones changed everything - shouldn't the way pay for them change too? introducing xfinity mobile. where you can pay for data by the gig, and share it across all of your lines. no one else lets you do that. see how much you can save when you pay by the gig. xfinity mobile. it's a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit, or go to xfinitymobile.com.

there are new developments in special counsel bob mueller's russia investigation in just the last hour. "the new york times" reporting first, quote, mueller has asked the white house for documents about some of president trump's most scrutinized actions since taking office, including the firing of his national security adviser and fbi director. mr. mueller is also interested in an oval office meeting mr. trump had with russian officials in which he said the dismissal of the fbi director had relieved great pressure on him. the document request provides the most details to date about the breadth of mr. mueller's investigation and show that several aspects of this inquiry are focused squarely on mr.

trump's behavior in the white house. "the washington post" has matched that report. just moments ago we're joined by michael schmidt who broke this story for "the new york times." first of all, i want to read to you something from the piece that caught my eye. in recent weeks, mr. mueller's office sent a document to the white house that details 13 different areas. on that list, i pulled out the flynn firing, the comey firing, the russians in the oval office but also the white house meeting in which they figured out how to respond to your paper about don jr.'s meeting with russians to get dirt on hillary clinton. what do all of those presidential actions sort of have in common from an investigator's perspective? >> the significance to susthat mueller's investigation has largely operated secret. there's very little we've known about it. certainly indications in the press he was looking at the issue of obstruction but what this does is details the

contours of what we know he is looking at and gives us some insight. and some meat on the bone of understanding what this investigation is all about and the fact that it does involve a lot of things the president was directly had a hand in doing in his time in office. >> you know, i was surprised to see the flynn firing on the list only because it's one of the things that from the beginning of that period, i guess we understand sally yates went to the white house counsel don mcgann. warned them flynn could be a target for blackmail from the russians. 18 days where he stayed on the job. and jeremy bash and other national security experts, veterans of the cia have said that's a period that an investigator would be interested in. but correct me if i'm wrong in seeing your report as the first evidence that that is, indeed, a time period the mueller probe is now interested in learning more about. >> i was surprised, too, when we

found out that the flynn firing was something they were sort of digging into. it makes sense in a sense given the fact that it involved the justice department, it involved the acting attorney general who went to the white house, provided them with this warning. it also makes sense because there's still a lot we don't know about what happened with flynn. why did it take so long for the white house to fire him? was it really because he had lied to the vice president or because he had come out publicly but this is the first time that i've seen anything substantial about the fact that mueller is looking into the firing of flynn and the circumstances around that, including the fact that mueller wants to know about flynn's meetings with kislyak and what type of white house documents exist about those interactions. >> your report that just hit also keeps alive the theory among outside observers that the mueller probe is taking place along two parallel tracks. one looking into the original sin if you will, the question about whether or not people in

donald trump's orbit colluded with russia. and i would put the john junior response, the comments to the russian ambassador kislyak that firing comey relieved pressure. relieved pressure on what was what i always wondered. but the second category of presidential actions seem to perhaps keep in the investigators' focus the question of obstruction. and that would be looking at the president's actions around the comey firing. is that your interpretation of this list of 13 presidential activities? >> that's what we thought was important here was that mueller's investigation has a lot of tentacles and it's looking at a lot of different things. what we learned here is stuff that the president was doing himself was directly involved and had a hand in are things that mueller wants to learn more about. the white house has said the president is not under investigation. there's nothing in this document that says the president is a target of the investigation. but what this does show is that

there are a lot of things the president was involved in that mueller seems to want to have answers to. and the thing that we often, i sort of forget about the mueller investigations is all the different parts of it. the flynn part, the manafort part, russian coclusion part, this stuff from when he was in the white house. so, you know, this is just one slice of the different things mueller is looking at. >> great reporting. thank you so much. let's bring in white house bureau chief at "the washington post" philip rucker. glen thrush is a white house reporter for "the new york times." he joins us as well. juan zarat se a national security analyst for msnbc and the governor of new jersey, chris christie. msnbc political analyst elise jordan and rick stengel. phil rucker, your paper has matched this great reporting. i go to bed at night and thank god for my family, my bed and the newspaper war.

let's read a piece. so you've got a source here that says, an unnamed official that says i'm convinced no matter where they end up, this investigation will run to completion, even if they fi firemueller. not of the outcome of the investigation but that there will be an outcome. there is no escaping this thing whatever the conclusions. maybe it's because i've been covering some hurricanes this year but there does seem to be a force of nature to this investigation now that may not have existed a month or two ago. >> there does. and it's becoming so much more concrete and real and there's a sense of momentum. when you talk privately to officials in the whourks they sense it as well. their focus on document production. that's a real thing. they've got lawyers in there. they are looking to try to put an end to all of these russia questions but they know this investigation is gaining speed.

mueller is looking at more and more he's adding to his team. the special counsel is. and the white house is dealing with it and preparing to respond to it. >> juan, you and i co-existed in government with bob mueller. he was fbi director when george w. bush was president. and that's just one of his professional achievements. but he is the most sort of a consummate professional, but he does hone in in an investigation like this. what does this development today about 13 specific actions that president trump took after the inauguration being on a list of documents that he wants produced from this white house mean to you? >> well, nicolle, we've talked about this. director mueller is going to bring credibility and closure to this investigation. we talked about the need for the white house to recognize that and to do whatever possible to see the clear closure of the case. what this represents is right at

the heart of the discovery mode of the investigation. i think he is now digging in deeply to try to gather as much information, not only about particular events but also to give context to information that he may be uncovering through other sources and about other events. part of this isn't just about those particular incidents or 13 items but also about how that connects to other information that they may be getting about paul manafort, information about potential relationships predating the campaign and trying to understand where influence may have taken shape and manifested after the election of the president. and so this, to me, is the moment of discovery where mueller is really digging in and, obviously, everyone is realizing that this investigation is for real. >> glen thrush, you and your colleagues have written some of the most extensive stories about how this investigation has gotten inside the president's

head. your paper broke the story with the most really raw details about how the president erupted at jeff sessions for recusing himself from russia. you guys have also covered his rage at republicans in the senate for not protecting him from the russia investigation. his allies have channels his peak at bob mueller's seemingly wideranging investigation. now this investigation is on him. on his actions. what was he doing in the oval office with kislyak smiling and talking about pressure being relieved. it's on him now to answer for the white house to answer for him about firing jim comey. answers for him to answer about the firing of mike flynn. >> you know, that's an absolutely on-point question. it's hard to tell. it seems really over the last six to eight weeks he seems to have gotten the memo that having, you know, these consistent twitter eruptions in

which he goes after people and makes unfounded accusations, that may not be the best idea. as my colleague ken vogel discovered when he was going to an inocuous lunch at a steak house in d.c., there's dissension on his staff between ty cobb and was counsel don mcgahn over how forthcoming and rapid to be in terms of turning over these documents. in general what we're dealing with here is a white house moving ahead in terms of disaster recovery, spending the whole week on the united nations and deal with the north korea issue with this crisis gradually gaining momentum. as everyone has said before, bob mueller is not going to be stopped. and as philip said before in our reporting also shows this, i think there is a sense of resignation inside the white house they'll have to start answering these questions. and i can say from the level below the president, there is a

desire to comply with what mueller is requesting out of a sense of self-preservation by the staff. however the president behaves, i think, and if he behaves outrageously or makes accusations and suggests as he has in the past or has had proxies like jay sekulow suggest, that he might somehow disrupt the investigation by getting rid of sessions or rod rosenstein, perhaps even mueller, i think you are going to start seeing now a rebellion on his staff. people want this to be dealt with, at least at this point in time in a way that protects them. >> phil rucker, around the time of the arpyopardon there was a lot of murmuring and i'm sure it was in both of your papers that perhaps he was telegraphing some message about pardons. i never totally bought it but i

now understand that the staff is almost -- that there's a sensation of being blindfolded. they don't know what's coming next. they do a lot of reading these stories, learning some of these developments themselves from press accounts, and a lot of anxiety inside that staff. and put on top of that, the legal defense fund has been established for the president and his son, but i'm not aware of any reporting that suggests that that legal defense fund will pay for attorneys for any of the midlevel or low-level staff. are you? >> no, and that's a good point. staffers' lives can be ruined by paying these legal fees. michael flynn is an example of this. he's created his own legal defense fund because he's anticipating extraordinary legal fees. but you're right about the staff being blindfolded. part of that is because they put the blindfolds on themselves. a lot of staffers have purposely tried to stay away from the russia question. they don't want to engage on the russia question. they don't want to know information about the russia probe in part to preserve their

own -- to protect themselves, to prevent themselves from having to become witnesses in this probe and having to lawyer up and deal with inquiries from mueller themselves. so there are very few people inside the white house who have full visibility and exposure to what's going on. those would include the lawyers, chief of staff john kelly and some of the other senior officials but below that level, people are really in the dark. >> and i know from working in a white house under investigation it is sometimes the press people who are hearing about the developments from reporters that are serving as a conduit for some of that information. tense times, to say the least. >> phil rucker and glen rush, i feel you're both at the starting line. going to race each other for the next big bombshell. we're grateful to you and your colleagues. it's the only way we know what's happening. thank you for spending some time with me. we'll get reaction from presidential confidante and trump campaign adviser, governor chris christie. plus, what he knew and when

he knew it when it came to paul manafort's business dealings. that's next. liberty mutual stood with me 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. it's looking up, not down.ng fit's being in motion. boost® high protein it's intelligent nutrition with 15 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. boost® the number one high protein complete nutritional drink. it's realizing beauty doesn't stop at my chin. roc®'s formula adapts to delicate skin areas. my fine lines here? visibly reduced in 4 weeks.

chest, neck, and face cream from roc®. methods, not miracles.™ so, i was at mom and dad's ♪ and found this. cd's, baseball cards... your old magic set? and this wrestling ticket... which you still owe me for. seriously? $25? i didn't even want to go. ahhh, your diary. "mom says it's totally natural..." $25 is nothing. abracadabra, bro.

the bank of america mobile banking app. the fast, secure and simple way to send money.

governor chris christie has been a steadfast ally of president trump. he's also said on this program that he never met with any russians on the campaign's behalf. he joins our table. how are you the only person who never met with any russians and never forgot about any meet -- >> what a calling card. i'm the guy that didn't meet with any russians. what i did all throughout the time i was supporting the president and continue to is to deal with the president. when he was a candidate and now. and i didn't get myself involved a whole lot in campaign machinations. i wasn't a staffer. i was the first endorser of the president after i left the campaign myself. and my job was for my friend of 15 years to give him directly my advice. i didn't allow my advice to be

filt filtered. >> if he was getting your unfiltered advice he may not have been asked today by bob mueller for documents around 13 actions, the flynn firing. you advised him not to hire flynn in the first place, right? >> yes. >> the comey firing. which you've advised him against firing jim comey? >> i think comey has made some mistakes but i don't think he should have fired him. >> i think there were other reasons more important than that one. >> the cover story he had rosenstein write? >> no, i think the fact that jim involved himself so personally in the hillary clinton investigation was an enormous mistake. and i'll tell you this. jim comey and i were u.s. attorneys together under pressure bush 43. he in manhattan. me in new jersey. if the head of the fbi, the assistant director in charge in new york had ever gone out and did a press conference, announcing that there would be no charges brought against the

defendant, jim comey would have had him fired. that's not what the fbi does. >> but no one disputes that -- >> you asked me why. if there was a reason why jim comey should have been fired, my advice to the president would have been that is someone that is overstepped their bounds and doesn't understand they nor longer a prosecutor. they around investigator. >> mueller is going to scrutinize the firing of jim comey because donald trump went on television with lester holt and said i fired him because of the way he was handling the russia investigation. >> that's not the question you asked me. >> i'm just trying to answer the questions you asked me. >> you're giving me prosecutor -- >> i'm sorry that i'm actually giving truth and fact. i'm sorry. >> you think the president has some legal exposure in the fact he fired jim comey because of the -- >> no. >> why? you don't think there's an obstruction of justice -- >> you asked if he has exposure? i don't believe he does. i don't believe he has obstruction of justice.

it's a hard case to prove, and i don't think -- bob mueller is a smart and careful prosecutor. if you are taking swings at the people that are as big as the president of the united states, you'd better not swing and miss. good prosecutors know that. it's not that you don't go after big targets but if you do it better be a head shot. everybody who sits around and speculates about this stuff has never had to do it. i've had to stand up and indict large figures in my state. and let me tell you, you better be right. if you don't, you ruin their careers and lives forever. it's a very powerful position. i'm confident bob mueller understands that. and won't do anything that's careless or irresponsible. you're asking my opinion as a prosecutor, my opinion is he has no exposure on obstruction of justice, zero. >> juan zarate, i just heard the governor say if you're going to swing at a big target like the president, you better be right. you think bob mueller is right? >> he's trying to discover as

much information as possible. to presume what he's swinging at is a little premature. i think the governor is right. you have to be sure of your facts. if you're going to try to bring a case against the president which is what we're talking about. you have to be sure about your facts. i was a former prosecutor as well and the governor is absolutely right in that regard. i think what we're right in the middle of is bob mueller doing his job which is to try to dig as deeply and as wide as possible to gather as much information to understand the context for what was happening at the time. what was happening in the white house, around these decisions, as well as before the fact. that's why i think we shouldn't fixate too much on the actual events, although those are important. put that in the context of everything else that bob mueller is likely looking at and that his prosecutorial team is going to look at, including money laundering and financial crimes for paul manafort. >> rick stangle? >> so i am not a former federal prosecutor. >> i'm sorry. >> i regrets that. so do my parents.

but here's what i want to ask you a question. so to take your thesis, which is the two main strains here, there's the collusion strain and the obstruction of justice -- >> this line of questions. >> so the question is, can you have an obstruction charge to obstruct justice to the collusion charge even if the collusion didn't exist? >> well, listen, depending upon what conduct you engage in, how grease thaft conduct is and how they can prove that state of mind, potentially yes. but here's the problem. this is what happens when you get a special prosecutor. now he is doing exactly what juan said, and i think he's doing what he's duty bound to do which is to dig into everything. this is the problem. when you let the fbi into your house and you say, we just want to see where something is in the kitchen. then they go, oh, i thought i heard a noise up in the bedroom. then, wait a second. is that a person tied up down in the basement? we have to look at that, too. this is what happens, which we remember, bill clinton didn't

meet monica lewinsky until 19 months after the special prosecutor was appointed. so this is the problem with these things. and in the end, could that happen? it could but it's really unlikely. and he's not going to charge him anyway. you don't charge presidents of the united states. you make referrals. will he make referrals? my prediction is no, but juan is right by saying that we don't know. i used to say about my old job as u.s. attorney, only i knew what i knew. and that's a position bob mueller is in. he's the equivalent of a u.s. attorney. only he knows what he knows. even some of the stuff being reported, it may mean something, it may mean nothing and may just be being diligent and take whatever information he gets and put it aside because it doesn't lead anywhere. >> does it make sense for the president to raise funds to use it for he and his sons. >> he's the head of the party and gets to make those calls but there will be people that criticize that. >> he's really rich. >> i understand that.

>> why does he -- my mother, god bless her, sent him $100. why does he need to use my mother's money to pay his lawyers. >> we'll talk at length and make sure he doesn't use his mother's -- >> talk my mother out of sending that check. >> that's your mother's business. >> in the end, the president gets to make those calls. i'd hope as we go forward, those people at the lower staff level who are not making enough money wind up being helped in some way because this -- >> calling the rnc right now -- >> i'm not calling the rnc. i don't raise money for them and i don't say how they spend it. if they're going to spend money on anyone, i hope everyone considers who has the ability to pay, as part of the consideration. but ultimately, let's be fair. it's the president who is going to make those calls. >> how about this. it's the president -- your mother sent that 100 bucks because she likes the president not because she likes the deputy chief of staff. >> but he's got lots of money.

>> it's completely unseemly and it's going to hurt him with his base, right? >> nothing hurts him with his base. >> i don't think they'll really care. that's an inside baseball story. >> i want to get you on one more question before we sneak in a break. reporting -- and i haven't seen you since then. but there's been reporting about jeff sessions practically in tears. the president exploding on him. he resigned. ultimately he stayed on. do you think when a story like this comes out about everything that mueller wants from the president that he wished he had someone like you as attorney general overseeing the mueller probe? >> you'd have to ask the president that. >> we'll get him to call in, and i will. >> i think -- listen. at the end of the day, i think every president should make a determination on who his or her attorney general would be. based upon having someone who is strong and tough and unafraid to make decisions. >> you think sessions is strong and unafraid to make decisions? >> i like sessions a lot and think he has the potential to be

a really good attorney general. he's an honest man. he's a very honest guy but the heat in that job is different than the heat you experience almost any place else. when you haven't done it for a long time. jeff was a u.s. attorney back in the '80s under president reagan. it's a tough job. >> was that a not tough and strong yet, but he'll get there. >> i departmeidn't say not toug strong but he's only been doing it seven months. >> going to hit pause there. jeff sessions, a man with potential. when we come back, the latest on paul manafort and the governor made some news today on the health care repeal fight.

when you've been making delicious natural cheese for over 100 years like kraft has, you learn a lot about what people want. honey, do we have like a super creamy cheese with taco spice already in it? oh, thanks. bon appe-cheese! okay... everything i did circled smaround that cigarette when i started taking the chantix that urge just slowly diminished and it was a great and empowering feeling. along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help people quit smoking. chantix reduced my urge to smoke. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms.

some people had changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, agitation, depressed mood or suicidal thoughts or actions with chantix. serious side effects may include seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking or allergic and skin reactions which can be life-threatening. stop chantix and get help right away if you have any of these. tell your healthcare provider if you've had depression or other mental health problems. decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. use caution when driving or operating machinery. the most common side effect is nausea. i don't even think about cigarettes anymore. ask your doctor if chantix is right for you. many insurance plans cover chantix for a low or $0 copay. we're back. our panel is still here, thankfully. we came on the air yesterday with breaking news from "the new york times" and cnn had some of this picture, too, emerging of paul manafort being in a lot of

trouble. "the new york times" reporting that no-knock search, when a lock is picked -- >> yeah. >> that took place and he was informed by mueller's prosecutors that he would -- that they plan to indict him. did you have any interactions with him during the campaign? >> i had some when he first came on board and when i was doing more traveling with the candidate at that time than i did later. i had interactions with paul and then interactions on the transition because he was involved in the early transition planning as well when he came in and replaced corey lewandowski. >> so let me ask you this. it's an open secret in washington that paul manafort took the kinds of clients that other firms wouldn't. they sometimes represented people not known as the good guys in foreign policy circles. the pro-russia side in ukraine and others. do you think that the folks who brought him into trump's orbit, i don't know who they are. do you know who brought -- >> not specifically, no. >> do you think they had any idea about how much baggage he

had? >> no. >> why? >> because i don't think they analyzed it that closely. >> should they have? >> sure. >> cnn has reported and we have not independently confirmed this but there were two fisa warrants approved to listen in to paul manafort ostenseibly for the purposes he may have been in conversations with russians. do you think that was a possibility. >> did i think it? no, nor did anybody else but fisas by their very nature of the most secret of this kind of activity. and i think the way i read this stuff was that there were people who considered he may be an agent of a foreign power and all and there's very specific things you have to prove to a fisa court judge without putting everybody to sleep that you need. they're not easy warrants to get. i got many of them when i was a u.s. attorney. they're not easy to get. the interesting thing about this, though, is that all that information, whatever information they gleaned, prior to 9/11, would have never been seen by the law enforcement side. with the patriot act, what it

did was take that wall away which is a very interesting now ramification of the patriot act will be that some of that stuff now has gone from one side of the wall that doesn't any longer exist to another side. what it tells you is, obviously, law enforcement and intelligence agencies were looking at what paul was doing for quite some time. it didn't necessarily have anything to do specifically with -- >> and the original one was 2014. to your point, and i want you to jump in here, to your point, we have a strategic interest in a western democratic ukraine. that man, paul manafort, worked against that for decades. at the behest of the russians and then he became the head of the campaign of a man who people are wondering is -- whether he's colluding with russia or not. connecting those dots is a very scary prospect. >> i'm interested in your confidence in the fisa process because a lot on the right, they are suddenly, you know, people who might not have necessarily

been civil libertarians before but are suddenly more concerned about this process and are taking it as evidence that president trump himself was indirectly tapped through paul manafort through the fisa court having approved a wiretap for paul manafort. are you confident that there must have been enough evidence for this warrant to have been granted? >> yeah, i am. i think in -- in 2014, obviously, there was stuff going on that had absolutely nothing to do with donald trump because manafort had no association with him at that point. my interaction, my -- >> he was still on his birther campaign. >> my interaction with the fisa court, my office's interaction with him gives me a great deal of confidence from the time i was there from 2002 to 2009 that fisa judges take this responsibility incredibly seriously. and they know, especially when you're allowing fisa wires on

american citizens. the standard is really high. i have a degree of confidence in that. once you get to 2016, i don't think those judges in my experience, would care about a campaign context -- >> or presidential candidate? that a presidential candidate could be indirectly -- >> but at least the law enforcement folks were doing it, have an absolute obligation to minimize those conversations. and so if he was on the phone talking to donald trump about campaign strategy, they've got to turn it off. >> let me ask you this, though. you -- this was jeremy bash who said you have to ask the question and answer it to your satisfaction whether or not the russians who had done business and funneled putin-friendly funds to paul manafort because he was on the putin side of the ukraine question. you have to ask and answer the question to an investigator's satisfaction that he wasn't placed there and still servicing those clients as a chairman of trump's campaign. he didn't make any money from the trump campaign. >> but that's an investigation

of investigating paul manafort and his relationship with -- >> and the president. >> but you can't take the leap to say manafort was continuing to work for russian interests. >> i didn't say that. you did. >> no, my point is you're then drawing the relationship to the president. and there's no -- >> i'm asking if that's a reasonable body of questions for an investigation. if the russians were paying paul manafort while he served as donald trump's campaign chairman, and i wrote this as a make believe tv show, someone would rip it up and burn it and say this is asinine. >> the more important part of this investigation is the collusion investigation. has always been the more important part of it because that's a thing that strikes at the things you're expressing concern about and that i'm concerned about which is the effect on our democracy, the effect on our ability to be an effective agent with other nations around the world. that's always been much more important than some of the other stuff that's a little sexier and gets a little more attention.

if there was evidence of collusion, by anyone -- >> manafort or kushner -- >> anyone in the trump campaign, then that needs to be uncovered. >> isn't there a charge of negligence when you say here's a presidential candidate who hired, as his campaign manager, someone who is being investigated for being a foreign agent of the russian government and fired flynn against your advice as well. how is that even possible that this person is capable or -- to be president of the united states. >> i don't think -- if he made mistakes in those hirings and certainly in the flynn one, i think it was, that he's the first president who has hired someone not to be a good hire. >> hired flynn, though, talk about a catastrophic hire. >> yeah. >> was mike flynn very involved in the transition when you were the chair of it, or did his involvement -- was it uptick after he --

>> it ratcheted up significantly after i departed. i fairly effectively kept him out of the transition when i was in charge of it. and it ratcheted up the day after the election and i was gone three days after the days election. listen, you and i agree on this, and this is nothing that -- if the president were watching right now he'd be surprised to hear from me. i begged him to get rid of mike flynn. so you know, that was a bad hire. but my point to rick is, you know, plenty of presidents have made plenty of bad hires. let's not get ourselves in a tizzy -- >> no one's ever hired a agent of a foreign -- >> i don't believe the president had any idea. >> is ignorance a kbedefense? s. on that? you bet. ignorance is a defense to collusion. you can't collude if you didn't know -- we have to sneak in a break

and then get you in trouble on health care. don't go anywhere. your business of the week. when disaster strikes, will you be ready? robert rising owner of new york slab wasn't. a fire tore apart his custom furniture shop and he lost almost everything when he discovered he had the wrong insurance. find out how he rebuilt his business. watch "your business" weekends at 7:30 on msnbc. >> announcer: sponsored by, american express open. helping you get business done. what does that mean for purchasing? purchase. let's do this. got it. book the flights! hai! si! si! ya! ya! ya! what does that mean for us? we can get stuff. what's it mean for shipping? ship the goods. you're a go! you got the green light. that means go! oh, yeah. start saying yes to your company's best ideas. we're gonna hit our launch date! (scream) thank you! goodbye! let us help with money and know-how, so you can get business done. american express open. so you can get business done.

right. in. your. stomach! watch this!... >>yikes, that ice cream was messing with you, wasn't it? try lactaid, it's real ice cream, without that annoying lactose. lactaid. it's the milk that doesn't mess with you. during the yellow tag sales event, you can get $3,500 off a hard day's play... $700 off select mud spa packages for two... and up to $1,300 off family packs of venison. ( ♪ ) save on a world of possibilities with deals on select 2017 can-am vehicles. only until october 31st at your local can-am dealer. ( ♪ ) only until october 31st at your local can-am dealer. will people know it means they'll get the lowest price guaranteed on our rooms by booking direct on choicehotels.com? hey! badda book. badda boom! mr. badda book. badda boom! book now at choicehotels.com

[fbi agent] you're a brave man, your testimony will save lives. mr. stevens? this is your new name. this is your new house. and a perfectly inconspicuous suv. you must become invisible. [hero] i'll take my chances.

so i do think it has a very good chance of passage and i certainly hope it passes, and they'll be voting in the not too distant future. thank you very much. >> that was president trump on the prospects of the new, maybe last hope, for the republicans to repeal obamacare. i think we have kasie hunt joining us. are you here? >> reporter: i am. >> what's the latest? will it pass?

>> i actually think what the president said there at the top is right as far as prognosticated what's going on here. a better chance of passing that pe people ever thought it might. the reason is that republicans came under incredible pressure. not just from constituents but from major donors on both coasts that they visited with over the august break and the money has really slowed down, because there's a perception they're not doing anything here. in congress. it's less about strictly repealing obamacare and more like not being able -- they don't have confidence they can do what they say they'll do. a little split, i think, between lindsey graham and those who are pressing the bill hard in public in leadership, ready to let the issue go, and basically proved themselves on tax reform. there are those in leadership who would say, hey, we could show all of these people we're capable of doing things if we could pass a tax bill.

the administration is seized on lindsey graham's plan and graham is under pressure to show they can actually come through. the pressure points are similar. john mccain, lisa murkowski and despite this ramping up, graham was testy with reporters today, something pretty unusual and reflected the fact he's feeling pressure to get 50 votes, nichole. >> governor kriscchristrist chr come down on the jimmy kimmel side. >> no. don't say that. but i'm not in favor of the bill. i won't get into jimmy kimmel. he's not a serious person on this. >> he helped -- >> i'm not here to talk about late-night comedians? okay? then i'll walk to talk about fallon and colbert's opinion as well. i'm againsted for the governor

of my state. i can't be in favor of that for new jersey and in favor of bloc grants but this bill is used to in a manipulate the money to send money from some states to other states. here's my view. i like almost everything about this bill and could make changes to it that might bring me around, but if they're going to steal money from my state to give it to another state who didn't choose to expand medicaid, i can't be in favor of that and injury the people in my state to help people in another state whose leaders made the conscious decision at that time not to take expansion. that was their decision. if they believe that was the right decision they don't need more money now, because fill tofk philosophically didn't agree with it. i think it's the right thing to do and not doing something that hurts my state. i'm the governor of my state. i'm not going to do this. >> and from the calculus of the

white house, why are they trying three sfrtrikes? why are they throwing weight behind his bill that seems unlikely to pass, in my opinion, and when so many governors oppose it? what's the strategy? >> it's obvious the white house is determined to repeal and replace obamacare and fulfill that promise. i don't have any problem with that. but i don't think -- >> can i ask you a question? do pennsylvania and michigan have the same problem you have with expansion? >> michigan will have to some extent. pennsylvania a little less so. because they weren't an expansion state. >> florida? >> massachusetts has a big problem. florida will have a problem. >> ohio? >> yes. you don't see those governors as supportsers of graham/cassidy. you don't see rick scott on the bill. >> is kasie with us? >> reporter: i am. >> imagine a scenario, so driven by politics, the white house make as decision politically disadvantageous to battleground

states, states, trump is states, michigan, florida, potentially pennsylvania and others? ohio? >> reporter: i don't necessarily think so. all in here. i'd like to ask the governor a short, simple question. set jimmy kimmel aside. governor, does this bill provide ironclad guarantees to people with preexisting conditions they will have affordable health care or not? >> kasie, i've read the bill, with that level of detail, but -- >> reporter: an essential question. >> essential for you. i'm the governor of new jersey. no -- >> reporter: including people in new jersey -- >> hold on. >> you already know. >> no, no, no. here's my point. if you both stop interrupteding me. in new jersey with have a state law requires coverage for pre-existing conditions. if money blacked back to new jersey from the government, covered for preexisting

conditions new jersey already a law that covers that, which i support. we wouldn't have a question about preexisting conditions. each state would make that determination on their own. >> we're all out of time. >> really? >> but this is fun. you should come back. >> really? fun for you, maybe. >> thank you for getting in there and covering that important issue. >> this is the only reason i came. >> i know that. keeping it real. my thanks to the governor, and elise and rick. that does it for our hour. "mtp daily" starts right now. >> as always, hi to the governor for you. say hi to the governor for me. >> hi to the governor. >> still sensitive, chuck. >> the chair -- the -- >> why can't we get along. >> the chair is saws here, governor. you know that my friend. good evening. i'm chuck todd in washington. welcome to "mtp daily." a wild day in washington. republicans going all-in on a