bent. you watch chris hayes. >> i wouldn't lead with that in the ads. michael moore -- >> i would put that on the yard sign. i watch msnbc. >> good luck. that is "all in." the ra"the rachel maddow show" now. >> you get what you paid for for political consulting. you're getting it on tv. >> not what you want to lead with on the yard signs in america. >> you watch rachel maddow. rachel maddow, vote for me. >> defense on the district. >> that's worked for absolutely everyone. thanks, my friend. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. this has been an incredible and fast-moving day of news. i sort of think the news gods are looking ahead and thinking thursday is a holiday for thanksgiving. we better get moving because we've got a lot to cram into what looks on the calendar like a week but it's going to have to go fast.

i mean, just in terms of me and my staff putting this show together, what we thought was going to be on the show at the start of the workday today changed 100% over the course of today. over the course of this day and afternoon and evening where big news just keeps breaking. so let's start at the top, which tonight feels like starting at the bottom of the barrel. "the washington post" published a long stomach churning expo say describing eight women making sexual misconduct against charlie rose. charlie rose is accused by more than a half dozen women that work in various capacities of unwanted sexual advances and groping and lewd calls and frequently figuring outweighs to take off all his clothes around a series of his female workers. he got them alone even though they thought it was a work

environment. he hosts on pbs and bloomberg tv that's been suspended and a high-profile co-host of the daily morning show at cbs this morning and a contributing correspondent for "06 -- "60 minutes." that news breaking today in the washington post and that news about charlie rose comes immediately on the heels of news from "the new york times" that they have suspended their high-profile white house reporter glen thrush after vox.com this morning published a number of sexual harassment claims against thrush. most of them were during his time as a reporter at poll lit c -- politico.com. that brought us to the news that broke this evening in reuters.

21 1st century fox reached a settlement. fox, of course, has previously been known to have paid tens of millions of dollars to a large number of women that made sexual harassment claims about the work environment and workplace behavior by specific personalities and executives at fox but according to reuters tonight, the settlement will result in an additional $90 million being paid out, this time to shareholders of the company. the $90 million will come from insurers of fox officers, fox directors and roger ailes' estate. but again, if this settlement is approved by a judge overseeing this matter, this will be another $90 million paid out in fox news sexual harassment claims and those are just the media sexual harassment and

sexual abuse claims for the day. today was the day a second woman came forward to say she was touched inappropriately by senator al franken. this took place at the minnesota state fair in 2010. that would be when al franken was a united states senator and that would mean if franken's case is taken up by the senate ethics committee the jurisdiction question if it happened while a senator would be different for this alleged case in 2010 as compared to the one last week which was from before when he was a senator and then there is the case of roy moore, the candidate who is remaining in that senate race despite the national republican party and almost every sitting republican senator calling on him to drop out calling on allegations of him making sexual advances on teenagers. we'll have more on that story later in the show tonight but this weekend, the largest papers in the state of alabama made

news by forcefully and unequivocally and aggressively endorsing roy moore's challenger for that senate seat doug jones. in washington today, the big news is the trump administration decided to declare north korea is a state sponsor of terrorism. the u.s. flipped back and forth on this designation for north korea over the years. there is no sign that today's announcement from the trump administration is based on any new information about north korea so this appears to have not necessarily been driven by events but a strategy decision by the trump administration as to whether or not this is a good strategy decision, don't know. it is hard to anticipate how a decoloration, might affect the on going insult go around that our president has adopted as his strategy toward the north korean leader on a personal level. then late tonight came this headline from nbc news. the president is closing his controversial self-named

charitable foundation. the trump foundation is closing. now, reporting on the dubious financial practices of the trump foundation last year earned washington post reporter a politzer prize. that's how we learned that trump himself had not donated any money to his own charitable foundation since at least 2008. since that round of reporting sparked by the president's campaign last year, since that round of reporting began, the trump foundation admitted formally to self-dealing, meaning it disbursed charitable funds to benefit trump's rather than for a charitable purpose. the foundation is under intense legal scrutiny in the state of new york. that leads to a really interesting detail to watch in this story as notes at nbcnews.com tonight even though president trump may wish to nail closed his charitable foundation and indeed he may have started

the process of desolving it, legally, he might not be able to close it. while the foundation is under legal skrut kncrutiny by the at general. you cannot evade legal skrut knee to cease to exist by the organization. on the russia investigation, "the washington post" had a long somewhat ominous report on what it's like to work in the white house right now under the spector of robert mueller's special counsel investigation. according to the report in the post today, witnesses questioned by muller's team warned that investigators are asking them about foreign contacts and meetings that have not yet become public. which means quote, expect a series of new public revelations. recent revelations over the past few days have not been great for current senior white house staff particularly white house senior advisor jared kushner.

we learned he told two committees he was unaware of contacts between the trump campaign and wikileaks. those congressional committees we know have proof, documented evidence that jared kushner was not only notified during the campaign the campaign was in touch with wikileaks, he went further than receiving information by e-mail, he turn that information around and forwarded it himself to another member of the campaign staff, which is going to make it hard for him to explain why he denied any knowledge of that under oath. in addition, jared kushner appears to have omitted any mention to investigators of yet another overture to the trump campaign. jared kushner reportedly received and responded at the bank of russia who was linked to vladimir putin and accused of having tied to russia organized crime with this latest set of

reports, jared kushner, i'm not exaggerating here, jared kushner appears to have had more contact with more different russians during the campaign and transition than any other senior member of the trump campaign that we yet know about. jared kushner has within 100% unforthcoming about those contacts, at least in the first instance and he continues to serve at the highest levels in the white house. and that would seem to be an untameable situation in the long run. but it remains to be seen what robert mueller's inquiry will do with this continually evolving, not good information about kushner and how honest he's being and what kinds of contacts he had with russia while russia was attacking the election to benefit trump. so eyes on jared kushner now. we're also right now waiting for the white house communications director hope hicks to have her

scheduled interview with robert mueller's investigators. we're told the hope hicks interview may happen as soon as this week. crucial question, it's not clear whether hicks will be called to testify to the grand jury. in addition to speaking with muller's prosecutors in an interview setting. so we don't know when the hope hicks interview and/or testimony will be but we expect it should be any day now if it hasn't happened already. so like i said, busy day. [ laughter ] >> all of that is going on in the news now. that's the kind of news cycle we're in now and on top of that, charles manson died. news at which the world does not weep. in august 1970, charles manson was on trial with two accomplices for multiple murders when the man who was president at the time threw that charles manson trial into chaos. the president totally messed it

up. >> i noted for example the coverage of the charles manson case when i was in los angeles. front page every day in the papers that usually got a couple minutes on the evening news. here is a man who is guilty, directly or indirectly of eight murders without reason. on his way back to washington from san cla memente called a n conference and the president made the flat statement that charles manson who is on trial for his life in los angeles is guilty, directly or indirectly of eight murders. a few minutes later, his press secretary called back and said he was retracting the president's statement because he had failed in referring to man son, failed to use the word alleged. but by then the trial in los angeles had been thrown into a small uproar. >> had been thrown into a small uproar. charles manson, of course, proved to be profoundly guilty,

but when you're president, you can't prejudice the outcome of any on going criminal trial by making a statement like that in public. if somebody is on trial, if you're the president, you can't say that, a person is guilty. short of a pardon, that's the best way a president has to set somebody free by screwing up a prosecution that way. still, for whatever reason nixon said it, the white house spokesman tried to resend it right after nixon said it. nixon had to come out later on after his spokesman tried to take it back and say he didn't really mean to say what he had said, but he had said it. this was the cover of the l.a. times the next day. look at that. that's how big the headline read. man s manson guilty, manson's lawyers held up that headline in court and used it to call for a mistrial. and the judge had to make the call. and ultimately, the judge didn't allow for a mistrial but could

have. when the jurors were supposed to be sequestered from news about the manson case but once the president proclaims a defendant to be guilty, there are reasonable worries that the president declaring the defendant to be guilty might leak through to the jury. the jurors might unavoidably hear that news or see it in the paper in three-inch headlines. presidents are not supposed to influence law enforcement or have way over the behavior when it comes to federal law enforcement. it's a very, very, very bright line and all sorts of stuff to worry about. one of the bright lines to worry about, one of the things actually worth keeping you up at night is the question of whether or not law enforcement is being perverted for political means. richard nixon was a president who didn't get that. he crossed over that line frequently and easily and that's ultimately what led to his resignation of president. the letters were about obstruction of justice,

interference with law enforcement. this is a big thing that presidents can get wrong, it could get you i'm peempeached a accidently springing charles manson from the murder trial. in nixon's case it got his attorney general convicted. in nixon's case it resulted in the first time we had a criminal conviction of a u.s. attorney general. >> for the first time in american history, a former attorney general of the united states richard pleaded guilty today to a crime. he admitted to federal judge george heart in washington he with held information from the senate judiciary committee during his confirmation hearings. this information provided a presidential order to drop anti trust proceedings against itnt. >> the former attorney general entered the plea swiftly in a wri written statement he said he regretted not having been more candidate and there had been no

white house interference in the itt case, when in fact, there was. >> this was all that was seen outside. his car sped away from the courthouse basement. >> he will be sentenced early next month. >> nixon's attorney general pled guilty to lying to congress about something called the itt case. the itt case was an anti trust case brought by the justice department when nixon was president and it was a case that nixon as president corrupted. >> and incidentally kleindienst has the itt thing settled. he cut a deal with itt, now this is a very very hush hush and it has to be engineered very delicately and it will take six months to do properly. but. >> does itt have any money?

>> geneen? >> geneen, yes. >> that's part of the ball game. as nixon in the oval office tapes talking about the corrupt deal he cut with itt and how the money part of it should be settled later because this has to be very hush, hush. not very subtle. what that was about is this company itt wanted to merge. justice department sued them on anti trust grounds and said no, you can't merge with the companies and buy the companies and then nixon quite bluntly arranged for that suit by the justice department to be dropped and settled in exchange for itt giving a bunch of money. the itt scandal was basical lal tangent where they went after the itt scandal. they got the attorney general

scalp to show for it. it was interference in the law enforcement functions of the justice department if there hadn't been money or a bribery component of it, it still would have been illegal influence by the president to have done what he did in that case. more than anything what made nixon, more than anything what resulted in the watergate catastrop catastrophe, what led to that is nixon not keeping his pause off the justice department and law enforcement. he treated law enforcement as his own and because that is a violation of the law and because that is a violation of our american norms and widely viewed as the lesson of what went wrong with the nixon presidency, since nixon resigned we did not see a president overt political pressure on the justice deputy and it's law enforcement decisions. we didn't see that for more than a generation. we are very obviously seeing

that now. president trump has proudly publicly pressured the justice department to prosecute his political component. he's proudly publicly pressured the attorney general to try to get him to reverse his recusare. federal prosecutor jobs in high profile jurisdictions where he has business or other interests. and now in this nuts news cycle, there are two new reports, one high profile, one lower profile about president trump exerting or appearing to exert improper influence on the decisions of the justice department when it comes to something quite important. the lower profile incident was reported at the washington post by national security reporter. quote justice department officials are preparing to announce several cases involving iranian suspects in the coming

months. now that's the lead. it's kind of a weird lead. why would we know in advance there are going to be announcements about specific kinds of suspects being charged with crimes? why would you know that in advance to get to the why you have to read into the sublead which is the important part of this story. quote, last month national security prols csecutors were t to look at any on going investigations involving iran or iranian nationals with an eye toward making them public. quote, the push to announce iran related cases caused internal alarm with law enforcement officials fearing they are publicized cases because the trump administration would like congress to impose sanctions on iran. federal law enforcement have voiced concerns that announcing the cases rather than keeping them under sale could imperil on going work or catch suspects that might travel out of iran.

if this is accurate, you can look through the lens of what is going on through iran. the trump administration is reportedly, pushing the national security prosecutors at the justice department to unseal specific cases they are working on for political affect even though it might negatively affect the ability to prosecute cases. this is like is huge red flag in terms of the independence of the justice department and federal law enforcement. so that i think ended up being a lower profile story because it broke on sunday night but then there is tonight's bombshell financial page reporting that for the first time in decades, the justice department will be filing an anti trust lawsuit against at&t to block the acquisition of timewarner. however you feel, if you feel anything about it at all, this president declared once this merger was announced that if he became president, he would make sure it never happened.

that's not your decision as president. on november 8th, "the new york times" reported that the justice department under president trump told timewarner they would have to spin off and get rid of cnn if they wanted this multi billion-dollar merger to go forward. i mean, with any other president it would be weird to consider the personal agenda whether or not the justice department was going to court to block a merger like this. but the justice department hasn't tried to block a merger like this in decades and with this president, he hasn't just hinted at that as a motivation for the actions of his administration, he's threatened that's what he will do amid a cascade of behavior and comments by the president that made clear he sees the justice department and power of law enforcement as his personal political arsenal. unprecedented since nixon. if only because everybody is

supposed to know that's what brought nixon down. in the midst of that, there is something else that has just broken in the news, which is also about the justice department i'll confess to absolutely not understanding with that match up of what is going on in the white house and justice department, there is a report about the muller investigation and new reporting in the russia investigation essentially, the justice department subpoenaed itself. i don't get it, either. that i need explained and that one is next. ack. patrick woke up with a sore back. hbut he's got work to do. so he took aleve this morning. if he'd taken tylenol, he'd be stopping for more pills right now. only aleve has the strength to stop tough pain

for up to 12 hours with just one pill. tylenol can't do that. aleve. all day strong. all day long. so, verizon and google have teamed up on the pixel 2. it's a match made in tech heaven. it's like verizon is the oil and google is the balsamic. no, actually, they separate into a suspension. it's more like the google pixel 2 is the unlimited storage. and verizon is the best unlimited plan. what if it's like... h2 and o? yeah. yeah, like that. i had a feeling that would score with you guys. good meeting. (vo) when you really, really want the best, get up to 50% off the pixel 2 on google's exclusive wireless partner, verizon. iton the only bed that sadjusts on both sides to your ideal comfort your sleep number setting. does your bed do that? right now save 50% on the ultimate limited edition bed. ends monday. visit sleepnumber.com for a store near you.

(amanda von a fluke.d scrappy and he totally has a super-power. didn't know i was allergic to ibuprofen. and i had fallen asleep... (scrappy barks) (amanda) he was totally freaked out, digging and pawing at me. and when i woke up i realized that i was in anaphylaxis and went to the emergency room. i don't know what i would do if he wasn't there. he's the best boy. (vo) through the subaru share the love event, we've helped the ascpa save nearly forty thousand animals so far. get a new subaru and we'll donate two hundred fifty dollars more to help those in need. (amanda) ♪ put a little love in your heart. ♪

it's a little hard to believe at this stage of the big sprawling that resulted in a guilty plea and two felony indictments but we have news of what we think is a first, not only is a first for me in the russia investigation, this is a first, first, never heard anything like this before, special counsel robert mueller was appointed by the second in command at the justice department by the deputy attorney general. he reports to the deputy attorney general. he could be fired by the deputy attorney general and that arrangement between muller and the justice department makes this a potentially awkward piece of news. siting a source who has not seen the request but told about it, abc news now reports the special counsel robert mueller just demanded that the justice department itself should hand over a bunch of documents that pertain to muller's investigation.

nbc news has not confirmed this reporting but abc news is is reporting that sometime in the last month or so, the special counsel demanded documents from the justice department, special counsel reportedly particularly interested in e-mails relating to the president firing james comey and before that, attorney general jeff sessions decision to recuse himself from things related to russia or the 2016 campaign. the director marks the special counsel's first records request to the justice department and it now means that muller is demanding documents from the department overseeing his investigation. and i mean, you know, carry the three, right? put these things together. i think this means that the justice department by way of special counsel robert mueller just supay psubpoenaed himself. new and awkward things every day at least for this go around for

the president and administration. joining us is a senior counsel on the ken star investigation during the clinton administration. he's currently a senior fellow at the r think institute. i really appreciate your time tonight. thank you for being here. >> thank you very much for having me. >> i'm not an expert in these matters. i'm an observer. the justice department demanding documents from itself to me feels strange. feels like something i haven't seen before. is this an unusual move? >> unusual and not. the not portion is of course, muller is going to want to get all of the documentary evidence relating to anything he's investigating and in this instance, the issue at hand is potential obstruction of justice materials naturally going to want the documents. which makes this odd is even though de facto, he is independent of the department of justice.

he is as you pointed out under law part of the department. this is like a demanding documents. it's a reason we had independent counsel law to put the independent counsel formally in the judicial branch. now that that's gone away we're left with this unusual circumstance and an interesting story. >> this would be unusual and would have that almost backwards dynamic you're describing if the deputy attorney general was not himself directly personally a player in the obstruction of justice matter that is being investigated here. rod rosenstein of course played a key role in the public explanation what happen in the firing of james comey. is it possible robert mueller in requiring documents from the justice department around that

matter that robert mueller would see that as inappropriate as a potential witness. is there anybody else he would go to or take it to rosenstein himself? >> i imagine the document request was sent to the liaison. one thing i'm not sure about is if it's a subpoena or demand that doesn't have the force of law but to the extent the deputy attorney general is a witness in this case and right to say that this aspect of the case suggests he might be, then the natural order of things oversight would fall to the associate attorney general, rachel brand who would be responsible for managing the department's response to mr. muller's request at least in the formal way. >> do we have -- as the public, do we have right to information about this process?

nbc news has not confirmed this report that we're basing this discussion on and i know a little bit about what parts of the government are subject to foyer requests and we've seen in the manafort and gates a gag order from the court barring people involved from talking to the press or anybody outside the court. when it comes to matters of recusal document requests, things like this handled, do we have any right to know? >> in general, the answer is no. in general, criminal investigations are exempt from requests and general are subject to a subject rule. rule 60 of the federal laws of criminal procedure. the violation which is actually a crime. that having been said, the confa yal -- confidentiality is on him

and his team. there is nothing that says the recipient of a document request like the department of justice could not disclose it if it wanted to. i don't imagine the department wants to much. >> that gives me a good idea how to spend my afternoon tomorrow trying to figure this out. former senior counsel on the ken star investigation and first time you've ever been here. appreciate your time. i hope you come back. >> thanks for having me. when you work for a president who counts himself among the very, very, very, capital very very rich in the category of going along okay, you might want help paying the lawyers you need on account of your rich president boss. would be human to want help and tonight, that dynamic between you and your rich boss would be big news. that's coming up. stay with us. y mutual saved us t eight hundred dollars when we switched our auto and home insurance. liberty did what? yeah, they saved us a ton,

which gave us a little wiggle room in our budget. wish our insurance did that. then we could get a real babysitter instead of your brother. hey, welcome back. this guy... right? yes. ellen. that's my robe. you could save seven hundred eighty two dollars when liberty stands with you. liberty mutual insurance. i'm all about my bed. this mattress is dangerously comfortable. when i get in, i literally say ahh. america loves the leesa mattress. we have more five star customer reviews than any other mattress of its kind. this bed hugs my body. today is gonna be great. order now and get $125 off. plus, a free pillow worth $75. and free shipping too. go to buyleesa.com today. remember how the economic crash was supposed to be a wake up call for our government? across thew tcountry lost thei,

their pensions and their jobs. i'm tom steyer and it turned out that the system that had benefited people like me who are well off, was, in fact, stacked against everyone else. it's why i left my investment firm and resolved to use my savings for the public good. but here we are nine years later and this president and the republican congress are making a bad situation even worse. they won't tell you that their so called "tax reform" plan is really for the wealthy and big corporations, while hurting the middle class. it blows up the deficit and that means fewer investments in education, health care and job creation. it's up to all of us to stand up to this president. not just for impeachable offenses, but also to demand a country where everyone has a real chance to succeed. join us. your voice matters.

a mid the lots of breaking news, the head of the federal communications is due to announce tomorrow the trump administration plan to kill net neutrality. it is one of those washington phrases that makes a lot of people's eyes glaze over. if this happens, not only is this going to be a huge political deal, this is something that will change your life if it goes through.

the net neutrality rule is put in place by the obama administration meaning internet providers can't pick which traffic goes fast and slow online. that makes the internet more or less a level playing field in terms of what content you want to access and how you want to receive it. under the changes the trump administration will propose, internet companies can pick and choose which stuff you get in a hurry and which stuff you have time to fold the laundry and runaround the block before it gets to you in a sense they get to shape what the internet is for money. the proposal comes up for a vote formally next month but given the republican majority on the fcc, it's expected to pass, fcc commissioner is going to roll out the plan tomorrow in my opinion or in terms of the way i look at this story and how i followed it over the years, they will roll out this announcement tomorrow, i think you will probably be able to expect significant protests to start at least by the time of the rollout but more likely, they will

probably start before. this is a big deal and this is going to become a very big political deal for people fighting this administration. watch. every day, on every street, in every town, across america. small businesses show their love to you. with some friendly advice, a genuine smile and a warm welcome they make your town... well, your town. that's why american express is proud to be the founding partner of small business saturday. a day where you get to return that love, because shopping small makes a big difference.

so, this saturday get up, get out, and shop small.

there are a lot of former trump administration and staffers who are staring down the barrel of really big legal bills. and all of them have been on the hook for their own legal fees up to and including the vice president of the united states, mike pence. but not the trump family.

president trump and his eldest son, they have been having their legal fees paid for by the republican national committee and by the trump reelection campaign. the republican party, the rnc for example spent $167,000 on donald junior's lawyer in september alone. which is awkward and would seem to be counter strategy for somebody whose current and former staffers are talking to federal investigators right now. somebody like chief of staff reince priebus was heard of the rnc for what, six years? he doesn't get legal bills paid for by the rnc but donald junior does? who decided that? honestly, was there a formal decision made at the rnc? no, we're not going to use donor's money to pay for normal staffers or our former employees but we will pay for the billionaire president's grown son. [ laughter ] >> and the billionaire president

himself him but nobody else. this is such a weird and unexplained arrangement. well, on friday it started to change. shannon at bloomberg news reported president trump would start paying his own legal fees. and he would maybe start paying for the legal fees of current and former white house staffers or maybe he would set up some mechanism by which other people could pay for the legal bills of those staffers maybe. that was friday. well, now tonight, shannon reports that the trump campaign, the campaign, the trump reelection campaign is going to stop paying for donald junior's legal bills. and that's not because he's going to cover them himself or his dad is going to cover them. they will set up a campaign legal fund to pay the legal fees of campaign staffers and done junior even though don junior wasn't a campaign staffer.donej

junior even though don junior wasn't a campaign staffer.we have reporting the trump campaign stopped paying donald junior's legal fees. what about the rnc and republican party? have they stopped paying and who decided to pay them on the first place? we still don't have a sat t satisfactory answer why the republican party was paying the legal bills. don't know why that was set up or reportedly stopping now. the lawyer ty cobb said paying his own legal fees was quote always president trump's preference. so why didn't he? [ laughter ] >> if he really wanted to pay his own legal fees, what, did the rnc body block him? i mean, does the president think it was a bad idea for the republican party and donors to be paying for him and his son? if so, why doesn't he repay them? so many questions.

joining us is white house correspondent for bloomberg news. nice to have you with us tonight. thank you for being here. >> thank you. >> this story confounds me. it's confounded me from the very first inkling we got from members of the administration and campaign would need provide legal counsel. without getting into the -- all the back and forth detail that i just ran through in the new reporting, do you understand basically what is going on in terms of paying for legal fees in this investigation? is there some method to the madness here? >> i understand what is going on at the moment but i thought i understood that before and i have been asking the questions you've been asking since the summer, since the investigation started heating up who will pay the legal bills and ask the campaign and rnc and individual lawyers and it was a question people couldn't answer for me for the longest time. then finally it seemed there was resolution that the president would have his bills covered by the rnc and campaign ask

campaign would pick up bills for the staffers but now of course, it's changed again. there has been endless back and forth between the lawyers. as it stands now, they are looking at setting up two legal defense funds, these are common funds that people have set up in the past. one for white house staffers and one for campaign staffers and the big question out there right now is whether the president will be able to contribute to one or either of these funds. it's something that's on the table that they are looking at right now but we don't have the answer to that yet. >> funny this is happening at the same time, like on the same night we're getting reporting that the president is closing down his charitable foundation and we know how he handled financing through the charity in order to handle business expe e expenses and settle legal disputes and things like that. the idea the president wants to contribute to legal fees is hard to square with the fact he's the only person we know aside from his adult son who had legal fees paid for by other people thus

far. does the -- do we know for sure that the rnc is only been paying for donald trump senior and junior? is it possible they have been paying for anybody else? >> it is because we don't have the filings yet. the most recent filing we have is from the third quarter. there could be more. it raised a lot of people's eyebrows to see the bills from donald trump junior and people that worked on the campaign with staffers faced with 30, 60, $100,000 in legal bills liquidating college funds and yes, when they saw 286,000 is the most recent number we had going to donald trump junior and nobody else there were a lot of questions and frustrated campaign staffers. >> is this is controversy within the republican party how these decisions were made and who is responsible for the outcomes? >> there is plenty of donors who donated money to the trump campaign and rnc and donated money to help get republicans

elected to office not to pay for legal fees from the past campaign. one of the reasons the president's lawyers said they are now having the president pick up his own legal bills, they wanted to keep that money in the rnc coffers to help e lkt republicans and campaign is a similar situation. the trump campaign is limited as to how much they can fund raise. they are an official campaign so they can only raise so much prom individuals between now and 2020. they want as much money as they can to actually help with the reelection, not pay what could be millions and millions of dollars in legal bills. they have spent $2 million in legal bills. >> wow. draining the rnc and the president's reelection campaign to pay for legal bills not everyone a year into administration. this is a remarkable thing. thank you for being here. i'm super glad this is part of your beat at bloomberg and i feel like eventual actually this will turn into part of the story

and i think chance fixes the country. it's confusing but will be a really important part of it. thanks for helping us understand your reporting. >> thank you. >> we'll be right back, stay with us. ere. i can guide you in? no, thanks , santa, i got this. looks a little tight. perfect fit. santa needs an f-150. that's ford, america's best selling brand. hurry in today for 0% financing for 72 months across the full line of ford cars, trucks and suvs! and just announced... get 0 % apr for 72 months plus $1000 cash back! take advantage of these exclusive holiday offers during the ford year end sales event. whentrust the brand doctors trust for themselves. nexium 24hr is the number one choice of doctors and pharmacists for their own frequent heartburn. and all day all night protection. when it comes to frequent heartburn, trust nexium 24hr.

i realize that ah, that $100k is notwell, a 103fortune.

yeah, 103. well, let me ask you guys. how long did it take you two to save that? a long time. then it's a fortune. well, i'm sure you talk to people all the time who think $100k is just pocket change. right now we're just talking to you. i told you we had a fortune. yes, you did. getting closer to your investment goals starts with a conversation. schedule a complimentary goal planning session today.

heads up. on something that we have known was brewing for a while but which now might be both starting to move fast and it may be starting to turn into a big, big deal. veterans groups are saying they were blindsided when the white house started holding quiet

meetings this past week to start the process of radically undermining health care for veterans at the va. the white house reportedly starting quiet talks to fold veterans health care into a private health care run by the defense department. news of the plan stirred alarm from veterans groups who said they had not been consulted. one official from the american legion telling the military times, quote, we certainly want to be brought into the conversation or at least notified about it. trump's va secretary is aligning himself now with the conservative groups. many of them funded by the koch brothers, conservative groups fighting a sort of stealth campaign over the past few years to do away with the va health care system, to privatize it. from "wall street journal" today, top official at the veterans affairs wants private sector providers to play a large

ericsson role in veterans health and said in an interview to make the hospital system compete with private sector providers for military veteran cust mores. when the wall street journal buoyanted out what he was saying in line with what the koch brothers and conservative donor network agitating for, the secretary responded, quote, well if it is that's by coincidence. just like maybe it's a coincidence that veterans groups watching out for what's happening with their health care. groups have been on alert against privatizing the va. i'm sure it's a coincidence they didn't see it coming at all. must have happened when they blinked. that the trump administration is actively considering this program for veterans is one thing. that veterans themselves kept in the dark is a good sign about the character of what they're trying to do. privatizing the va, we have known they wanted to do this for the last few years. they're actually moving on it

now and they have to keep vets groups in the dark to do it. watch this space. [bell rings] every year we take a girl's trip. remember nashville? kimchi bbq. amazing honky tonk? i can't believe you got us tickets. i did. i didn't pay for anything. you never do. send me what i owe. i got it. i mean, you did find money to buy those boots. are you serious? is that why you don't like them? those boots could make a unicorn cry. yeah, tears of joy. the bank of america mobile banking app.

the fast, secure and simple way to send money. i love you, droolius caesar, but sometimes you stink. febreze car vent clip cleans away odors for up to 30 days. because the things you love can stink. ♪ pudding... ...pudding... ♪ [sigh] did grandpa win again? what do you think? yes! download the new words with friends 2 today.

whstuff happens. old shut down cold symptoms fast with maximum strength alka seltzer plus liquid gels. it's tempting to keep your eyes on the president here in this clip. watch the cabinet officials around him trying to pretend like they can't hear anything that's being said. >> for the media, to the press, really appreciate it. thank you. >> thank you, everyone. >> your thoughts on roy moore, mr. president? do you believe his accusers?

do you believe roy moore's accusers, mr. president? >> thank you. thank you very much. >> thank you. thank you very much. cannot hear you. can't hear. can't understand the nouns you said there. thank you. anybody have any coloring i could work on? 11 days after "the washington post" first reported on multiple allegations of sexual misconduct against senate candidate roy moore the president will not still not answer a single question about mr. moore but despite the president himself not talking about it the white house appears to have settled on the line of choice which is that the people of alabama should decide. support for roy moore among republicans in d.c. fallen off a cliff and support of republican officials in alabama remains strong. state's republican governor who was the lieutenant governor who got the big chair herself because of another sex scandal that forced out the predecessor in alabama, shees on board with roy moore. alabama republican party sticking with him. as are many of the state's elected republican officials. they're all steadfast in the

support for roy moore despite the allegations against him. by at least nine women. but now, even his support back home appears to be getting the first hairline cracks. the young republican federation of alabama, a group of alabama republicans between the ages of 18 and 40, yes, 40 is young! announced over the weekend that they have suspended their support for roy moore. latest polls also show some real hesitance of alabama voters. two thirds of alabama voters tend to vote republicans and now democrat doug jones shown winning the race. who knows whether polling means anything anymore in america but the trend line is showing the blue line ever so slightly above the red line there. that was before three of alabama's largest newspapers this weekend ran this shared editorial on their front pages. not just above the fold but above everything else. stand for democracy. excuse me. stand for decent sy. reject roy moore.

we don't know ultimately what effect that will have. today the alabama secretary of state told nbc news he is expecting lower than typical turnout in that special election. as well as a higher than expected number of write-in votes. secretary said he lowered the initial turnout projection as high as 25% to the 18% to 20% range predicting nearly 250,000 fewer balloted fewer. how this affects the vote on december 12th is anybody's guess and things seem to be changing not just in the country but in alabama on this one. we'll see you tomorrow. now it's time for "the last word with lawrence o'donnell." good evening. >> good evening, rachel. we'll have ted baits on, one of the members that wrote that endorsing doug jeans saying it was the only -- only decent person on the ballot, qualified, for the united states senate. we'll ask him how it's