>> david, thank you so much. as we move forward on this afternoon, a saturday for you, i'm richard lui live at msnbc headquarters in new york city. thanks for joining us. this hour the russia investigation as president trump spends new year's eve weekend at mar-a-largo. new details about australia's roll in flagging russian interference and how that launched the fbi investigation. and the holiday message putin sent to president trump as well. plus as we say good-bye to 2017, a year that brought many unexpected moments, could 2018 be the most consequential year of our lifetime in politics. a new op ed in "the washington post" predicts a storm on the horizon in 2018. first off for you, we'll begin with new information on the russia investigation. including word that australia may have played a significant role in the launch of the investigation by the fbi. "the new york times" reporting that in may of 2016, trump foreign policy adviser george

papadapoulos spent a night drinking with an australian diplomat and told him in that conversation that russia had political dirt on hillary clinton. according to the times, two months later when leaked democratic e-mails began appearing online, australian officials passed the information about mr. papadapoulos to their american counterparts. now no response of -- as of yet to the report from papadapoulos. and trump's claims that a dossier compiled by christopher steel sparked the russia investigation. the president tweeting, use the -- the fbi used this to go after the trump campaign. and today a message from putin telling trump he wants the two countries to, quote, make progress andn promoting pragmatic cooperation designed for the long-term. we are in west palm beach there

in florida. and kit, a lot to talk about, but if this reporting comes t t tout -- out to be true, this is a realignment in the time line for the russia investigation. what do we know. >> reporter: well this would be fascinating if this does in fact turn out to be true. and the reporting on this here, particularly around australian diplomats, australian intelligence officials reaching out to the united states to warn them about this issue does something to take the dossier out of the discussion, for those pushing back and calling the entire russia investigation fake news or a witch hunt. a lot of republicans particularly in the house of representatives have said if the dossier is the basis for this investigation, then the whole investigation is probably bunk. this new york times report pushes back against that significantly. now the white house has responded to this report. with a statement from the president's outside attorney ty

cobb. reading, out of respect for the special counsel and his process, we are not commenting on matters such as this. we are continuing to cooperate fully with the counsel to complete their inquiry expeditiously. it is interesting to tease out such as this part of the statement reads. it was just a few days ago we were talking about another white house lawyer john doud responding to another story about another cooperating witness, michael flynn, but pushed back against the reporting about how the white house might handle that, more aggressively, saying it was nonsense and fake news. so the white house not engaging fully on this and putting this back into context with the flynn report, i want to read you a tweet from the president of the united states from back in october when papadapoulos was first pled guilty. the president tweeted, few people knew the young low level volunteer named george who was -- who has already proven to be a liar. check the demes. remember, that flynn story a

couple of days ago in the washington post said if flynn were to roll over on the president or his close associates, the white house would push back by calling him a liar and trying to distance him from the president. that tweet about george papadapoulos sounds pretty similar, possibly operating from a similar playbook here. >> that is the playbook. so you're reporting. thank you so much. traveling with the president. appreciate that in west palm beach. now nick ackerman who is a legal analyst and former assistant special watergate prosecutor, ken dell- -- delani. ken, let's start with you. we hear the reporting from garrett and from the new york times, this realignment, if you will, that comes out to be true, of the time line, what might the significance be here. >> richard, as garrett laid out, the most important takeaway from the story is it does explode the myth perpetuated by some republicans an by the trump administration that this fbi investigation is based entirely on that christopher steel

dossier, the one compiled by the british intelligence officer. we've known that is not the case. there's been testimony from u.s. intelligence officials that foreign governments had passed on information of concern in the summer of 2016, that there were contacts between russians and members of the trump team. what the new york times story does is lays out the details and one in particular involving george papadapoulos. and it makes clear that george papadapoulos relayed to this australian diplomat that he knew that the russians had dirt on hillary clinton. this was early on. before that had been made public. that is really important. now what is unanswered in this story, richard, and what i think is a central question in the mueller investigation, is did he tell other key officials in the campaign? did that information ever get to donald trump? did paul manafort know? there is no evidence e-mail evidence that the times or any others have gained but if he did, the mueller team knows about it. >> the tip of the iceberg is what you are saying here. and to you, nick, on this, it is

reporting it it -- it was a night of heavy drinking and with an australian diplomat. so ken is asking, what else might he have said and who else might have he told this very piece of information. >> it is hard to believe that he didn't pass this information along to the trump campaign, to the people that he was reporting to. this puts the trump campaign right into the conspiracy -- >> may 2016. >> right. to steal the e-mails and to use them to throw the election to donald trump. that is the crime that is being investigated. conspiracy to violate the federal computer hacking law. and to use those -- the fruits of that crime to get donald trump elected. this is just another piece -- in a whole series of things that we've learned over the past year, including the june 3rd e-mail that talks about the same dirt, bringing this stuff to trump tower, the trump tower meeting.

and then all of the context with wikileaks and guccifer 2.0 where all of this gets distributed and released to the public. this is all part of a major conspiracy i think ultimately charged by mueller. >> and part of this, ken, is we're getting from this reporting a better sense of the role that papadapoulos played, right? because this has been the pushback and gar-- garrett was that out, that he was a liar and low level and also the statements being made that he was a low level volunteer for instance but the reporting here shows that if it is true, again, that he was much more than that. >> that is right. he was active on the foreign policy front. now he was clearly not a senior official in the trump campaign, but having meetings with foreign officials, he was representing himself as a foreign policy adviser. and even after that famous meeting we know about where he broached the subject of a head to head between putin and donald trump and remember jeff sessions now the story is that he said that wasn't a good idea.

even after that papadapoulos continued to have meetings and represent himself as a foreign policy adviser and try to relay -- improve relations between russians and the trump campaign. he is a more important figure than the trump administration is now suggesting. >> and you have to tie it into the flynn guilty plea. because flynn pled to a lie to the fbi in january about a telephone call with the russian ambassador in january after the election. but we know from his guilty plea that that lie somehow relates to the coordination between the campaign and the russians during the campaign because that was the materiality of the entire lie, according to his allocution to the federal district court when he pled guilty. so the real question is, what do sanctions have to do with this conspiracy? was this a quid pro quo that the russians would steal these e-mails, use them to help donald trump get elected and then in return the trump campaign -- the trump administration would drop

these sanctions? i think that is where this is all heading. >> you are really breaking it open here nick, the idea of what is the playing field that mueller and his team is considering. and ken, as we look back now to may 2016, this field is getting bigger. and as robert mueller and his team starting, if you will, from the very beginning and just going month by month or day by day, week by week and with this report and we know at least may 2016, again if it comes to be true, that mueller is looking at. >> well, absolutely. look, we know the investigation -- the fbi investigation began in july 2016. it began with this information and other information. including information from christopher steel. and it has been chugging along ever since on two tracks. both the collusion and the obstruction of justice track. and there is no sign that either of those are finishing up, despite what we're hearing from some trump allies any time soon. we have potentially a trial of

paul manafort and rick gates many months from now. so the mueller investigation, i think 2018 is a crucial year but there is no sign that it is wrapping up. >> so obstruction, nick? which is one -- one path that the mueller team is looking at. and of course the issue of collusion. >> and conspiracy. that is the crime. the crime is conspiracy. >> what is your sense based on the reporting into the new year as to the way mueller might be leaning. he is equally weighing both of these paths. >> think the big enchilada is the conspiracy to break into the democratic national committee in violation of the federal computer crime law and to use those e-mails to help donald trump get elected. all of that is motive as to why donald trump and others were endeavoring to obstruct the investigation. and why donald trump told james comey to let the investigation on flynn go. all of this is going to come together in 2018. >> let's move from then chill --

enchilada to the burrito, because falling in the first quarter is that one of the senate investigations, the word is they will be closing and finishing. what might that mean to the mueller investigation as well as the three other investigations on the hill? >> richard, it should mean very little to the mueller investigation. but you are absolutely right, that the -- we're seeing signs that the house investigation may be wrapping up because house republicans want it to wrap up. an that is the -- always been the more partisan of the two investigations and democrats have been complaining they have very little say over when witnesses are called and what questions to ask and now the republicans are driving that to the finish line. that is less clear in the senate. the senate side is much -- more bipartisan and there is a desire on richard burr to get to the bottom of this. but they have many more powers and ways to get documents and --

and to speak something -- your other guest just said, whether or not he can prove that donald trump knew there was collusion, that doesn't mean the end of this. if he can't prove that, there are still other potential crimes here, other potential jeopardy for members of the trump administration, for the president himself, particularly on the obstruction of justice question. >> and nick, finally to you, reflecting on what ken said here, what will that mean if the house were to wrap up this particular committee were to wrap up their investigation, they could come out with a report, right? and that would be basically it. >> right. but you look at their motivation here. the news today really puts the screws to what these people were thinking. it is hard to believe that people in the house didn't know that papadapoulos had passed this information along to the australian -- >> why do you say that? >> because they have a committee. they were talking to people -- in executive session. it is impossible for me to believe that somehow the fbi didn't tell them that this

investigation started with papadapoulos and others, not with christopher steel but that christopher steel was simply corroborating information that the fbi received afterwards. so either the congressman that had been pushing this lie had been lying or others in the house would knew about this sat back and said nothing to these congressmen and let them go ahead and lie. either way, this is a pretty serious thing. >> great to you. nick ackerman and ken delanie. and any time we bring in enchiladas and burritos, i love the conversation. and coming up, "the new york times" blindsided and embarrassed people in the white house. my panel will join me to dive into that straight ahead.

there is more fallout from president trump's impromptu 30 minute interview with "the new york times" from early this week. daniel straus from politico. and alexis flaus and let's start with you on this conversation. "the washington post" reporting today, not a single aide or adviser was present at the table -- alluding again to this 30 minute interview with "the new york times" -- and not a single aide or adviser knew about it in advance. this is pretty part and parcel with the way this president has acted in the past. but when he's down there in

mar-a-largo, it shows here alexis that the president does get off the rails if you will in these discussions. >> well one of the things that a lot of people have learned to enjoy mar-a-largo as their club, including "the new york times" reporter, is that we know the president is very apt to be affable and walk around his club and enjoy talking to people while he's having a meal there. and in this particular case, mike schmidt of the new york times had the perfect invitation, which was to have lunch with chris ready sh the ceo of news max and chris ready knew exactly what would happen, which was that he would introduce "the new york times" reporter, who he thought was very fair to the president. and hope for an end of the year interview and the new york times benefited greatly. and the new york times is not very happy with chris ready, who is a very close friend of the president and using every opportunity he can himself to be

near the president at mar-a-largo. >> so matt, as you look at how schmidt was able to get close to the president, 30 minutes, it seemed like he knew exactly what was he doing, listening to the president, the way it's been portrayed, in terms of errori erroring -- of reporting, schmidt, he wanted to sit there in a catcher's stance andlet listen to the president and the president let loose. >> i don't understand people getting matt at schmidt, i see progressive friends beating him up because he didn't take every opportunity to cross-examine him and say, no, sir, that is wrong. and there is a lot of revealing. >> and the context. >> and like a lot of donald trump things, the longer the transcript the more you get a window into his thought process or lack there of and one of the revealing moments was when he led with him and hey, look, you are in charge of the justice department, what do you think about the possible investigation into hillary's e-mails an the

president right then said that he is thinking depending on how the mueller investigation goes, that is going to perhaps affect the way he decides to intervene or not into this other investigation. which i think is very, very revealing, disturbing mindset and window into the mindset of the presidency and you wouldn't have had that if this whole thing would have been combat the entire time. >> daniel, you've probably been looking through the transcript yourself along with our two colleagues here alexis and matt here. and i'm going to bring up a point from the washington post. what they did is they look through it, and from their perspective, 24 false or misleading claims in that interview. the approach again by schmidt was to wind him up and let him talk. and there are different approaches to interviews. and i'll go on to say -- go on in "the washington post" in what they are saying. along with the 24 false or misleading claims, including statements he made about their being collusion between russia and the democrats, that he has a

right to do whatever he wants with the justice department, matt brought up that point and that he knows more about taxes and health care than anyone. your reaction to that? >> it's like what matt was saying. the truth is that the longer you could get the president to talk, the more revealing his comments usually are. the fact that he was so focused on stressing there was no collusion in his administration, in his campaign -- >> 16 times. >> yes, 16 times. and he pointed to democrats in -- it was very difficult to follow why he felt there was collusion or that democrats had said that they didn't see any collusion between russian president trump -- russia and president trump shows what president trump is worried about right now. and the same on health care. he is focused on tearing down obamacare and the health care system and the reform that the obama administration put up and now he wants to go back and essentially, according to him, work with democrats on some kind

of new health care plan after this. which seems unlikely. what we're seeing with this transcript is really the worries, the apprehension of the president and the hopes in the coming year. >> and also again the claims of knowing the most when folks might say the president is not the most informed, at least some of the op eds have been saying since thursday. alexis, let's build on top of this reporting, with papadapoulos. potentially being that spark in may 2016, that began the investigation if you will into the russia question investigation that we've now seen and been reporting on for last year or so. the papadapoulos reporting, about him discussing potential e-mails from russian entities, did this realign the argument then that the president might be making, that it is not the dossier, it is this. >> well, one of the things that i think has been very clear at the end of 2017 is that however

ambitious the president has been to believe his attorneys advice that robert mueller special counsel investigation was going to wind up soon, is incorrect. and what we have known from some of the reporting about where mueller and his team have been going have already suggested, even before this reporting, that they were doing very vigilant and deep dives recently in terms of interviews at the republican national committee about who inside of the rnc had digital contact with the campaign where that information was going. so in this particular case, the papadapoulos reporting adds to our belief in the news media that this investigation is going to go well into 2018 and that president trump's decision or descriptions of his patience and confident that mueller will be fair is just -- it is in suspended animation at this point. >> so matt, wider and deeper and mueller's team is going with the

papadapoulos reporting if it comes out to be true. also farther back in time. >> it is very interesting to see the gap between what the president said about the mueller investigation and his legal team does and how they act on it. and what the surrogate for the president saying. it is a huge gap. it is not the president bringing up uranium or gps, it is the surrogates which said it is as if they are preparing a political, a p.r. response on capitol hill almost more than they are taking those points seriously as a legal defense. that is interesting. it says they are worried on one hand -- he is expressing confidence that he'll be exonerated. no collusion. no collusion. and on the other hand, if there is something that comes up, that is more or -- obstruction, they want to have a political attack on it. they are paving the way with the right hand of undermining mueller conclusions and on the left hand they are expressing confidence and not attack them in the way the surrogates are. >> dan, 30 seconds. how big of a deal is this

reporting. >> this is a big deal. this is a continuation of what we've seen in the past. and the truth is that we know more and more that mueller's investigation is not going to wrap up soon and that really trump saying in past in his administration saying that they expected it to end soon was a comfort and not really something they knew for certain. so we know there is something that is going to continue being discussed over the next year. >> daniel straus, alexis simmon sh and matt welsch, thank you all three. >> thank you. coming up, the latest from iran as thousands take to the streets to protest economic conditions. plus heightened security as new year's eve approaches. no matter how the markets change... at t. rowe price... our disciplined approach remains. global markets may be uncertain...

but you can feel confident in our investment experience around the world. call us or your advisor... t. rowe price. invest with confidence.

here are some of the stories we're following on msnbc. iranian police confronted anti-government protesters as demonstrations spread. other rallies held in support of the iran clerical leaders. the anti-government protests are fueled by a spike in the price of food. president trump calling on iran now to allow the protests to continue, tweeting, the world is watching. tomorrow's new year's eve celebration in new york times square will have enhanced security, including snipers an metal detectors.

nypd dogs are trained to find trace amounts of explosive particles left behind by a bomb. as an extra precaution, the 125 parking garages around times square will be empty. anti-violence activist erica garner has died of brain damage after a heart attack. she campaigned against acts of police brutality after her father eric garner died after being put in a chokehold by an nypd officer. the grand jury did not indict any officers in that case. erica garner was 27. an arrest overnight in a twisted prank gone horribly wrong. a kansas man killed by police responding to a phony emergency call and is all -- this all could be the result of a feud over a video game. nbc's ron mott has more. >> reporter: it's call swat-ing. and it may have just turned deadly. wichita police release body cam video of an officer shooting a man in the doorway of a home.

authorities responded to the scene after a caller phoned in what officials say was false information. a man claiming to have shot his father and then holding two relatives hostage. >> i already poured -- [ inaudible ]. >> but there was no such emergency. 28-year-old andrew finch, a father of two, opened the door with police positioned around the house and was fired upon, police say, after ignoring instructions to keep his hands up. >> their responsible actions of a prankster put people and lives at risk. if the false police call would not have made, we would not have been there. >> reporter: the information is believed to have only nated from a disagreement over the online video game "call of duty", tyler bar is was arrested in los angeles under suspicion of playing the call but finch is thought to have no connection to the gamers. >> i think it is a dream. i'm going to wake up and he'll

be here. a cop can't go around shooting people without any consequences. >> celebrities have been frequent targeting. miley cyrus, rihanna, justin beiber, have had people show up, usually just a nuance, but in kansas on thursday night, fatal. a prank chilling with fake details, tragic in its real result. >> ron mott with that story. up next, we look ahead to the new year and the about thele for control of congress. why the 2018 mid term elections could be the most hotly contested on record.

well, thomas, you've got prediabetes. but with more exercise and a change in diet, it can be reversed. but i've tried exercising, and it just makes me hungry for bacon. i love bacon, too. and who really likes to exercise? not me. me neither. nobody! [both laughing] mmm! so we're good? what? oh, you still have prediabetes... big time.

only a matter of days before the return of the second phase of the 115 congress. the senate will reconvene on wednesday while the house is scheduled to return on january 8th. as we look ahead to the 2018 mid-term elections multiple polls show democrats have an advantage over republicans right now. now the democrats are averaging a 13 point lead in polls asking which parties voters are most likely to vote for next year, according to a tally by 538. i want to bring in ryan williams, and romney 2012 deputy secretary, vas ill flus. are you worried when you look at these poll numbers, ryan? >> yes. i think it is shaping up to be potentially a difficult mid-term election cycle. the first mid term of a president's four years is

usually a difficult election any ways for the party in power. so we already have head wind heading into it based on history. but the president's approval numbers are low and that hurts the party so in order to get do better we have to get his numbers up and look at the tax bill and point to his success in the first year in office. if you could articulate the reason why the legislation is important to benefit working families, i think the numbers will improve. if he gets caught up on the russia investigation and airing tweets or whatever other distraction, i think we'll have some problems but i hope he can focus on the accomplishments and not get distracted to improve his own numbers. >> i know you are not patting yourself on the back because if you look at the dnc and the fundraising numbers, they are in the tank compared to the rnc at the moment. however you are seeing some fundraising -- very high numbers for democratic candidates, specifically. but the dnc and tom perez not doing well. >> well, they'll be fine. i'm not worried about their fundraising because i think what

we have on our side is something that we've had in past but seen with such vigor and that is an motivated electorate. look at virginia and alabama and some of the stuff i could talk about as get more into the conversation. >> where is the leadership, my friend. >> tom perez and keith have been great leaders for the dnc. i think what people are pointing to is there no singular democratic voice among the potential candidates. i'm not actually -- i'm not concerned about that right now. because number one, we have donald trump as a sort of united factor for demes. and we have more candidates running for house seats than in the last three mid-term elections combined and that tells me not only do we have a motivated electorate, we have individuals willing to step out there and put everything on the line and say i'm going to run for office and take on these republicans that are in the seats even here in new york. my office spent -- raising over a million dollars to do exactly

that. recruit and challenge -- recruit candidates and challenge the republican seats sox there is a tremendous amount of activity. i'm not concerned there isn't one singular voice. i'm happy with the multiple voices out there. >> for the mid terms. >> yeah. >> and ryan, that is somewhat daunting for republicans, as you know so well, being a republican strategist, a report by politico showing that 162 democratic candidates in 82 gop held districts raising over $100,000, i think this report coming out in october so far. clearly outraising republican candidates in these districts. what is going to be the ground game in the leader of the party doesn't seem to be affected. if we were to look at alabama as an example. >> i think we are raising money as a party. the rnc as you pointed out is eating the democrats lunch when it comes to fundraising this cycle. they are doing a very good job. our congressional committee is doing well. speaker ryan is raising desources to protect incumbents

and recruit new candidates i feel good about the resources and the issue is to get the president's approval numbers up to help the party an the only person that could do that is the president himself. he needs to stick to his issues, he needs to focus on talking about his successes in office and not get distracted. that is the best thing that could be done. resources are nice but at the end of the day most people have well funded campaigns, it is really trying to get the president in line to help his numbers improve and have the rest of the party come with him. >> ryan, what do you think about that? the ground game in these districts, not looking good at the moment. how is that turned around? because fundraising is going to be a key input into who wins these districts. >> well, look, hillary clinton had a great ground game in 2016 and she lost the election. many would say the trump campaign didn't have nearly the operation she did. so it comes down to energy, it comes down to candidates and we have to get good candidates. especially in some of the districts where we're lose veteran republican incumbents retiring and we have to get the president's approval number back up as high as we can.

>> but as you know, hillary clinton did get 3 million votes more than the republican candidate. so -- >> but she lost. >> one might say, though, because we're talking about votes, that it did work out because she did -- do well in fundraising. to you on this baz ill, as we look at the democrats, you have talked to tom perez lately and what has he told you. >> we talk. we talk. we're pen pals. no we talk. >> the important point here being what is coming down from the leadership in the dnc? what is the mantra, what is the chant, if you will. >> well, the chants -- the mantra is ground game. look at what happened in alabama. and this is actually important point. alabama, their african-american vote, there was an investment in that vote and african-americans went out and elected a democrat. we have a race up in mississippi next year, if senator cochran actually steps down from office, which has been rumored,

mississippi is 30 % african-american and the second highest only second to washington, d.c. if we do what we did in alabama in mississippi across the country, then we can start energizing voters that have not been touched as well as they should have been before. to actually be able to turn a table. so i think what tom perez and keith ellison and others at dnc are looking at now is investing in this ground game. we realize how important it is for everybody down ballot. the dnc has been presidential focused but i think the focus of down ballot which they are starting to do is really important. >> ryan, he was talking about -- about the coalition put together in alabama that has a very unique situation for several or one main reason in that election. what is the counter play from your side of the aisle to bring your coalition together, this as you were mentioning trump country approval ratings are going down for the president. what is the coalition that will

counteract what democrats are doing from your side of the aisle? >> well i think that we need to articulate the successes we've had in office. with republican house senate and president and that includes tax cuts. that includes opening up an war -- for oil exploration. some of the things in office and why it is important to keep republicans in power. that is what we have to do to talk to voters, swing voters for them to come out. and the alabama situation was unique and our candidate was not a good candidate. i don't think we'll see that elsewhere. but we have to get good candidates and articulate why it is important to keep our majority in order to continue to create jobs an improve the economy. the message is economic. the economy is doing well and that is a success story we could talk about into 2018. >> the question we have as we look forward to january is will we hear roy moore in the way we heard todd aiken, just taking us back a couple of days here during the mid terms and we'll see how that does happen.

ryan williams, thank you, baz ill mikele, great to have you both. >> thank you. tomorrow night, we'll say good-bye to 2017. so what is in store for 2018? joe scarborough has a few predictions an warnings for the new year. why he said 2018 could be the most consequential year ever in politics. my 30-year marriage... ...my 3-month old business... plus...what if this happened again? i was given warfarin in the hospital, but wondered, was this the best treatment for me? so i made a point to talk to my doctor. he told me about eliquis. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots and reduces the risk of them happening again. not only does eliquis treat dvt and pe blood clots. eliquis also had significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis had both... ...and that turned around my thinking. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve

or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. plus had less major bleeding. both made eliquis right for me. ask your doctor if switching to eliquis is right for you.

an op ed by joe scar bro, the host of the morning joe is sounding the warning bell about what is in store for 2018. he writes a storm is gathering and there is every reason to believe that 2018 about be the most consequential political year of our lives. let's bring back daniel straus, alexis simmon dinger, for the hill and matt welsch, from reason magazine. daniel, break out your magic eight ball or whatever you do use for 2018, what are your predictions for 2018? this is always fun stuff. >> i'm a little weary to predict anything because -- >> go for it. >> because 2017 -- okay. i think we're going to hear a lot of the campaign of roy moore and the republican tax bill. i think that there are going to be a lot of democrats who are going to try and replicate the doug jones playbook and that will be met with mixed success.

and i also think that we're going to see president trump out on the campaign trail more than i think a lot of strategists are predicting right now. i think he's going to see that as a net win and i think republicans in their primaries are eager to embrace president trump. you saw rhonda santis out in florida, eagerly taking a tweet from the president and then seeing a number of top republican billionaires in the state flocked him. so i don't think the president is going to go away ant campaign sh on the campaign trail in 2018. >> the poll numbers are not saying that. the recent elections have not said that. >> i didn't say he would be impervious, but in primary in particular he is very helpful. but again, you are right, we saw in alabama that he's not a silver bullet. he did not -- his endorsement did not help luther strange and it didn't help roy moore win the senate seat in the end. but i think in primaries he'll be very helpful. >> and alexis, what does 2018 tell you? >> well from my long experience

coming -- covering presidents in the white house, in my experience i know and history shows the second year of a presidency is less satisfying and in some cases less ambitious and less fulfilling for a president and we know that president trump thinks that his first year was a challenge, but he has big ambitions for the second year and i think when an unpredictable president is very frustrated, which i expect him to be in his second year, whether it is international policy or dealing with congress, or dealing with the media --

outside, legal aid societies and protesters came in and helped reverse the situation. our institutions survived that initial very, very bad move by the trump administration. >> we were on air all night. i remember that, covering airports all around the country and individuals, like you said, all the legal papers in order. but then seeing the support of our legal system behind them. >> and the court system checked those two -- the first two travel bans, the one that the trump administration has now. i might disagree with the policy of it, but it's more well thought out than the initial one which was wrong in many ways. >> fiscal conservativism gone is what he's saying. one might say, let's wait for the midterm elections, see if that pans out and is a resurgence of fiscal conservativism, but reflect on that, tell me what you think was the worst political moment of 2017. >> i gotta say, charlottesville and the nazi marches there,

pretty frightening and unreal. i've never seen anything like it and i didn't really expect something that outlandish to get as much attention, or seriousness as it did. >> that was the worst moment for you? >> yeah. >> alexis, if you would like, also look back at what might be the worst, but if you want to flip it on the other side, what might be the most positive political moment of 2017? >> well, i think one of the interesting things about 2017 was to see the ricochet off of the 2016 election. for those of us who follow politics, it was very, very intriguing to see the electorate on both sides of the aisle being very animated in the first year of president trump being involved and interested and conscientious and tried to absorb what was happening in current affairs and the news media, but they're definitely paying attention, and for those of us in reporting, that's what we want to see. >> matt? >> you know, donald trump was an

old-fashioned drug warrior, he appointed an old-fashioned drug warrior as his attorney general in jeff sessions. we have legal weed in nine states, and they can't reverse it. there's worry they'll use the federal government to step down on the state freedom. they can't do it. our institutions and our federalism have more robustness than i think some of us feared that it might. >> one of the moments that i look back on this past year, the me too movement and whether that will translate to something in 2018 when folks go to the polls. what are you seeing? >> i'm a reporter who covered the anita hill hearings, clarence thomas a long time ago. we've gone through a variety of stages where we thought we've seen watershed moments before in dealing with women's issues. we would all like to think that sexual harassment or sexual misconduct can be put in a box

or on a shelf, but i know from experience it's harder than we think. we hope to see that progress in the new year, but one of the things we'll definitely see is a continuing conversation about that. we don't think that the discussion about this is over in capital hill. certainly not over in every walk of life in the united states and around the world, whether we're talking about corporate america, if we're talking about government, we're talking about our entertainment industry. so we'll continue to talk about it. we'd like to think there are strides, i'm not so convinced. >> daniel, will we see more women in congress? >> i think we will. i think we'll see more women in congress and a lot of these women, both in congress and hopeful for congress, are eager to address this issue. kirstin jill grand kirsten gillibrand is a name i think we'll hear a lot more in championi championing anti-harassment efforts in congress. >> matt, to you, we are seeing an up surge of candidates that

are women. >> and i think there will be issues about why the private sector is working this out faster than the civil side. >> thank you all three. appreciate it. much more news coming up, the latest on the russia investigation as president trump spends his holiday weekend in florida. we're also keeping an eye on the protests in iran. stay with us. ye we got a yes! 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.

good afternoon to you, i'm richard lui live at msnbc headquarters. new details coming out today about the fbi's investigation into possible russian interference in the u.s. election. "the new york times" saying the probe was launched and according to the report, papadopoulos revealed in a discussion that russia had illegally accessed thousands of rival candidate, hillary clinton's e-mails. the report suggesting that u.s. intelligence officials took the australian tip seriously enough to start investigating then. no response so far from papadopoulos. president trump has claimed the investigation was launched in response to a salacious dossier that you probably remember, compiled by christopher