they say the beat goes on but that's not always true. beat is over. good news for you, "hardball" with chris matthews is up next. can trump handle the truth? let's play "hardball." ♪ good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. president trump's impromptu meeting with reporters last night at the white house shed new light on the request whether he's obstructed justice and maybe knows it himself. over the last year, he has reportedly taken numerous steps to slow, disrupt or otherwise impede the russian investigation. among them, he asked former fbi director james comey to drop the investigation of michael flynn. he demanded loyalty from comey, as well as from other law

enforcement officials. then he fired comey who was overseeing the fbi's investigation into trump's campaign. now, in an apparent attempt to the defend his actions, the president says he hasn't obstructed justice he's just been "fighting back." >> one more quick one p do you think robert mueller will be fair to you in this investigationings? >> we're going to find out. >> here's what they'll say and serve says. no collusion. there's no collusion. now they're saying oh, well, did he fight back? did he fight back? you say collusion. you fight back, oh, it's obstruction. >> nice try. through that sleight of hand, the president suggests that he just stood his ground, not as he's being investigated for abusing his powers as president. to repeat, donald trump is complaining the rights of an average every day citizen to him or herself with the power he has

at his disposal, powers he may have exercised to get the russian probe off his back. by saying he's fighting back, the president seemed to acknowledge for the first time he has in fact taken aggressive steps to shield himself from the investigation. up till now, he's flatly denies taking actions an key to an obstruction case against him, namely he's denied the allegations made by former fbi director james comey. >> some of the things that he said just weren't true. i hardly know the man. i'm not going to say i want you to pledge allegiance. who would do that? who would ask a man to pledge allegiance under oath. >> did say under oath you said you hoped the flynn veks he could let go. >> i didn't say the that. >> so he lied about that. >> well, i didn't say that. i will tell you, there would be nothing wrong if i did say it according to everybody i've read today. i did not say that. >> this comes as his legal team

negotiates how robert mueller will question him. even trump's lawyer admitted such an encounter with mueller could put it the president at risk of perjury. he was so assured of himself yesterday, he welcomed the potential showdown with mueller. his message yesterday was bring it on. >> are you going to talk to mueller? >> i'm looking forward to it actually. >> do you have a date set, mr. president? >> i don't know. i guess they're talking two or three weeks. i would love to do it. i have to say, subject to my lawyers and all of that but i would love to do it. >> to reach a higher standard you would do it under oath. >> absolutely. >> trump's posture raised a question central to his presidency so far, whether he really believes his notion of the truth will prevail over the facts or he's whistling past the political graveyard. betsy wood ruf from the daily beast, robert kostas, national reporter for the "washington post" and msnbc political analyst, robert be apuzzo with the "new york times" and msnbc

analyst and ryan good man, editor-in-chief of the website just security. let me start with robert about understanding trump. i always go to you to try to figure him out. when he says i'm just fighting back, he plays one of the guys from the boroughs, one of the boys from the neighborhood kind of thing. i'm just defending myself, standing my ground. i guess what he's saying. but is he confusing what an average man or woman would do to defend himself in court, get a good lawyer, be on the lookout for trouble with his use of the presidential authority to fire fbi directors, toquette attorney general, to question the politics of a new director, all these techniques, all these things he's done only a president can do and he says he's just fighting back. does he confuse the rights of a citizen with the power of the chief executive confident united states? does he confuse them here? >> he's using a queens new york style but he's certainly not in queens anymore.

every utter rans of the president of the united states especially regarding his handling of the probe into russian interference will be under structureny. he has his own attorney general talking to mueller. he knows his conduct is coming under question and trying to fight back because there is a movement on the right. i see those comments as a nod to this whole movement in the right wing of the republican party tore question mueller's credibility. >> we'll get to that in the second part of the show. ryan good man, obviously you're allowed to get the best lawyer you can find and encourage that lawyer to get you off. that's what the system's about. trump is acting like that's always done. he's finding his way past a prosecution. he said it is unfounded. look what he's used, you know the law. how is obstruction of justice different than just defending yourself as he puts it? >> it's obstruction of justice especially if the president of the united states is asking some of the senior intelligence officials of other departments to weigh in with comey at the time to get him 0 drop the flynn

investigation. in fact, that was the smoking gun tape in watergate that turned it many republicans against nixon. it's the first article of impeachment for nixon was interference the ongoing investigation. so he would be way out of his jurisdiction and in the land of obstruction. >> why doesn't i know that or does he know and he's whistling past the graveyard denying what's obvious, that he misused the powers of the office to protect himself? >> it's careless in a certain sense in what he said yesterday about fighting back because if you're his defense counsel, you're now worried he's kind of admitted to some of the facts where before he denied he had done any of this stuff and now he's saying yes, i took aggressive action. that would be one of the lines of analysis that mueller will be very interested in asking him about since he's now changed his story. >> let me go to betsy. that's a great question. it seems to me matt, as well, both of you. he went further ever in saying i

did do all this stuff, he did defend himself using his powers as president but so so is your old mankind of thing. >> that comment about fighting back i would imagine prosecutors could use to establish the reason that trump took the actions that he did. this is something that cog speak to motive. and the fact that trump is so candid and so open in ways that can cause him and his policies enormous legal hurdles is almost certainly giving his legal team pause as they're considering whether or not top sit down with mueller. i spoke with trump's lawyer about an harsh ago. he has not decided whether he's going to let or advise the president to talk to mueller and he said he himself, meaning john dowd, will be making that decision rather than the president. >> matt, this question gets back as somebody mentioned a minute ago, when nixon went down, all nixon did compared to what trump did, he told haldeman after haldeman came up with the idea,

his chief of staff says why don't you get vernon walters over at the cia, have him tell the fbi that this whole watergate break in was some sort of cia operation and lay off it. in other words, he was crushing the whole fbi investigation while using the fbi by using the cia as a cover. but this is what we're talking about here, getting the whole fbi off a case. >> i actually think this is why the interview with telephone is going to be so important because it actually doesn't really matter. you and i ccan talk about this mueller is going to come in and say did you do this? why did you do that? why did you do that? he's not going to say were you just fighting back or obstructing justice? he's not looking to trump for analysis. that's why the interview is so important. >> robert, it seems to me the question has come up and one of our producers figured out the

very fact that trump was willing to say all right, i was trying to defend myself and taking these steps to defend myself. you got me. what's wrong with that. by doing that, he admitted the whole motive behind the obstruction. >> he said similar comments before in that lester holt interview why he fired jim comey. in part it has always been a reference to the russia probe. he sees the investigation as something unnecessary. >> in this case he said defending myself, not just getting rid of the russian probe because it's not appropriate or not necessary. he said in this case, i did it defend myself. >> and that's what we're all going to have to pay attention to. was a the capitol this whole week and lawmakers are wondering regardless of what the mueller team concludes, congress will have to make a decisioning whether this fighting back or whatever you want to call it means there should it be some kind of congressional action. some democrats are calling for impeachment.

>> in his eagerness to meet with mueller's investigators, trump may have gotten ahead of his lawyers. "the new york times" reports his top lawyer tie cobb tried to walk back some of his remarks last night. he said mr. trump was speaking hurriedly and intended to say he was willing to meet. cobb clarified he'll be guided by the advice of his personal counsel. that was mrs. cobb, no lack of arrogance on the part of these guys. another trump attorney john dowd told betsy woodruff, he will be the one to decide whether trump sits down for an interview with special counsel mueller. he said he hasn't made a decision whether as interview will happen. the roger stone expressed more alarm again. let's watch what he said about a potential encounter between the president and robert mueller. here's roger stone. >> under no circumstances should he grant mr. mueller an interview. it's a suicide mission.

it's a very clear perjury trap. >> i love that full german pronunciation of mueller's name. what do you think of roger stone's advice? >> he's incorrect to say this would be a perjury trap as one of your contributors was explaining to me. perjury trap has a specific legal definition, when you bring someone in for an interview and ask them a bunch of unrelated questions to try to trip them up. mueller's prosecutors aren't stupid and won't do that interviewing the president of the united states. roger stone is not the most sophisticated legal mind on this. that said, sitting down for an interview like this could be something that would cause trump's lawyers a high degree of stress. he doesn't have the greatest relationship with the truth. >> how would you rate his performance last night, matt? was he clever, or belched it right out there, i'm defending myself? >> what's the strategy, let trump be trump.

we got the president in his element. he impromptu weighing on immigration, weighing in on mueller. look, i think he knows that he's ultimately going to have to -- if bob mueller wants to talk to the president, he's going to talk to him. if he doesn't do an interview, mueller can come over the top with a grand jury subpoena. you would much rather have a negotiated interview where we agree what we'll talk about than talk before a grand jury. >> ryan, why doesn't the special counsel who's been impounded to do this one, commissioned one thing to do, investigate this probe thing, this russian probe, why doesn't he just say, mr. president you'll come to talk to me when i call you to come to talk to me. >> that's right. he has all the legal power at his disposal and holds the cards. if trump said he wasn't going to come, mueller would say i've got a subpoena, you're coming. under those circumstances the only way trump is not going to speak with mueller's team is if he pleads the fifth.

that's politically impossible for him to do. he's in a difficult situation because he doesn't have that option. he'll be meeting with mueller if mueller wants to meet with him. >> he's running again for election. if you're running for election again, don't ever take the fifth. if you're never running again, it may be the smarter move. >> could be. there would be reasons trying to run out the clock. i think his advisers like roger stone are very worried about weather might do in that interview. part of it could be perjury. i also think part of it could be what you just said, that he didn't know when he admits certain facts that is what the crime is all about. so the most thing to prove in an obstruction case is intent because you have to prove corrupt intent. like you said, he kind of said. it's corrupt if you're trying to do it to protect yourself. >> you're great. thanks so much. betsy, robert, matt as always and ryan, thank you sir for joining youing us. how trump and his republican eyes have declared war against

intelligence and cranking up the fog machine to keep america confused as hell about this investigation the closer it gets to the oval office. every day is gets cloudier. that's the way they want it. now the justice department and democrats are fighting back. that's good. plus, how is the world feeling about trump and his america first agenda? there he is over in davos, switzerland in the alps and increasing on his own as the world moves ahead of trump and without him and without i'm sad to say america. trump's now you see it, now you don't act with immigration. he's gone from saying the d.r.e.a.m.ers have to go away to now he's open to a path of citizenship for them. whether he is he going to morph into a rel president? we'll be right back. finally, let me finish tonight with a reminder of a different american leadership. this is "hardball," where the action is. take off for mexico with expedia. ♪ one click gives you access to discounts on thousands of hotels, cars and things to do.

like the fairmont mayakoba for 59% off. finally, let me finish tonight ♪ everything you need to go. ♪ expedia. finally, let me finish tonight ♪ when you have something you love, you want to protect it. at legalzoom, our network of attorneys can help you every step of the way. with an estate plan including wills or a living trust that grows along with you and your family. legalzoom. where life meets legal. well, the national security archive has released a

collection ef donald rumsfeld's what he used to call his snow make memos, the short communications he sent while serving as secretary of defense under george w. well, in one of those memos written before the department of homeland security was established, he talks about how, this is his word, uncomfortable he is about the term homeland. rumsfeld tells his deputy defense secretary at the time the word homeland is a strange word. homeland defense sounds like german, more german than american and smacks of isolationism. third, what are we really talking about? i suppose population as opposed to homeland? let's visit about this. i have to say for once i agree with him totally. what was wrong with the good old fashioned certainly civil defense. "hardball" also makes an appearance in the memos. weeks after the invasion of afghanistan, rumsfeld messaged his spokesperson, last night on "hardball" with chris matthews a northern alliance spokesman said the united states has not given

the northern alliance what it promised in terms of apcs or armored personnel carriers rumsfeld adds "he was a clean cut young we knowie who automobile has never been to afghanistan. it was enormously unhelpful to the united states. we ought to let somebody know that he that fellow needs a muzzle." that's how he talked about the show in that war. we'll be right back. alright, i brought in high protein to help get us moving. ...and help you feel more strength and energy in just two weeks! i'll take that. -yeeeeeah! ensure high protein.

with 16 grams of protein and 4 grams of sugar. ensure. always be you. this is food made to sit down for. slow down for. put the phone away, and use a knife and fork for. and with panera catering, it's food worth sharing. panera. food as it should be.

of welcome back to "hardball." donald trump's republican allies subscribe to the playbook that the best defense is a good offense. on a nightly basis now, they've offered up a diet of conspiracy talk about the fbi and the justice department. here are just some from last night. let's watch. >> if i were the attorney general of the united states, i would be very concerned about what the fbi did here and i would send an independent law enforcement like the u.s. marshals to secure and recover this evidence. >> the walls are closing in on

those responsible for their massive corruption abuse of power at the top levels of government in we are now calling state sponsored sabotage. >> mueller is not only out for blood, he's out to save his own butt. he is the person who obviously should be investigated. jim comey should be investigated. all of these guys, strzok, mccabe were, are they getting a paycheck? they need to be taken out in cuffs. this is not our justice department. this is a bunch of arrogant condescending people who obviously think they know better than we do. >> the dangerous narrative taking hold in the fever swamps of the far right is that the fbi or a ca ball within it is working to take down the trump presidency. latest battle cry is release the memo. that's a reference to a four-page classified document put together by you know who obviously it, house intelligence chair devin nunes that claims the fbi abused its powers to obtain a warrant tosh target former trump campaign adviser carter page.

>> and i'm here to tell all of america tonight that i am shocked to read exactly what has taken place. >> the american people and the media must see what our government is doing in secret without america's knowledge. the memo is proof that government cannot be trusted. >> i haven't seen it, of course. it's been described by members of the house intelligence committee as career ending, kgb-like, lawless behavior. >> no wonder they don't want it out. >> democrats who obviously have seen this memo say it's misleading cherry picks actual facts. yesterday the justice department pushed back. the justice department. assistant u.s. attorney -- general steve boyd who obviously used to work as an aide to jeff sessions sent a letter to nunes writing we are currently unaware of any wrongdoing related to the fisa process. he also warned nunes releasing classified information to the public without consulting with the relevant members of the intelligence community would be

extraordinarily reckless. i'm joined by jim himes of connecticut, a member of the house intelligence committee. gentlemen, congressman, what is this thing? it seems like all the people in the fever swamp, the hard right crowd and some of these people were jeanine pirro once were normal people. now they're all singing this greek chorus of crazy how somehow everything about this investigation is awful, country, evil and not to be believed. it tells me learn bells are going off and what they're seeing is mueller doing his job and all those professionals in the special counsel's office getting very close to trump and all the dogs are barking now to try to distract us what's going and with this memo? >> it's astonishing. breathers like hannity and piro throw this stuff on television it doesn't surprise me. mark meadows, united states

senators like ron johnson who obviously should know better perpetuating this idea as senator johnson said there's corruption at the top of the fbi based on a memo that having read it, you you would hope whoever wrote that was a couple whiskeys into the bag and based on that memo, of course, being based on intelligence that none of these people have reviewed, as the astonishing. they've trade their integrate, senators and congressmen traded their integrity and historical legacy for a momentary sugar high of supporting a president who would not support them in any instance whatsoever. it's astonishing to watch. >> just to help people negotiate through this nonsense, if the president was involved in obstruction to protect himself in the russian probe, if he was involved in collusion with the russians, if he has a history of money laundering if any of those three rebig-time, that's a facts we have to get to the bottom of. what is the relevance of arguing

whether somebody at the fbi misused the fisa to digging into what carter page, one of the most fringe characters in this whole thing, how can they even in their own mind's eye say this problems the whole thing is unfair? how can they do that? it's a fringe element of nothing. your thoughts? >> understand what's happening here, chris. mueller may or may not prove obstruction. he may very well have more indictments. he may have more stuff. what is happening a coordinated campaign to cast doubt on the fbi, doj and robert mueller so if mueller does produce new indictments and criticisms of the president, the right wing will say he was compromised from the start. that's not true. none of this stuff is rooted in any evidence whatsoever. these are people making stuff up. >> i think they're setting up a predicate so if the congress has in its hands and the house judiciary committee whether it's a are led committee or one this

year that's run by republicans this year, a democrat this year, no matter how good the evidence against trump, at least as good against nixon, they won't do nothing. the other leg of the vast conspiracy today is a supposed effort by the fbi to hide damning texts between two employees, peter strzok and lisa page who were critical of president trump. both worked with mueller at one time. hundreds of those texts have been released but this week the fbi acknowledged they were missing messages sent between december of last year and -- december of '16 and may of '17. what does that add up to? here's congressman matt gaetz of florida. >> this will be illuminated by the memo. the notion that this particular five months is where the block hole is, i mean, that is one hell of a coincidence. it's precisely the time that someone would be hatching a conspiracy, meeting with their secret society, building out

their insurance policy. >> well, anyway, according to "washington post," the fbi failed to save text messages sent from thousands of cell phones in their system due to a technical glitch. it wasn't just those two individuals. further complicating the con spir say narrative, the justice department inspector general told lawmakers they have succeeded in using forensic tools to recover the messages. so there's nothing missing anymore. they keep looking for these, anything that's a glittering object they can say somehow this distracts from this investigation of the president. therefore we should not pay attention to this investigation. >> let me pan out and tell you what's really dangerous about this. fbi agents, dea, atf agents marshals are the deputies. the marshals lost a deputy in the line of duty this week. we asked them to go out and doo really, really hard things, missing kids, civil rights violations, public corruption. and for people to trust our

federal agents, right, they have to believe that the institutions are credible. when we start tearing those down from above, we're undermining their law enforcement mission. this is dangerous stuff. by the way, as you've pointed out, it's also wrong. the text messages aren't missing. there is no secret society. this stuff is it fiction. >> why would conservative politicians -- i don't know talking about hannity, actually people have gotten elected developed political careers as conservatives, they believe in the traditional institutions of government. that's what hold us together. they have to have an fbi to get bad guys. why would they tear down the fbi just to save the skip of this president? >> that's a terrific question. i'm probably the wrong guy to answer it. i believe in the institutions fervently. i've been part of it my entire life. i worked for bob mueller and jim comey. these are good and decent people. more important, the men and women who obviously work for them are good and decent people.

that's who obviously you're hurting. > republicans this week also went into a stir at the suggestion of a secret society, that's the phrase, within the fbi conspiring against president trump. the reference to a secret society comes from one of those texts between lisa page and peter strzok having some sort of affair. senator ron johnson on tuesday referenced that secret society and added another layer based on someone he referred to as an infor and the. watch him. >> what this is all about is further evidence of corruption, more than bias but corruption at the high left levels of the fbi. the secret skeet, we have and i formant talking about a group holding secret meetings off site. there's so much smoke and so