nick and bill, "mtp daily" started right now. i'm sorry we're late. >> that is okay. we'll dock your pay. if it is thursday, things are getting curiouser and curiouser. good evening. i'm chuck todd in washington. sometimes we wonder if we're alice in wonder land. welcome to "mtp daily." if there something more absurd than the shenanigans around the memo, it is the stuff you have to believe in order to take the

contents seriously. the white house said the president is likely going to green light the release of this memo tomorrow. what that means and what form, we don't know and we also don't know exactly what the memo said but we now have a pretty good idea of why the president and his allies want it released so badly. for them, this memo will only help support the evidence that they believe points to a vast conspiracy against the president. so let's go through that evidence. based on what we do know about this memo, and those trumpeting its release. if you want to go down this rabbit hole. if you want to take this memo seriously, there are plenty of kpu conspiracies you need to make to make this memo factual. you have to believe that russia colluded with the democrats to undermine the trump candidacy and that he implanted in the fusion gps steel dossier and

that gave the fbi an excuse to continue spying on the trump campaign and that got rod rosenstein involved. which of course his involvement meant to approve an application to continue to spy on a former member of the trump campaign. all of which approved by a fisa court judge. all of that was part of an effort to take down the president. if that is not a big enough conspiracy, there are a bunch of other conspiracies that you have to believe in order to prop the one that i just told you about. maybe you believe that the dnc and john podesta hacked themselves or all of the trump and intelligence, cia and fbi, was falsified, maybe you believe the fbi was always in the tank for hillary clinton. maybe you believe james comey ham handed handling of the e-mail investigation was a elaborate ruse to have his cover blown about how he was somehow secretly helping clinton as he was hurting her candidacy. and maybe you believe the

employee are on this. and so russia and the u.s. intelligence and the courts and.president's own appointees at the justice department, all of them part of this conspiracy to take down the president. folks, you may not take that literally, but a lot of people are taking everything i just said about this rabbit hole very seriously. let me bring in a couple colleagues, pete williams and kelly o'donnell at the white house. kelly, i want to start with you. i know the president just got back from west virginia from this re -- retreat and they alerted the pool that the president has cleared the memo but not sure what that means. who is releasing the memo? congress or the white house? >> reporter: well the latest indication we have from white house officials multiple sources is that the intention is for the white house to green light -- saying the president has no objection to it being released and sending it back to the house and emphasis from officials that

this is a house of representatives process. not a white house process. is that some early distancing if this doesn't go as planned? we've have dayed of noise surrounding this. you just laid out how whatever might be in that, whatever is learned, they have been able to get this sort of nagging undercurrent of questioning law enforcement and the conduct of those who were involved in the original fisa court when it was time for the campaign. that has really been hanging in the air. is that enough politically. so we don't yet. the other question that is curious is we've have senior white house officials told us redactions to the memo, changes at the request of the fbi are likely and then we are told there won't be any from senior officials who should be in a position to know. so the big question is, is the president listening to his own fbi director, is he listening to the intelligence committee chairman? but at least at this point it appears the president is ago on

this but it goes back to the house. >> it sounds like he's getting mixed advice in the west wing. it wouldn't be the first time. >> it feels that way. because we've been trying to make certain we didn't understand someone or making sure people were in a position to know the answer and double checking things and we had a situation where we were given information that redactions had been done and then told no, it is in the revision process. that is very muddy today. and that in and of itself over a period of hours is notable to me. >> are they nervous -- quickly, are they nervous they've overhyped this thing? >> well they've let it get oxygen for days. and i think that there is a risk of that. perhaps it will be a weekend release when people are thinking about a certain football game. maybe that would tamp things down. >> good luck with that. all right. kelly o'donnell. oh, boy, thanks very much. let me move over to pete. all right, pete. i know there is another media organization claiming

christopher wray the head of the fbi -- there is some sort of fear maybe in the white house that wray could resign over this. i know you've pushed back on that fact. but obviously the fbi is upset. do they have any recourse left to stop this memo? >> two points. i can't say what the fear is at the white house but i could say -- i'm told that there is no plan for christopher wray to step down over this. basically the fbi has made its point and i don't think they're going to say anything when the memo comes out. which seems likely it will come out. i think they feel that they've already said their thing. they put that statement out yesterday saying that the memo was incomplete and therefore misleading. they have grave concerns about revealing potentially sources and restricting future information flows from foreign governments, from intelligence sources. i think they're feeling is they've said their thing and when the memo comes out for them to then rebut it or say something in return, just lobs the tennis ball back over the

net and they're not interested in any further battles and i think they feel they'll be lots of picking apart of the memo by news organizations and that they really don't need to be in the fight. >> and let me ask you this other question. i feel one of the reasons why the fbi may be having a hard time getting traction for redactions is the government cries wolf a lot on classification. i heard it during the snowden releases, the manning releases. all of this oh, my god, you have no idea what this is going to cause and the public and even the elected officials going -- okay, you warned of doom and gloom and we didn't see it. why does this feel like the same type of wolf crime? >> there may be. but you have to remember there is also a fisa court process here and that -- and that insists on keeping these things confidential and classified. so the government doesn't have much of a choice here. fisa court by its nature is classified. but in the nature of the fisa

applications, foreign intelligence, you are dealing with intelligence from foreign governments, you're dealing with sources that you don't want to see dry up. and that is the other sensitivity here. i will say this, chuck. in terms of redactions, the rules that the house is following for the first time ever here say if the house wants to release it, it asked the president, do you have any objections, yes or no. there is no provision in the house rules for the white house to fiddle around with what the house is sent them. now this is the first time this has ever happened. everybody is ad-libbing here. i guess you can't blame the government for trying to try this here. but the other thing we hear is that if it is going to be released, the house members will try to release it through the congressional record, read it into the record so they get protection of the constitution speech or debate clause in case they are worried about what they are doing here. >> that is how mike gravell got the pentagon papers on the record. >> right. >> pete williams, kelly

o'donnell, thank you very much. joining me now is chuck rosenberg, former federal prosecutor and a former counselor to robert mueller and now an nbc news contributor. so you are a card carrying member of the deep state. >> seems that way. if by deep state you mean people who care deeply about our institutions. >> i try to have a sense of humor these days because it is very hard not to. first of all, walk me through -- what is it that the fbi is most concerned about here? they are sounding an alarm louder and louder, whether wray is threatening resignation or not, i get that. but the fact that that fear is out there, it is clear these alarm bells are loud. >> so there are a lot of sensitive sources and methods that go into every fisa application and we rely on lots of people, including foreign governments to help us in our cases. and if people don't believe that they could trust their information to our institutions, to the fbi and the cia, then we undermine their work. >> so the fear is that in this fisa application, that is --

that they are writing this memo which obviously they believe this was unlawfully targeted person or there wasn't enough evidence or the evidence was outside evidence, what sources and methods would be revealed here. how they are tapping his phone for instance. >> or how they think about the cases. >> or how -- who is connected to this person. >> right. but there is two problems. the immediate problems, it is this particular case and there is the larger problem, it is the entire process, it is the intelligence collection platforms. and so what you are doing, conceivably, chuck, i haven't seen the memo, is putting all of these things at risk and for what? it seems to be for a political imperative. >> one of the contentions by those that want to believe and when i went through the rabbit hole thing, one of the contentions is that the steel dossier and it alone got the fisa warrant. in the history of the fbi, would -- how often would the fbi rely on somebody else's

investigation work without any sort of reinvestigation and sim lay take that to a facea court. >> it seems unlikely. here is why i could say that. when i worked for bob mueller at the fbi as counselor while he was director, i reviewed every fisa warrant before he certified them. >> how many -- can you put a number on that. >> eight to ten to 12 a day. sometimes far less. and sometimes a into more. >> multiple in a day. >> multiple in a day and they are thick and did -- >> this is all in the post 9/11 world which meant we had a lot. >> we had a lot. and i can't compare to what we had today. but we had multiple aday and i could tell you there is an exacting process. lots of lawyers and agents look at these things before it came to me. director mueller would scertify and go to the attorney general of the united states. he would sign it and then -- and this is really important, chuck, it goes to a federal judge. so the notion that we're trying to slip something past the federal judge is crazy. >> is the renewal process easier

than the initial process. >> it is only easier in the sense that your facts have already been established but you still have to make a probable cause showing. the standard doesn't change. but a lot of the underlying work has been done. >> what is your cost-what is the level, that you'll get useful fgs or what is the threshold that you have to prove that you need this tap. >> well you have to show that the person is probably -- probable cause, an agent of a foreign power. >> that is number one. >> acting on behalf of that and that this tap, this information will yield foreign intelligence information of value to the government. so where did the probable cause standard come from, it comes from the constitution. fourth amendment, it says it right there. and it is the exact same standard in the fisa court as it is in federal district court for a criminal case. >> so take a hypothetical. say a guy like carter page who was investigated for potential ties to russia in i think 2013 and they cleared him of this.

all of a sudden his name pops up again and he's popping up. would this -- him popping up in the steel dossier combined with the 2013, would that be enough to say maybe we do need to keep an eye on this guy. >> it could be. but your question is really important because it assumes -- and i think properly -- there is a lot of stuff, not just a dos i -- dossier but a whole trail of stuff that going into the affidavit. i would corroborate you and ask other people. >> and is there any scenario you could think of where the steele dos ier or some piece of evidence at some private entity put together would be the sole way you would justify a facea warrant? >> ideally no. you would have other stuff. but let's say it is only the steele dos dall-- dossier.

so what. so if it is reliable and you disclose to the judge and court how you got it and why you believe it to be accurate, remember it is still just probable cause. we save standards like proof beyond a reasonable doubt for conviction at trial. probable cause means probably. and so while i don't believe that it is predicated solely on the steele dossier, even if it was, which is unlikely, i'm not sure that would be improper. >> you have worked with christopher wray in the past. and i know -- i think you are like pete williams, there is only so many times you threaten resignation and when you do it, the fbi directors could come up on this often. what do you think chris wray's line is? >> his line with respect to -- >> to staying or going. >> you can't threaten resignation every time someone does something dumb. you would threatening

resignation several times a day. chris is a a good man and i know him and trust him and i think it is in the interest of the fbi and the country to stay where he is. so the notion that he would resign over this seems farfetched. >> did you not buy the reporting that said he threatened resignation over being forced to fire andrew mccabe. >> i don't buy that either. you can't threaten to resign every time something doesn't go your way or someone pushes back on your policies. >> and if you threaten once and you lose and then -- can't do it again. >> you can -- >> you can't use that -- only one time you could successfully use it. >> you could argue and push and you could plead, but don't threaten to resign unless you mean it. so i don't see it as likely that he would have threatened to resign. he has bigger battles to fight. >> and there is so much to talk about but i hope we've given clarity to an opaque process. thank you, sir. so what will the political fallout br foe this and if and when the nunes memo is made

public, the panel is next. we'll be back in a minute. for the faint of heart. luckily, office depot® officemax® is here to take care of you. ♪ taking care of business with print services done right. on time. guaranteed! expert tech support. and this week all dell pcs are up to twenty five percent off! save even more when you purchase a dell monitor. and make sure you protect your investment. office depot® officemax. officedepot.com ♪ taking care of business

welcome back. bipartisanship compromised, the white house insisted, that is what the president was pushing at the state of the union. >> so let's come together, set politics aside, and finally get the job done. >> but he also tied immigration to crime and violence and his rhetoric seemed to make it more difficult for democrats to get on board with any kind of immigration deal. well today speaking at the republican lawmaker retreat, the president was all for bipartisan compromise. unless he doesn't have to. >> we have to get help from the other side. or we have to elect many more republicans. that is another way of doing it. really, that is another way of doing it. >> see, forget about wanting to set aside politics to find a

solution. forget the bipartisanship, jut get a whole bunch more trump republicans elected this november and then it won't matter. >> we win more, we don't have to compromise so much. with the tax bill, we got what we wanted, because we had essentially a unanimous vote. but we have to go and we have to get it done and get it done properly and we're going to have to compromise unless we elect more republicans and in which case we could have it just the way everybody in this room wants it. >> so if you are wondering why many of us didn't put more weight behind the president's words at the state of the union, well there you go. more "mtp daily" after this. and it's exactly what you're looking for.

it's ok that everyone ignores it's fine. drive. because i get a safe driving bonus check every six months i'm accident free. and i don't share it with mom! right, mom? righttt. safe driving bonus checks. only from allstate. switching to allstate is worth it. welcome back. let's bring in tonight's panel. george will is an nbc news con tribute or and alicia wales and howard fine man is a

contributor. yamish, let me start with -- what the white house -- what do you think is happening in side of the white house because it does seem as if there is mixed messages coming out today alone on this memo. we know what the president wants. but it does sound like he's getting pushback. >> i've been talking to white house aides. they've been telling me that they know the president is going to release this memo. that they feel like this is happening pretty shortly. most people in washington feel like it would happen tomorrow. but people are worried about whether or not the president could justify why he is doing this and not just because he thinks this is going to help himself. they understand that the narrative will be that. but they're -- right now readying up why this is important and why the democratic memo isn't out yet. and also how they're going couch the fact that they are going against what the fbi said was something that is inaccurate and that they are gravely concerned about. so they are prepping for this narrative that they have to come up in order to counter it. >> george, let's -- let's set aside the facts.

the pipe -- they've already blown it with the hype because now it is seen as a donald trump life vest. >> well there are very few facts to put aside at this point. which is why there is so much speculation about motives of why they are doing this , it seems odd that the support would be to support classification. my estimation is 80% of the classified documents in this town should not be. but they are classified to protect the power or the reputation of the convenience of those who classify them. we also hear that there is something faintly disreputable and nomminous and a threat to the rule of law is congress exercises over sight over the fbi and they should be doing that. so i think everyone ought to calm down. we'll see what is in this now and it might turn out to be not very much. >> that is what -- i was just

going to say, suddenly everybody -- paul ryan saying this is nothing to do with mueller probe. and he's quietly been saying this is just a handful of house members who are just -- who are overhyping. >> well, chuck, i've got a lot of good sources around the president who talk to him and who have talked to him about this. here is my sense of it. the big picture. they've decided inside of the white house, i think donald trump has decided that he can't get away with firing bob mueller. first of all, it is technically difficult the way the rule was set up to put mueller in. he had to go too far down in the structure of the department of justice to do it and secondly as one of my sources said, it could give bob mueller the high ground even higher than he's got now. so what they're doing in the memo they believe is part of it, is to try to attack the credibility of the entire -- to pick at bob mueller and the people around him and the support ecology around bob

mueller to be smirch it because they couldn't fire mueller themself. that is what they are doing here. how it memo is related to the conduct of bob mueller in his investigation is obviously the question. and i think this memo isn't going to show much about that. >> but i think in the white house, that is why i said they are crafting a narrative. because they're going to have to make the argument that this somehow, even if it is subtle, make the argument that this undermines the legitimacy of bob mueller even if though don't say his name because they want to have russia and all of this sounds as if it is completely inconsequential when people understand there is something that russia did and the intelligence agencies said russia did something inappropriate in our elections and continue to do so in the midterms. >> here is what i'm struggling with, george. i hear you on the over sight and you've been fighting about article one for -- i feel like for quite sometime these days. please, will congress read their

constitution. but nunes didn't go about in in a watch dog kind of way. he went through in a back door way that seemed to undermine the potential nobility of what they are doing. >> it was to say no more ungainly. but there has been a lot of ungainliness going around. until yesterday afternoon i thought the fbi's problem was there might be facts injurious to the national security and revealed by releasing the memo. yesterday afternoon they said they were worried about the omission of some facts which is to say they were worried about the argument and the conclusions an the opinions supported by the memo, which frankly is none of the fbi's business. that is an argument you could have in public. >> that is what a committee hearing is for. that is what -- >> correct. yes. >> back and forth. so now where does this go, though? >> the next thing is to see what is in the memo. and i think the partisan on trump side, the people talking

to donald trump, the people playing to his desire to undercut mueller have convinced themselves that somehow this memo and what is in if it will raise a larger question about the legitimacy of the entire mueller investigation. that is what they hope. there is a certain amount of circular thinking and inside of the oval wishful thinking going on here. >> by the way, it seems at least short-term, isn't trump's strategy working? >> it depends on who you ask. >> is it a political strategy of muddying the waters on mueller, is it working for him? >> i think it is working in some ways because the release of the memo is such a vague thing but it is also a caught fire. everybody is talking about it. if you look on twitter or conversations, every day people are wondering what is in this memo and why is it important and they try to connect it to mueller but it is not connected to mueller. but everyone kind of thinks it is. so i think in some ways it is working. but me as a reporter, the thing i'm interested in going forward

is how our intelligence agencies will work with this white house and what the fbi's response will be and are we seeing leaks of what was left out of the memo because as a reporter it seems like that will happen and then how are all of these committees still looking to get information from the agencies, why would the agencies share anything else with them. >> this is my great fear, george. is that -- with people fighting this now, they're going to be complaining they didn't go through the proper channels and then go through improper channels to fight about the improper channel. >> correct. >> and then we do then have -- i don't know -- you throw up your hands and go, okay, are you going by the book or not going by the book. >> well don't we all want to know what the fbi was doing during the climactic moments of the 2016 campaign. that is kind of interesting. i'm not against the fbi. one of my three sons is an fbi agent. i have a big picture of him getting his credentials from one robert mueller as director of the fbi. but something went wrong there.

we had a -- on morning joe this morning he had senator rand paul of kentucky who said about the -- the tweets, the anti--trump tweets between two fbi agents. the senator made a good point. suppose those are two judges tweeting like that back and forth and it became public. wouldn't that be kind of interesting. i think so. >> but they weren't. >> no. they were fbi agents who are presumably politically neutral arms of -- >> i would like to think the white house and the trump supporters were interested in the historical record and just making sure we understand the 2016 campaign. i don't think that is what they're about here. >> look, i'm going to get into this fbi in a minute. but it seems the original sin is when a single public servant believes they alone can sort of fix a perception problem. fbi was worried about politics, jls thought -- james comey thought he could fix it himself and everything has been a problem ever since that july decision. >> and when people say in

washington they have a perception problem, they don't have a perception problem, they have a real problem. >> it is fantastic. all right. stick around. i need to sneak in a quick break. this memo drama is not politics as normal but how far away from normal have we gone. director leon panetta will pit it in his perspective next. there's a vacation at the end of every week with hilton. whatever type of weekender you are, don't let another weekend pass you by. get the lowest price when you book at hilton.com

this new day. looks nothing like yesterday. roads nowhere to be found. and it's exactly what you're looking for. welcome back. we have a big show coming up

this sunday on "meet the press." first we have np exclusive interview with president trump's first white house chief of staff, reince priebus and then happy to share the news that former cia director john brennan is now an intelligence analyst for nbc news. my second guest this sunday on "meet the press." a packed show. we'll be back in a moment. i thought i was managing my moderate to severe crohn's disease. then i realized something was missing... me. my symptoms were keeping me from being there. so, i talked to my doctor and learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb.

tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. looking for a hotel that fits... whoooo. ...your budget? tripadvisor now searches over... ...200 sites to find you the... ...hotel you want at the lowest price. grazi, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor.

you or joints. something for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember.

welcome back. we've said it before and will say it again. what is involving the pending release of the nunes is not normal politics in washington or in governance as we read this morning. we've never seen this. a public fight between the house republicans and the fbi and led by an republican and appointed by a republican president and it is a fight that the republican white house seems to be encouraging. joining us now someone who knows what is normal in these circumstances. former cia director and white house chief of staff congressman nixon aide, leon panetta. i throw that in there because

we're talking about flouting norms and rule of law. you've seen it all, sir. >> yes, i have, chuck. but i haven't seen this one. this is new. >> okay. so, look, fights between congress and the head of -- head of intelligence agencies, being domestic or with the cia, not new, they could be ugly, they could be messy and they should be, right. it is sort of part of it. but what -- put this one in perspective in your mind. and play devil's advocate a little bit. what should the role be of the house intelligence committee on this? >> well, the role of the intelligence committee coming out of watergate was to establish a committee of republicans and democrats that would responsibly oversee a highly classified information produced by the intelligence

agency. so that the people had their representatives being a check on the kind of classified information that was being provided. that is the way it was designed to work. frankly that is the way it worked when i was director of the cia. i had both republicans and democrats cooperating to work with me with regards to classified information. what is happening now is a total breakdown in the procedure because when they move ahead, and as they apparently are going to do here, to release some classified information, it truly does jeopardize the sources and methods that are used to gather intelligence and that is a dangerous step. >> well let me ask you this. there was a lot of warnings, you were among those, that were really concerned about whether it was the snowden leaks , the manning leaks, those two most recent because you were in and

around government in those times and we heard these warnings. dire -- people might die. the public and even elected officials are looking back on those warnings and think, boy, they seemed to be -- have been over sold. why shouldn't be believe this isn't being oversold as well. >> look, i think -- when it comes to the impact of releasing this kind of classified information, that it is important to listen to people who are right in the middle of it. the fbi, cia, who work with sources every day to gather intelligence. and it doesn't mean that questions shouldn't be raised. it doesn't mean that the committee or the intelligence committee ought not to oversee that operation, they should. but they're the representatives of the american people. but you cannot provide intelligence to the president of the united states unless you

have sources for that intelligence. and that means protecting them and protecting the information that they provide. and if you don't do that, you're not going to have sources for very long. >> you know, it sort of strikes me, your service in government as you rose through the ranks, you saw more classified information. from congress to chief of staff to defense to cia. i guess it would be cia to defense so you stepped back in some of the classified info you got to see. in your experience do we overclassify? >> oh, i don't think there is any question that there is a lot of over classification that goes on. pat moynahan made that point and a greed wi-- i agreed with him. i think there is a tendency to overclassify information and at the same time when it does involve sources that are in very sensitive positions, and you need that if you are going to

find out what is going on in russia, what is going on in north korea, what is going on in china, and you got to be able to protect those people in the jobs that they're in. and if you release information that gives those sources away, then that can create some really important problems for our intelligence gathering process. >> well but if you are a member of congress and you believe that the classification is -- argument is an excuse for a little cya, what should you do? >> i think if -- if your concerned about whether or not something should have been classified, there are ways to challenge that. you could challenge it in the committee, challenge it through the executive branch, the fact is there are ways to try to raise questions about whether something should be classified or not. but the wrong way to do is to simply throw it out there without checking with those that are involved to show just how sensitive that information can

be. >> one of the concerns we were talking about earlier, with the panel, is this idea that the intel community is mad at how congress is behaving, and it will be tempting to essentially -- if you are not following protocol, well then neither are we. and look, we and the press may be the beneficiaries of a lot of leaks, is that what we are about to see? this is becoming the wild west of leaking. >> well, there is no question, chuck, that it is breaking down the process as it was designed to work so that all sides would have say in the process. we are a democracy. we have check and balances. but you have to establish ways for those checks and balances to work. that is why we have an intelligence committee. that is why we have an fbi. that is why we have a cia.

that is why we have a president of the united states to try to protect those processes and procedures that have been put in place. when that starts to break down, when the president says i'm going to release it no matter what the fbi says, or what the justice department says, then it creates what i consider a constitutional crisis. >> and is it inevitable that people will start with holding -- cia directors or i don't want to put it on any cia director, but directs and fbi directors will say -- the running joke is careful what you tell congress because then everybody will know. the intel committee used to be immune. do you think that is gone? >> look, these are -- these are human beings. if they -- if they see that the committee is being careless in the way they handle classified information, they are going to hesitate to provide that information to the committee. i think you can bet on that. >> and that is a vicious cycle

which will only raise more suspicion by that. >> that is right. >> leon panetta, thanks for playing statesman for me today. much appreciated. if i go through your resume i'll run out of time. >> don't do that. ahead, the investigation into hillary clinton's e-mail. your own theory. we all agree on the facts. but your conspiracy is about time. we'll be back in a minute. ( ♪ ) ♪ one is the only number ♪ that you'll ever need ♪ staying ahead isn't about waiting for a chance. it's about the one bold choice you make, that moves you forward. ( ♪ ) the one and only cadillac escalade. come in now for this exceptional offer on the cadillac escalade. get this low-mileage lease on this 2018 cadillac escalade from around $879 per month. visit your local cadillac dealer.

but some of us make somethinge make sommuch more. dinner. from around $879 per month. mom would be proud. with blue apron, any night is a chance to see what cooking can do. fast like stop staring atcaps help youthe clock fast,st, like stop worrying about your boss fast, like wow, you're already asleep fast. when life keeps you up... zzzquil helps you fall asleep in as little as 20 minutes.

welcome back. tonight i'm obsessed with coincidence in the age of conspiracy. so the "wall street journal" reported that top fbi officials like and rue mccabe were aware for about a month that lots of hillary clinton e-mails were on anthony wiener's computer before they alerted congress. a month later james comey did tell congress and the public learned about the new e-mails. so what does this all mean? rigged, say some democrats who argue that anti-clinton fbi agents sat on the e-mails to throw the election to donald trump. rigged say some republicans who argue that pro-clinton fbi agents sat on the e-mails to protect clinton before the election. nonsense said michael steinbach, saying the delay was, well, bureaucratic or good old-fashioned leg work. that would include things like getting a warrant to search his laptop and figuring out how to

review 600,000 e-mails but there were fewer and sending them to the ncia and it would have taken month. did it take a long time. four weeks. did hillary clinton get hurt. are they suspicion? you beta. but it was a result of due diligence or someone else might say a lot of bureaucracy or whatever. but the bottom line is on these things, usually the simplest explanations tush o explanations turn out to be the best ones. we'll be right back. up to twenty five percent off! save even more when you purchase a dell monitor. and make sure you protect your investment. office depot® officemax. officedepot.com

i knew at that exact moment, whatever it takes, wherever i have to go...i'm beating this. my main focus was to find a team of doctors that work together. when a patient comes to ctca, they're meeting a team of physicians that specialize in the management of cancer. breast cancer treatment is continuing to evolve. and i would say that ctca is definitely on the cusp of those changes. patients can be overwhelmed ... we really focus on taking the time with each individual patient so they can choose the treatment appropriate for them. the care that ctca brings is the kind of care i've wanted for my patients. being able to spend time with them, have a whole team to look after them is fantastic.

i empower women with choices. it's not just picking a surgeon. it's picking the care team, and feeling secure where you are. surround yourself with the team of breast cancer experts at cancer treatment centers of america. visit cancercenter.com/breast this new day. looks nothing like yesterday. roads nowhere to be found. and it's exactly what you're looking for. welcome back. time for "the lid." i was just joking, i want to do a sort of normal politics. >> what a relief. >> good old-fashioned republicans and democrats have a back and forth. so mike pence has had -- went after joe manchin in a bunch of

tweets. pence said he voted no to give working families more of your hard earning money and joe voted no tax cuts and no on the policies that west virginia needs and joecuts. and then there's this video that's been making the rounds, manchin's response is the vp's comments suck. then republicans have been circulating this video of joe manchin at the i-uniyu state of union. take a quick look. as you see there, manchin, thinking, i'll clap, then he's thinking, i'm going to stand, then he realizes none of the other democrats are standing. look, george, you always see politicians do this. it's funny. i was reminded of jim high tower, the long-term sort of populist of texas who said

there's only two things you find in the middle of the road, yellow lines and dead armadillos. is joe manchin going to join them? >> he won the state by 42%. unanimous, in other words. what pence did by attacking him the way he did indicates that doug jones won, they're now down to one, the red state, trump state democrats do not seem to be in trouble, highcamp and the rest. it's a full-court press and they have to find some democratic seat to flip. >> and it's interesting, manchin, you know howard? you feel like manchin wants to take the bait. you remember sure deodorant never let them see you sweat. he's letting them see him sweat. >> he has rabbit ears and he's in the dugout all the time.

donald trump won west virginia by 42 points. i don't care how easy manchin has had it in the past, this is going to be tough. he is the kind of west virginia guy who thinks personal relations and sort of cousinly behavior is going to save him. >> if he wins, will that be the answer? >> that type of politics, i wish it were still possible in america, things are so partisan and it ideological, . >> i thought it was interesting that his initial response was i'm so surprised that mike pence is going after me. why would you ever be surprised in this is going to be one of the biggest referendums, donald trump is on the ballot in west

virginia. it's funny to see him on twitter start to get a little bit more feistier, because that's what he thinks he has to do to meet donald trump and mike pence where they are. >> there's one that democrat that's facing him that's in jail right now, a former coal miner. >> what donald trump said in the state of the union and i love beautiful, clean coal. that's not music to joe manchin's ears. >> right. look in the senate math, george, you just brought it up. they don't have a good challenge to highcamp. after west virginia, comes north dakota. indiana is going to be a fight. manchin on paper should be a dead duck. >> when trump went to north dakota before he left, mitch mcconnell said please don't say something that can be put in their ads. so he says come on up, senator

high-camp. he makes it up as he goes along. >> and that's their issue. but those senate seats, you can't send donald trump to suburban atlanta right now, you can't send him to suburban dallas, you can send him to west virginia or north dakota. >> if you send him to west virginia is he going to have another one of those nfl random pick a fight about something people forgot to think about and he has a gaff and he's back to cultural wars. he loves those crowds, he gets hyped off those crowds and he goes off script and whatever they write, he goes off script and he goes crazy. >> i talked to a senate republican, we know what's going for us is bad for house republicans. >> and you'll save yourself. there's only so many seats in the lifeboat. >> so they'll say, forget it. send the president, we know what

he says may get put in an ad in suburban denver. >> the senate is the ultimate backstop for donald trump should there be impeachment. >> you got a point there. thank you, for some normal old time topolitics. the best place to get away in the absolute worst-case scenario. mom let me know she'd always be there for me. and she was.

it's really hard to even think about her not being around... that's why i'm so grateful she got screened... and they caught the blockage in time. if you're over 50... call life line screening now and schedule an appointment near you. it could be the best thing for you and your family. for just $149, you'll receive five screenings- including ones that use ultrasound technology to look inside your arteries... for plaque that builds up as you age- and increases your risk for stroke and heart disease. after all, 4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom is a stroke. these painless screenings go beyond a normal annual checkup, and this package will save you over 50%. call today and start with a free health assessment to understand your best plan of action. i still need mom. i want her with me as long as possible.

life line screening. the power of prevention. call now to learn more. there'swhatever type ofhe end of eweekender you are,ton. don't let another weekend pass you by. get the lowest price when you book at hilton.com

well, in case you missed it, republicans are holding a retreat in the hills of west virginia this week, specifically white sulfur springs, west virginia. the host, the green brier resort. the u.s. government built a bunker in the event of a disaster, and there's horse back riding. there's a massive under ground chamber designed to house congress in the event of a catastrophe. it's got everything that a discerning congressman would love, row style bunk beds and ready reserve foods, dehydrated orange crystals. this place was top secret from the time it was built in the 1950s and '60s. it was declassified after it was exposed in a newspaper article

in the '90s. now you can go on a tour of the secret greenbrier be under. if you like your vacations a little less on the bun keker si there is horse back riding. donald trump saying he will release that secret gop memo to discredit his investigation. but more information about two other people that bob mueller has probed in this investigation. the former campaign aide rick gates, now telling a court they are completely withdrawing as his attorneys. the move effective immediately and the reasons not fully explained in public, that is under seal. also, bob mueller telling a judge, get this, he's