we have got a big show tonight. former u.s. attorney general eric holder is our guest this hour. he is a hard man to get on television. i am very much looking forward to talking with him. our live interview with attorney general eric holder is coming up in just a couple of minutes. super excited about that. and you by now have heard there is another senior white house official who has resigned suddenly, and under troubling circumstances. this time it's the white house staff secretary, a man named rob porter. he's out now or at least he's on his way out now. he has resigned. this is a person who has serve as right-hand man to chief of staff john kelly. he spends hours a day with the president, sets the president's daily schedule. he kproels the flow of paper -- controls the flow of paper across the president's desk. so to a certain extent he controls the president's access

to information. we learned today rob porter has been doing that job all without being approved for a security clearance. which is itself probably a bit of a scandal for a person who is seeing everything that crosses the president's desk. the reason why he couldn't get approved for a security clearance reportedly has to do with allegations of domestic violence from each of his two previous wives. these are allegations he denies but these are also allegations the white house was aware of reportedly as early as last fall. that's when they reportedly learned he was rejected for his security clearance. and the fbi had spoken to both of his ex-wives who both reportedly described to the fbi of his alleged abuse.

so that story, that surprise resignation is a big deal story. we're going to have more on that ahead tonight including some troubling context in terms of what this follows from other members of senior white house staff. today has also been an unusual day on capitol hill. this is the famous footage of mr. smith goes to washington, which is how anybody who watches turner classic movies thinks about the fact one thing senators can do is they can filibuster in the senate to block legislation. they can talk and talk and talk until they can't talk no moir. and that is one peculiar tactic we reserve for united states senators. today in washington the proverbial mr. smith was not a senator and not a mr. today house democratic leader nancy pelosi set an all-time congressional record for the longest amount of time that anybody has ever held the floor in the u.s. house of representatives. the longest speech anybody has ever given on the floor. now, this was not technically a filibuster because only senators

can technically do that. effectively, though, it really was the same thing. nancy pelosi took the floor at 10:00 a.m. for what was supposed to be a one-minute speech. leaders of both parties are usually given a little leeway in terms of how you count one minute. but in nancy pelosi's case, she just refused to yield back her time for an hour, and then two hours, and then three hours, and then four hours and five hours and six hours before she blew through the record. now, what this is about is that tomorrow night, thursday night the government's set to run out of money again and to shutdown again if there isn't yet another short-term deal agreed upon to keep the government funded. it looks like another shutdown will probably be averted for now, they probably will come up with a way to fund the government for now. but for dreamers, before trump

started threatening to deport them anyway, they still not have been taken care of. they are still in the middle of this mess involving their legal status that the trump administration has created. now, the last time we had a shutdown, which was only two weeks ago on the one-year anniversary of trump taking power, the last time we had a shutdown one of the things senate democrats did get in that fight was a promise from the republicans in the senate that there would at least be a vote on a deal to fix this mess that the dreamers are in. that was one concrete outcome that came out of that shutdown fight in the senate side. the democrats got mitch mcconnell and the republicans to agree, okay, we will at least hold a vote on daca, on the dreamers. that's only in the senate, though. in the house republican speaker paul ryan has made no such promise. ask, you know, if they did vote on it, a bunch of republicans would probably vote for it and all the democrats would vote for it, so paul ryan definitely

doesn't want to do anything like that. in the house, though, it's not clear what leverage the democrats have to get paul ryan to change his mind on this. and so today it apparently was time for a new tactic. this has never been done before. a member of the house holding the floor. in this case she used her eight plus hours on the house floor to tell story after story, personal stories of immigrants brought here as kids who have known any -- who have never known any other country besides this one and nevertheless facing deportation to countries they have never known. she held the floor without a break, without being interrupted, without sitting down for eight hours and seven minutes. she passed the record all the way back at 3:20 this afternoon. but then she kept going for hours longer. leader pelosi's office confirmed in response to questions from reporters that, yes, she did do the whole thing in high heels, 4-inch heels to be precise. 4-inch heels which i measured on

my own shoe. can you see that? use a ruler so you can see. 4-inch heels. i made myself some heels. so that's a lot. i don't know if i could do that for eight minutes let alone eight hours, but nancy pelosi first female speaker of had -- of the house, long time leader of house democrats, calling out those shouts from the peanut gallery that she is too old to hold that position, at age 77, she broke an endurance record no young whippersnapper has ever taken a shot at even while wearing loafers. now, what this means in political terms i'm not sure we know yet. there was no advance notice that nancy pelosi was going to do this today. she just sort of sprung it on everybody. it may have been key to her success, i don't know.

but the surprise factor also meant for much of the day there really wasn't any coordinated pr effort around what she was doing. democrats didn't appear to be spending the day trying to promote the fact this was happening. a lot of the media was late to figure out this was going on. but, you know, this is novel, never done before, break through the noise tactic to try to up the pressure on paul ryan to finally allow a vote on the dreamers after all his happy talk on the subject and never actually taking any action, this was a real concerted effort to up the pressure on him about that. this does reflect democrat's frustration that this problem isn't getting fixed for 800,000 young people after all this time. and yes, at its heart it's political. democrats don't have the power to get this done on their own or it would be done. if they can't make it happen, they at least want latino voters and immigrants and people who support immigration and the 87% of americans who say this ought to get fixed, they want all of those american voters to know

even if democrats do not have the power right now to fix this problem alone, they want to fix it and they will at least pull out all the stops trying to get it done. and yes, that's politics. that's the pr part of this, the demonstration effect, part of this. but, yeah that's what politics is supposed to be like. you make a principle stand for a policy that you want and you fight like heck to get it done. and whether or not you get it done, you persuade people to vote for you because they like what you are fighting for and how hard you are fighting for it and they want to help you get it done. that's politics at its best. i think some other important context for what happened up there today is that democrats right now, specifically democrats today are on a bit of a high in terms of what they think their chances are of getting back in power, of winning the house, winning control in some of the states. and that high is because of some elections that happened last night, elections that swung in

democrats direction by surprisingly gigantic margins. margins big enough, i think the democrats themselves didn't quite know what to make of it when the results came in. now, we closed out the very last seconds of show last night watching these results start to come in. these were four impossible seats for democrats to win that were all up last night. four special elections for four legs late your seats in missouri. this isn't like that lower left-hand corner, that isn't trump winning with 63% of the vote, that trump's winning in that district by a 63% margin. right, these are seats so red that for, you know, obvious reasons democrats didn't bother trying to run someone in any of these districts in the last election. they didn't even try. but since trump got elected, since the 2016 election, something has been going on that's making democrats give

places like that a second look. making democrats take a second look at places where it looked insane to even try just a couple of years ago. last year 2017, obviously not a national election year, but there were still elections all the time, mostly special elections where a seat becomes vacant for some reason and they have to hold a special election to fill it. special elections tend to be low turn out events. as a general matter of american political science, we know the lower the turn out, the better republicans' chances are. so as a general rule special elections tend to go poorly for democrats because they're low turn out events and it benefits republicans. but that's not the way it worked out last year, though. last year there were 70 special contested special elections all over the country. looking at least year as a whole, there were four instances all year when a republican flipped a

seat from blue to red. there were 34 times including with a u.s. senate race when democrats flipped a seat red to blue. and even when democrats didn't win, special elections shifted blue last year on average by a ton. on average democrats running last year in races all over the country, they did ten points better than clinton did in the presidential race in 2016. that's average nation wide-. so that includes very red states and very blue states and places that are purple, too. you put it all together, on average, it's a ten-point shift on average for the democrats. and remember hillary clinton did actually win the popular vote in 2016. and that was 2017. so so far this year in 2018, which is still a newborn baby as far as years go, so far this year there have already been nine contested special

elections. including the four last night in missouri. the swing toward the democrats this year so far was 23 points. well, now after democrats turned in these results last night in missouri on those red, red states in missouri, now the national average swing for the democrats is even bigger. special elections this year, it's an average swing of 27 last night the swing toward democrats was so big in those four missouri races, it actually flipped a seat. last night the swing towards democrats was so big in these four missouri races, it actually flipped one of those super safe republican seats. in a district where trump won 28 points, they had a 38 point swing towards democrats. and that was enough to flip that seat, to install a new democratic member of the legislator in missouri. mathematically that looked impossible before missouri democrats did it last night. now, democrats look at trends like that. they look at numbers like that

and they say, wow, no seat is safe for a republican anywhere. not if there's a 30 point swing in democrats direction even in red states. right, that gets democrats' blood really pumping. now, here's the question. does that really mean democrats are doing so well this year they're going to win the house, maybe even the senate? hugely important question. among other things that would mean passing legislation that matters to democrats rather than coming up with new and creative ways to plead with republicans to please allow votes on those things. of course, if democrats wore the -- held the house and or the senate, that would make all the difference in the world when it comes to the trump administration and the protections of the investigations at the special counsel office's and all that stuff. the former president of the united states, barack obama and the man who served for six years as his attorney general, eric holder have mounted a specific effort to target democratic money and democratic energy in 2018. and it's interesting given this

context, they're looking at this environment and they're deciding on a strategy that does not count on a big blue wave, making no seat safe anywhere for republicans. they're not counting on some big democratic shift nation wide being enough to for democrats to get done what they need to do. today the national democratic redistricting committee, which is being convened by president obama and former attorney general eric holder, today they put out a target list of the 12 states they are targeting for democratic gains this year. and they're being even more specific than that. in north carolina, for example, their targeting the state senate and the state house. in wisconsin they are targeting the state senate and the governor's race. in ohio they are targeting the state auditor's race and the secretary of state and yes the legislature and the governor's race. but they are also targeting a ballot measure to ungerrymander

that state to redraw districts in ohio so that ohio no longer basically gives republicans an insurmountable headstart in winning congressional seats. democrats really have been feeling giddy about their prospects in this year's elections. and their record in special elections over the last 15 months tells you a lot about why. president obama and eric holder are looking at that same set of facts and pursuing a different kind of plan. a plan that is not giddy and does not depend on giddiness. it is really specific, and it's for a really specific reason. joining us now is former attorney general, now the chairman of the national democratic redistricting committee, eric holder. thanks for being with us tonight. >> good to see you, rachel. >> so let me ask if my setup does you justice in terms of the way you're seeing this. i look at the plan that you are working on at the national redistricting committee, and see that as something that seems very

specific. it seems you've got a goal that doesn't depend on there being a big blue wave. >> we certainly want to have substantial numbers of voters participating in the process. we think that always benefit democrats, but i think there is a structural problem caused by the gerrymandering that was done after the census in 2011 that has led what has been called a durable majority of seats that are just uncontested for republicans in the house at about 15 to 16 members, the house of representatives. and in the state legislatures you see that problem manifest in a whole variety of way. so there are structural things we have to get through. that's what the national democratic redistricting committee is all about. getting to a place where we have elections that are more fair, so that people when they go to the polls and express their views, actually end up having a chance to elect a person who will reflect their policy choices. >> so how long a horizon is this? obviously the census year is

2020. 2021 is when legislatures would presumably start doing legislature redistricting overhauls based on new census data. what kind of time horizon are you looking at for this project? >> we are looking to impact elections in 2018. we worked in 2017 in virginia and had a fair amount of success. although we learned a lesson in virginia as well. we had in essence what was a wave, a wave for democrats in virginia, but we were unable to take the state assembly. even though there was a ten-point deferential with republicans and democrats in terms of the votes. unable to overtake the republicans in the state of -- state assembly of virginia, and that i think is a function of the way the lines were drawn. in 2018 we are going to be looking at ten states and see where are the places we can make a difference and support candidates that will have an impact on the census in 2020.

and then also with regard to redistricting that will occur in 2021. the people we elect in 2018 to four-year terms will be the very people who will draw the lines in 2021. >> and in terms of making a difference in those races are we really going to see you and president obama out there trumping for really local offices, like statehouse seats where there might be only a couple of thousand votes cast in total? these are really local elections. >> yeah, democrats have got to go into the states. i will be in wisconsin in april, probably the latter part of march. there is a wisconsin supreme court seat that is up, and i will be campaigning there. the president will be campaigning as well. he will be talking to us about the kinds of places where we think his influence can have an impact. and i would expect you'll see him doing things you might not expect of a former president in terms of the level, the level at which he will become involved. and the same thing for me. >> do democrats get what you're trying to do?

i was trying to sort of contrast, i think, the general democratic feeling or at least democratic observers feeling about what's going on right now with the specificity of what you are trying to achieve here and why. do people get it? do you have the support you thought you would? i saw in "the times" you raised a $16 million out of $30 million. target. i wondered if that was ahead of where you want to be or behind or ahead of where you want to be? >> we're ahead in term of funding. the $30 million is a two year cycle. we're one year into that cycle, and so we are a little above where we ought to be. and i think democrats do get it. i think the consciousness has been raised about gerrymandering. if you look at the state of wisconsin where in 2012 democrats won over 50% of the vote and you look at the congressional delegation democrats only have one third of the seats. if you look at the state

legislature, democrats only have one third of the seats. and people are seeing there are problems with that, that the system is in fact rigged, that people's votes in some ways done -- don't matter. and people are upset about that. they want to come up with ways in which they can rectify that situation. and i'm not being hyperbolic when i say this, but people want to save our democracy. i think that's really what is at stake. >> mr. attorney, while i have you here, i would be remiss if i did not ask you something of what's going on right now between the fbi and justice department and white house. i also would be fired if i didn't ask you if you are run forth president. can i ask you to stay right there and i will ask you both of those things when i come back? >> sure, that's fine. >> that's fine. we will be right back with former attorney general eric holder. stay with us. when a critical patient is far from the hospital, the hospital must come to the patient. stay with me, mr. parker. the at&t network is helping first responders connect with medical teams in near real time... stay with me, mr. parker. ...saving time when it matters most. stay with me, mrs. parker.

that's the power of and. you might be missing something.y healthy. your eyes. that's why there's ocuvite. ocuvite helps replenish nutrients your eyes can lose as you age.

it has lutein, zeaxanthin and omega-3. ocuvite. be good to your eyes. ♪ take off for mexico with expedia. ♪ one click gives you access to discounts on thousands of hotels, cars and things to do. like the papaya playa project for 49% off. ♪ everything you need to go. ♪ expedia.

we're back now with former attorney general eric holder. mr. attorney general, thank you again for doing this. >> sure. >> today you were at an event in washington, d.c. and after your remarks you were asked by politico.com, a reporter for politico, whether you thought special counsel robert mueller has enough evidence to prosecute president trump for obstruction of justice. you told politico today, quote, is there a technical case there now? i think so, no. why did you say that? what did you base that on? >> well, i think you're talking about a technical case as opposed to one that you might be bring out. if ones looks at the dismissal of james comey and the reasons why the president told lester holt he did that. it if you look at the president's attempts of trying to get people, heads of the intelligence agencies to get involved in this matter, if you look at the president's actions on that airplane with that

statement among a variety of other things i think you technically have a case of obstruction of justice. i'm not saying this is case you bring at this point, and i don't think what other evidence the special counsel has. but on basis of what has been reported in the media and assuming those reports are accurate, i do think that you have a technical case of obstruction of justice. >> if you were an attorney general right now, you would be overseeing robert mueller's special counsel investigation the way rod rosenstein is say right now, and that means they have to come to mr. rosenstein with investigation decisions, opening up new lines and also bringing charges against somebody. if you were in that oversight role, what kind of a process would you go through? how would you evaluate what to do if the special counsel came to you and said, i plan to charge the president of the united states with obstruction of justice. how would someone in that oversight role decide that's a

proper decision? >> you have to look at the relevant interpretation of the various statutes and policies that exist within the justice department. there are office of legal counsel opinions that deal with whether or not a sitting president can be indicted. so you certainly want to look at those. but i also know there are opinions that take a contrary view that were prepared by special counsel in the watergate scandal as well as ken star. i would want to look at those as well and ultimately make a determination. if the request from the special counsel was to indicted, make a determination on all the information on whether i would allow the special counsel to proceed in that way. >> is it your view a president could be indicted? >> it is aet not set in law. and i've looked at all of those opinions. and it seems to me there are, i think, fairly -- i think some fairly persuasive arguments that can be made that a president can be indicted.

now the controlling opinion at least at this point is the one from the legal counsel office says that is not correct. i've read that opinion, and i have some issues with it. but it is not settles law at this point. >> we are in some uncharted territory in terms of the relationship between the president and the justice system. in the last few months we have watched the president and some of his supporters in congress really work to discredit the fbi around the investigations into the president and his campaign but also sort of in general. in several cases they have called out in concerted efforts, they've called out by names specific fbi officials, the case of deputy fbi director andrew mccabe. he was essentially pressured out of bureau. he retired last month. he is 49 years old. there's also been concerted campaigns against other senior named fbi officials. when you're in charge of the

justice department, i know you didn't face this a&m same kind of thing, but is there something an attorney general or that other people in positions of authority can do to deal with those kinds of attacks? would there be -- is there more that an attorney general or anybody else could have done to shield the fbi and justice department officials from the kind of pressure they've been getting? >> that is the exact role an attorney general has. you are supposed to shield your people from political pressure. and one of the things that disturbs me the most is the fact this attorney general has for whatever reason been relatively silent. when attacks are going against career people at the fbi, career people at the united states department of justice. i have to think that the leadership at the department knows these are spurious attacks, that they're inconsistent with the reputations that these people have, the way in which they've conducted themselves over the years. and those voices, those leadership voices need to be heard in defense of the people who they supervise. it's a privilege to be the attorney general of the united states. what you have to do if you are

the amount of g. is protect the values that define the institution and the people that define that institution. >> if the attorney general fails at that, is there a plan b in terms of doing the most to uphold the rule of law, to uphold the rules of law enforcement when the attorney general doesn't take that heat? what are our other options as a country? >> well, you know, our institutions are strong. our norms are being tested, but they are also strong. the people who work in the department, the people who work at the fbi are strong. and they will continue to conduct themselves in appropriate ways. they will make tough decisions and conduct investigations. but they do so under a pressure that i think is in some ways unnecessary in the sense that an attorney general might blunt some of it. but the real problem here is the president. the president going after named career people. the president saying things about the integrity of the those two institutions, the justice department, the fbi.

no other president has ever said those kinds of things, conducted himself in that way. and he's doing long-term harm to the reliability and integrity of the justice department and to the fbi. long after he's gone, we will see the impact of these attacks. >> would you make a better president? how is that? pretty good the way i snuck that in there, right? >> that's pretty good. i think any one of my kids would make a better president than donald trump. but, you know, i think there are any number of people who would be a better president than the person we now have in the white house who has broken through those norms, conducted himself in a way that's inconsistent with what's best about this nation, labeled people in very inappropriate ways, used inappropriate terms when talking

about countries, turning his back on our immigrant heritage. yeah, there are a number of people i think would be better president than donald trump. >> are you going to think seriously about running this year, sir? >> well, i'm focusing with on the nrdc making sure with regard to redistricting, i'm focusing my efforts there. ask i will make a decision at the end of this year what i want to do with regard to a higher office. >> eric holder, former attorney general during the obama administration, now the chairman of the national democratic redistricting committee, thanks for being with us tonight. i know you're super busy, sir. appreciate your time. >> thanks for having me, rachel. still ahead tonight, the surprise resignation at the white house today from a top presidential staffer who we learned today didn't have a security clearance for his entire time in office, and that may have been because of the serious accusations from both of his ex-wives that he engaged in domestic violence during those relationships, and that that information was conveyed to the fbi. that story is next. stay with us.

( ♪ ) ♪ 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.nth. with blue apron, any night is a chance to see what cooking can do.

for my constipation, i switch to miralax. stimulant laxatives forcefully stimulate the nerves in your colon. miralax is different. it works with the water in your body. unblocking your system naturally. save up to $5 on miralax. see sunday's paper. did you know there's a world of miracles inside our bodies? for example, your eyes can see ten million shades of color. sometimes, all you need to do is look up. we can hear thousands of sounds from 20 hertz to 20,000 hertz. our bodies can withstand temperatures around 60 degrees centigrade.

our tongues can differentiate 100,000 different tastes. nice! our noses can distinguish more than a trillion scents. knowing each one of them - that's the tough part. get out there. explore. see. smell. hear. taste. touch. widen your world. in august 2016 there was a big political shakeup in the presidential campaign. donald trump's presidential campaign announced that paul manafort was out and henceforth the new guy running the campaign would be the guy from the website, breitbart.com. he would be the new campaign ceo. steve bannon. he was announced to be the new

head of the trump campaign on august 17th. the following week, on august 25th, politico was the first to report that steve bannon had been criminally charged in a domestic violence case involving his former wife. the a police report described in detail what happened on august 1996. quote, she ran into the house with him following her, she toll him she was calling 911. she grabbed the cordless phone. she headed into the living room where the 7-month old twins were. mr. bannon jumped over her and the twins to grab the phone from her. once he got the phone, he threw it across the room. once she found the pieces she found she couldn't use it. bannon's wife told police he hadn't just hurt her phone, he had hurt her. bannon quote, reached up to her from the driver's seat of his car, grabbed her left wrist. he pulled her down as if he were

trying to pull her into the car, he pulled her down to the door. mr. bannon grabbed at her neck, also pulling her into the car. police noted in their police report they saw physical evidence to back up his wife's claims. and also writing, i saw red marks on her wrist and red mark on her neck. these were photographed. police officers put in their report that mr. bannon's wife described three or four previous arguments that had also become physical. that incident resulted in criminal charges being brought against steve bannon, domestic violence, battery and dissuading a witness. put a pit if that. charges were filed against steve bannon in that case, but when it came up for trial the case got dismissed because the alleged victim, steve bannon's wife couldn't be located to testify. which may explain the dissuading a witness charge. a couple of days after that bombshell report from politico nbc news got ahold of a court filing from after the couple's divorce where steve bannon's wife explained her absence. from the domestic violence trial

after he haddan charged. she said that steve bannon's defense attorney told her to leave town. so she couldn't testify against him. quote, he told me i had to leave town, that if i wasn't in town, they couldn't serve me. and also if i went to court, he and his attorney would make sure i will be the one who was guilty. so steve bannon when the story surfaced he said through a spokesperson he has a great relationship with his ex-wife and twin daughters. and ultimately these charges were dropped. all these reportings about they criminal allegations about steve bannon, they came out a week after he was named the ceo of the trump campaign. and what happened as a result of that reporting was bupkis, nothing. he didn't resign from the campaign. he went on to serve this the campaign to the bitter end, and

he continued to serve in the white house. they never bothered to address whether they knew about this domestic violence. so when they decided to hire steve bannon, whether they vetted him and found this out, they didn't care. it was okay with them. this has become a through line of the trump pressy since. you might remember when the president nominated the ceo of carls, jr., the secretary of labor. and it was then once again politico that first broke the news that his ex-wife had also made serious allegations of domestic violence. she had appeared on a 1980 episode of oprah titled high class, battered women. >> he vowed revenge. he said i will see you in the gutter. this will never be over, you will pay for this. >> eight months after that appearance on the oprah winfrey show his ex-wife retracted her allegations of abuse as part of a child custody agreement. she has said actually he was not abusive. he has denied those allegations. but after that story came out,

andrew puzder withdrew his nomination for labor secretary. he didn't become a member of the cabinet. but the trump administration is even now considering finding a new role for him. the president still likes him, wants him around and wants to give him a high profile job. the president himself has also of course faced domestic violence allegations. journalist harry hurt obtained a copy of ivana trump's sworn divorce deposition and in his book, lost tycoon" he detailed episodes of alleged violence and rape that is related in her sworn testimony. ivana trump has since recanted those allegations against donald trump. when the daily beast tried to report out that episode and figure out what happened there not long before trump announced his presidential bid, trump's lawyer michael cohn, told the daily beast there's no such thing legally of a man raping his wife. he told the publication, quote, you cannot rape your spouse,

there is very clear case law. that's not true at all. then michael cohen threatened the dily beast if they went ahead with their story. i will never forget these threats. i have to say we've covered these a couple of times on the show. michael cohn said to the daily beast reporters, quote, i will make sure we meet one day in the courthouse and take every penny you have and come after the daily beast. and everybody else that you possibly know. i'm going to mess your life up for as long you're on this freaking planet, so i warn you to tread very effing lightly because what i'm going to do to you is going to be effing ghiss disgusting. you understand me? there's a sensitive issue on this white house, sensitive issue on this subject. well, today the white house staff secretary, which doesn't sound like a big job but it is, a very senior and influential aide to president trump announced plans to resign

following a series of reports from the uk tabloid the daily mail relating allegations of physical abuse from thinks two exwives. rob porter denies the allegations. he is calling them a coordinated smear campaign. his first ex-wife told the daily mail he punched her during their marriage. she detailed black eyes he gave her on a trip to italy. she also detailed what it felt like when he choked her. she said quote it was not enough for me to pass out but it was scary and dehumanizing. they divorced, porter remarried. porter's second wife, now second ex-wife, said she was walking on eggshells because of his explosive nature. she said he pulled her from the shower pie boat of her showers according to "the washington post," both of porter's ex-wives were interviewed by the fbi when he was selected by that job.

standard procedure. nbc news has confirmed that rob porter was not in fact granted security clearance. one of porter ex-wives said when the fbi asked her whether or not parter might be vulnerable to blackmail, she answered yes because of the number people aware of the abusive behavior. she said, quote, i thought by sharing my story with the fbi he wouldn't be put in that post. for his part, rob porter denies these allegations. he said, quote, i took the photos given to the media 15 years ago. the relate behind them is nowhere close to what's being described. i've been transparent and truthful about these vile claim, but i will not further the gauge publicly with a coordinated smear campaign. so that is porter's response as he resigns from the white house. but as for the white house chief of staff john kelly released a statement yesterday saying, quote, rob porter is a man of true integrity and honor and i can't say enough good things about him. easy a friend, a confidante, and a trusted professional. i'm proud to serve alongside him. general kelly then sent that

same statement out again after the second round of allegations were published today including a photo. but this is going to be hard to explain away for the white house and for the white house chief of staff john kelly in particular. cnn is reporting that white house officials including john kelly have known about these abuse allegations for months including the fact they were conveyed to the fbi. quote, by early fall it was widely known by trump's aides including chief of staff john kelly both that rob porter was facing troubles obtaining security clearance and that his exwive s claimed he had abused them. kept him on anyway and kept giving him more and more responsibility. "vanity fair" reports tonight white house staffers are deeply frustrated and are questioning john kelly's decision to support porter in this issue. what remains to be seen how much this actually matters in this particular white house in the face of multiple domestic abuse

allegations including photos. the instinct of the white house chief of staff reportedly was to tell porter to stay and fight. i don't know what kind of pressure, embarrassment or ethics makes you change that, but there is movement on this. we actually got a brand new statement on john kelly on this. we'll have that next. stay with us. oh, you brought butch. yeah! (butch growls at man) he's looking at me right now, isn't he? yup. (butch barks at man) butch is like an old soul that just hates my guts. (laughs)

(vo) you can never have too many faithful companions. that's why i got a subaru crosstrek. love is out there. find it in a subaru crosstrek. he gets the best deal on the perfect hotel by using. tripadvisor! that's because tripadvisor lets you start your trip on the right foot... by comparing prices from over 200 booking sites to find the

right hotel for you at the lowest price. saving you up to 30%! you'll be bathing in savings! tripadvisor. check the latest reviews and lowest prices. jimmy's gotten used to his whole yup, he's gone noseblind. odors. he thinks it smells fine, but his mom smells this... luckily there's febreze fabric refresher for all the things you can't wash. it finds odors trapped in fabrics and washes them away as it dries. and try pluggable febreze to continuously eliminate odors for up to 45 days of freshness. pluggable febreze and fabric refresher. two more ways to breathe happy. if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable

after just 4 months, ... with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ♪ otezla. show more of you. we have just gotten a new statement from white house chief of staff john kelly responding again to this fairly shocking news that a senior white house official is resigning after

allegations of physical abuse from his two ex-wives, allegations that may have prevented him from getting a security clearance for the full year he's been working at the white house at a very senior job. staff secretary rob porter resign while denying the allegations. he calls im them simply he false. the report is that nobody asked for his resignation, but chief of staff john kelly praised porter in over the top term, calling him a man of integrity and honor whom he's proud to serve alongside, and the chief of staff has been sticking to that line for a couple of days as these allegations have mounted, even as this photo was released by one of his ex-wives that she says porter administered to her in 2006. tonight we gotten a new

statement from john kelly where he has just stopped praising rob porter. this is the new statement from the chief of staff, quote, i was shocked by the new allegations released today against rob porter. there is no place for domestic violence in our society. i stand by my previous comment of the rob porter that i have come to know. since becoming chief of staff, and believe every individual deserves the right to defend their reputation. i accepted his resignation he willier today and will ensure a wift and orderly transition. ib joing us now, one of the reporters who has been following this in washington. gregory courty is with u.s.a. today. thank you for being here. there are two tracks, the allegations from the exwives. the other track is what the white house knew, how senior a job he was in.

how early the white house knew there were these serious allegations against him. serious enough that they apparently prevented him from getting a security cleans clearance. what can you tell us how the white house is handling this news and coming up with an explanation of how he last there had so long. >> obviously we are more than a year into the trump administration. rob porter was one of the senior people who has been there from the beginning. he has a very senior role in the white house. it's not real low' household name, the staff secretary, but it is a very important job. you will see him in these photoons. and you have been showing some of these pictures every time president trump sign a bill or an executive order there is rob porter there handing him the paperwork. he krol crows all the flow of information to and from the president and coordinates the policy making throughout the white house. he had been working on a temporary security clearance from the beginning based on this fbi investigation, which we now know did speak to his two exwives, who detailed these

allegations of domestic abuse to the fbi. because of that he did not receive a permanent security clearance. but a permanent security clearance isn't necessarily a prerequisite to at the timing white house employment. you know, the security clearance is really at the discretion of the president for these high level jobs. and so he was able to continue to operate. now how long the white house had known about this, we know they had known for at least a matter of weeks or months that these allegations were out there. but it wasn't until this british tabloid last night published these allegations that the white house took action. >> in terms of the security clearance issue, i take your point absolutely that this is something that's within the president's discretion. the president, if he wanted to, could give somebody a security clearance, could clear people to look at things, could unilaterally declassify things if he wanted to. famously it's been reported that his son-in-law jared kushner with his broad portfolio of

policy in the white house he also has been unable to obtain a permanent security clearance. is it clear at this point from the status of the reporting that the white house was aware that these domestic violence allegations were the specific hold up or at least part of the hold up for what was blocking mr. porter from getting a clearance? >> yeah. someone at the white house must have been aware. because unlike other agencies, the department of defense and the intelligence community, the white house polices its own security clearances through an obscure office in the new executive office building, the office of security. it's pat of the office of management and administration. and they are the ones who receive the fbi background reports and have to make an ultimate judgment about whether or not somebody is cleared for a security clearance. whether the chief of staff knew about that. remember, john kelly was not the chief of staff when rob porter came on on inauguration day. >> right. good point. >> he was the second of homeland security. so what did the chief of staff

know, and when did he know it? i don't know. buy as you have been pointing out tonight, the chief of staff's own statements have been sort of slow to recognize the gravity of this until just a few moments ago in that statement that you read where he says that domestic violence has no place in society. >> greg courty, white house correspondent at u.s.a. today thank you for helping us understand this evolving reporting. appreciate your time. >> thank you. >> we'll be right back. stay with us. you two had been through everything together. two boyfriends, three jobs... you're like nothing can replace brad. then liberty mutual calls... and you break into your happy dance. if you sign up for better car replacement™, we'll pay for a car that's a model year newer with 15,000 fewer miles than your old one. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

what can a president [ do in thirty seconds? he can fire an fbi director who won't pledge his loyalty. he can order the deportation of a million immigrant children. he can threaten an unstable dictator armed with nuclear weapons. he can go into a rage and enter the nuclear launch codes. how bad does it have to get before congress does something?

tuesday? tuesday next week, tuesday

february 13th, day before valentine's day. i can tell you, i'm going to be cuddling up with the annual worldwide threats hearing before the senate intelligence committee. they have an all-star lineup, fbi director chris wray, pompeo, coats, they're all testifying in open session on tuesday. we found out today it's happening next week. here's a thing to keep an eye on, do our intelligence chiefs in open session, where we can watch, get grilled about their russian counter parts. it was going to be a secret from us until the kremlin let us know that all three of the top spy chiefs from russia were recently invited into the united states, including one banned for sanctions. it was the russian tass that first spilled the beans about the russian chiefs coming over.

routers followed up on t headline, russia's foreign spy chief met last week with washington u.s. intelligence officials. including dan coats. and cia director mike pompeo met with two russian spy chiefs. whether it was pompeoo coats, that took place just days before the white house announced we wouldn't be imposing new sanctions on russia for them meddling with our elections despite a law passed by congress that they have to. the timing, to say nothing about the open question of how a russia spy was able to come to the fbi in the first space -- first place, caused a question how they got in, who they met with, and who cleared the guy to get in here who is legally banned from coming to our country. so far as we know the director of national intelligence, dan coats, has no responded. cia director mike pompeo did with his trademark wit, we periodically meet with our russian intelligence counter parts to keep americans safe.

mike pompeo will be there on tuesday. in that open session. even if worldwide threat day is a >> good evening. mike pompeo's wit is nothing compared to rachel maddow's whit. >> that's nice. >> rob porter being pushed out has been developing all night. that john kelly statement that came out at 9:30 tonight apparently was the end of a long day of him fighting to safe rob porter's job. reports indicate he was inside the white house saying you don't have to leave the white house because of one black eye photo of one of your former wives out there. >> it's the evidence from the former wives, the former wives talked to the fbi, the statement from one of his former wives