it's 4:00 in the new york. donald trump loves to attack people. he's attacked the pope on twitter, he attacked his sitting attorney general from a podium in the rose garden. he even tweeted a critique during a live interview with the wife of a service member killed in action in niger who he'd spent a week quarreling with. the only people who have been spared, the two women who in recent weeks alleged sexual relationships with him, and vladimir putin. but the president's silence is accompanied by a growing frustration. the "washington post" reporting, "privately, the president has lobbed sharp attacks at daniels and her media tour. calling her allegations a hoax and asking confidants if the episode is hurting his poll numbers. the president has even griped to several people that daniels is not the type of woman he finds attractive. trump asked staff in the white house if they, too, had watched and wondered what they thought of it. the president said he personally did not think daniels appeared

credible." think about that statement. what part of her interview didn't appear credible? why wouldn't he have tweeted his review if that was his sentiment? he doesn't have an unexpressed thought. according to a former campaign adviser who told me they'd often keep campaign announcements like endorsements a secret from him because they were so afraid he'd tweet them out. "the new york times" adds to this reporting, "inside the white house, mr. trump is eager to defend himself against allegations that he insists are false. those close to him say. and he is growing increasingly frustrated with breathless wall-to-wall news media coverage of the salacious details from the two women." speaking of wall-to-wall, we were inspired by rachel maddow's wall, so we built one of our own. here's a list of all the people, places and things trump has attacked. i'm up there. along with a slew of former presidents. cities under attack by terrorists. and by our count, and with the help of the excellent reporting of "the new york times," trump has lashed out at more than 430

targets since he announced he's running for president. from oprah winfrey, to the cast of "hamilton," so why has stormy daniels been spared? here to help us answer that, our favorite friends and reporters. white house bureau chief phil rucker. at the table, jonathan lemire. "washington post" columnist eugene robinson. jen palmari, former communications director for the clinton campaign and obama white house. she has a new book out we'll talk about later in the hour. and john, magazine commentary editor. i have to start by asking if you're on the wall. you're been called a? >> the president called me a sleaze bag. >> are you on the wall? >> i'm not on the wall. i'm insulted. >> i love this wall. >> jeff smith, snoop dogg, rich lowery, maggie haberman, the fox news debate. bought me back in time to an innocent era. are you on the wall? >> i'm not on the wall. i got already about 11 friends i counted on the wall.

>> really? >> so it's -- >> it is a remarkable -- >> it's a remarkable wall, right? woody johnson, jeff flake, jeff -- i mean, you go to the js and it's -- i mean, meghan mccain, john mccain -- >> i like super bowl 50. >> yeah, i don't know what he -- >> particular game. >> that game was a problem. >> t-mobile. t-mobile. he didn't like it or something? >> okay. the question of the hour, phil rucker, why isn't stormy daniels on the wall? >> well, let me just say, nicolle, congratulations on the wall. that's a lot of words behind you. >> wall envy. >> yeah. it's a big, beautiful wall. look, stormy daniels -- the president is insisting to his advisers and to his friends that these allegations are not true, but he won't come out and say them publicly. today at the press briefing, sarah huckabee sanders was asked by reporters several times about the situation and insisted the president had fully addressed this issue, but he just hasn't

in the last if u weeks. he's been silent. he's held his punches. advisers are telling him he has nothing to win by engaging and encouraging him to stay silent. he's not been silent in private. he's been bruooding over this. talking to friends and associates about the situation. he's been asking how they think it might impact his poll numbers and been making it clear to people he talks to inside the white house that stormy daniels is not his type. i don't know what his type is, exactly, but he says she's is not his type. >> what's so interesting about that line is that stormy daniels and the former playmate, miss mcdougal, both said that he talked about how both of them reminded him of his daughter. so even -- >> yeah. >> -- his explanation of his innocence to his staffers seems to be something that there's a pretty strong tie to at least what he articulated in the retelling of both these women's accounts of their interactions with the president. >> yeah, that's exactly right,

and that comment made a lot of people cringe when they saw it on sunday night. and inside the white house his advisers actually view stormy daniels as a fairly credible person. they feel like this is a serious issue that's a legitimate news story and could be a problem for the president. could be a problem for some time to come. you know, publicly, of course, the official line from the white house is to deny all of this but privately some of the people working for the president think he has a problem here. >> and you tweeted, i was following you on twitter on sunday night, you tweeted he should be impeached for the things he said about his daughter. >> just about his daughter. i mean -- >> that was a grossout. >> yeah, grossout that he compares his paramours to his daughter. that, whether, you know, if you were to accept the contention that these women, he didn't have anything to do with, we know he said it before about other people. so that's clearly the case. i think based on the polling that i've seen in the last

couple of days maybe he wants stormy daniels to be out there because both the a.p. poll and the nbc news poll have him up seven points in a month. so i don't know -- >> you think that's on his sexual prowess? >> i don't -- i'm saying correlation is not causation, nicolle. does not appear to be hurting him. >> let me ask -- go ahead. >> i think there might be a reason for him not to speak directly, come out and say she's lying, she's a liar. he might be worried about being sued for defamation. >> he is -- his lawyer is being sued for defamation. >> right. maybe -- i think he does not want to be a party to that sort of litigation because then everything comes out in discovery, perhaps. but that would require us to believe he's listening to legal advice. and so, you know, that's the other side. >> that's the other side of it. you've got a great piece that one of my favorite lines from the campaign was when michelle obama said, "when they go low, we go high."

it turned out to be poetry, but really not practical political advice. you write about how his opponents are borrowing from his playbook. with suggestive statements, cryptic tweets, provocative lawsuits and must-see television interviews, trump's adversaries are using some of his own tactics to grab and keep the spotlight. from adult film star stormy daniels to former fbi director james comey, each has become a must-see supporting character in the president's daily drama." they are finally, i think, learning some of the lessons that people ran against him, 16 republicans in in the primary, your candidate in the general, never figured out how to fight an asymmetric war with someone who doesn't play by the rules. someone who attacks the pope and everyone else. is perhaps someone who's going to be taken down by someone using these tools you described. >> it is remarkable. president trump has a grip on the media like few we've ever seen before. he controls the day-to-day headlines. he spawns 15 things a day that would have been the biggest

event of a month in the obama administration. >> right. >> he's also, as we can see here, not shy to go on the attack. what we've seen in our reporting indicates is we've seen a real breakthrough here. the "washington post" makes a good point there, too, about how he's frustrated by the media coverage. that's how he views everything, right, the winning in the media. what we're seeing here, stormy daniels' attorney, mr. avenatti, could be hosting the 3:00 hour, he's so good on television -- >> listen, we don't know he will be one day. the 4:00 hour. >> he's played this masterfully. every day there's a little something else, he teases, tantalizes, keeps the story going. obviously, the tweet last week of that cdrom suggested there would be evidence, was a piece of this, even though, of course, in the "60 minutes" interview, stormy daniels said she couldn't address it just yet. some ways, that keeps ths going. i think we're going to see a similar rollout with the comey book going. he's lined up for a half dozen

or more interviews. people are seeing you have to flood the zone back. you have the ability to hit him back. at some point one would assume he would resist being able to take the bait. >> let me go back to the question of his sexual prowess. >> okay. >> let's keep this family friendly. serious question, in the republican primary, he and marco rubio got into a disgusting conversation that totally derailed any debate over policy at one of the primary debates over the size of their hands. stormy daniels said on "60 minutes" she didn't want to have sex with him. she said in the "in touch" magazine interview it wasn't particularly remarkable sex. her attorney mark avenatti said on the "today" show, a show we know donald trump has watched, that she could describe his private parts. how long do you think donald trump can stay quiet when he couldn't let marco rubio talk about his hands for 12 hours? >> i don't know. i think he can stay quiet. it's possible over time that you get to a point where it is clear if there's a fire, don't -- the fire is not particularly helpful to you, don't squirt, you know,

kerosene on the fire, don't throw logs on the fire. let it -- see if it can burn out without you. i don't know what it is sthatha could say that would be helpful to him or the sort of thing that could cause his backers to say, yeah, that's great you gave it to stormy daniels. maybe it's better for him to keep his mouth shut. i know it sounds weird to say a 71-year-old man wouldn't know that already. some of the cases you could mention from this board, particularly let's say khizr khan, the gold star father, or judge curiel, something like that, it was no help to him. he won the election -- >> more recently -- >> no help to give into those fights. >> he had a seven-day fight with the widow of ladavid t. johnson. >> right. >> which is why i don't accept -- i think -- and phil, your paper has before covered donald trump as a tea kettle

about to burst. i don't think he's going to stay quiet even if, as gene says, it's in his legal interest to do so. he's not someone who can keep his mouth shut when he's itching to attack. i think your reporting suggests he's doing just that. >> i think that's right, nicolle, you know, he hasn't had an interview in a while, he hasn't had sort of a full news conference in a while. there's not been an opportunity for reporters to really press him directly on the stormy daniels allegations, on the details, what exactly is it he's denying, did he know about the payoff, the hush money, if it were, from his attorney, michael cohen, and so forth? these are all questions i think he's eventually going to be asked because he can't stay hidden forever. >> i also think that you make a good point that she said the sex was unremarkable, she wasn't attracted to him. remember, this is a man who planted with the "new york post," best sex i ever had, with marla maples.

it will be striking if he's able to bite his tongue. i'll remind you, he's telling people stormy daniels isn't his type, that's the language he used in october 2016 when allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault came out. part of what he said was, i couldn't have don't that, you know, they're not hot enough for me. >> oh, god. let's go to something more serious. something that you have dealt with in your career. and that's the collateral damage of a sex scandal. >> right. >> late elizabeth edwards dealt with this. you worked for john edwards. i want to read you a quote from the spokeswoman for the first lady. wrote "media is enjoying speculation and salacious gossip, stephanie, we're not enjoying this. i'd like to remind people there's a minor child whose name should be kept out of news stories when at all possible." i agree with stephanie, i think children should be kept out of this. take us inside what this does to a family. >> it is -- i have thought about both melania and their son,

during this, because i think you imagine that on the inside, there's a plan, right? you imagine on the inside, there's probably a plan for someone's going to talk to the first lady and make sure she understands, make sure she's okay or someone's going to explain to elizabeth what john's going to say in an interview and it's not what happens. it's people just being human and a lot of times the most human way to deal with a situation like that even when it's in your face is to deny it and ignore. i would not be surprised if no one, including trump, has talked to his wife about what to believe or not really to believe here, but it is, you know, it's -- it was heart -- it was pretty wrenching to watch my friend go through that and, of course, you know, i watched hillary endure similar situation within her marriage and in an extraordinary public way and you

think that people build up muscle and callouses to protect them from being hurt by what they hear on tv, but people are human and they still are. >> let me adjust two things, two pieces that i learned about how the "access hollywood" tape affected melania trump. i said yesterday that one of the people who was in the room at the time that that story broke, they were doing debate prep at trump tower, and one of the first things that trump said -- he did the math, he wanted someone to add up the year that it happened and the year that he was married to melania to find out if they were together at the time. so infidelity happens. as you're saying, if you're a public figure, dragging your family through the gutter with you doesn't happen automatically. i wonder if you have any thoughts on the observations made by potter in the "6 0 minutes" interview, over the $130,000 alleged payment by

michael cohen or trump or entity to stormy daniels. >> yeah, because i went through it, because john edwards was prosecuted in a criminal trial for something, you know, for a very similar situation. i know some people who understand the law better than i think that what trump is facing would be, say, a more serious case and he was very close to being convicted and i had to testify in that trial. and it was not something i, you know, certainly wished to happen to john and i was glad that he was acquitted and it felt like a reach at the time from the justice department to be prosecuting that, but, you know, there -- you can certainly make -- there's a record of making a pretty strong legal case that something like this is considered a campaign contribution. >> get in on all of this. >> well, you know, i think that's a fascinating question that ultimately is going to have to be answered. i've heard it explained both ways to me. i've heard that this is a very strong case and also spoke with a lawyer who says it could be

argued that there would be other reasons to pay off stormy daniels other than winning the election. it could be that you didn't want your wife to find out or whatever. and so that trump could argue if it came to that that i was just trying to keep it from my wife, it had nothing to do with the election and that might be seen as a big -- or, you know, but who knows. >> some of this i think we know that melania trump, from every visible piece of evidence that we have, is not particularly enjoying her life as the first lady and that, i think, has had -- >> how do we know that? i've heard that her son is happy and she certainly is an elegant -- >> let's just say, she doesn't look like a person who is out there looking to have public events and, you know, sort of -- she does a couple of -- >> i think she doesn't look happily married. i think she's rising to the responsibilities of america's first lady.

>> the way she wants to look, she is a professional model. i think se projects -- no, i'm serious. >> fair enough. >> this is not a criticism at all. i think she projects exactly the image she wants to project at a given -- >> if so, she really is brilliant because i think her comportment and expression and the way she carries herself has subdued this story a little bit. that is that people are uncomfortable talking about her and talking about their son. they should be uncomfortable talking about their son because he's off limits. but she -- her whole mean is i'm along for the ride, this is all happening to me, please leave me alone. i think people sort of are leaving her alone which is kind of -- >> let me just bring up -- >> you have no idea what -- >> let me bring up someone else, though, because women don't farewefare well in this administration generally speaking. "the new york times" reports today president trump stayed in touch with rob porter, remember him, former white house staff

secretary who stepped down after allegations he abused his two former wives according to three people familiar with the conversation, he's told some advisers he hopes mr. porter returns to work in the west wing. this seems like donald trump throws up a deck of cards and picking a new scandal. >> you worked in a white house. would that ever happen in the white house? >> no. >> would that ever happen in the white house? no. >> you have any reporting on this? >> reporting is, yes, there has been some contacts. miss sarah sanders said today from the podium they have talked. she couched it, said, well, one time that i'm aware of. our reporting indicates it's been more often than that. i think there's a sense in the building a return to the white house for rob porter is very unlikely. let's remember he can't get a security clearance. >> right. >> that's probably not going to happen. we know how it is in trump world, you're never really gone. he's someone who i'm sure the president will continue to consult. there are people in the west wing who really miss him who suggest some of the chaos of the last few weeks, even more chaos than usual, is due to his departure. >> phil rucker, let me be the last word, you and your colleagues there have a great

pulse on the chaos in the west wing. >> yeah, nicolle, i think it's important to keep in mind, we've been talking so much this block about the personal chaos, the stormy daniels situation, president trump's marriage, but he's under siege in so many other areas. there's legal crisis regarding the mueller probe, the russia probe, and a political crisis. his party is in trouble heading into these november midterms. there's a serious chance that the republicans lose control of the house of representatives which could spell danger in capital letters for president trump next year if democrats take control of the house and so he's got a lot of pressure right now from all different directions. >> we're going to give you the permanent job of writing our teases. that's exactly where we're heading next. phil rucker, thank you so much. when we come back, politics and the porn star, donald trump survived the storm but republicans may not be as safe. and it might just be time for donald trump to check out legalzoom.com. more lawyers say no thanks to all that fame and fortune donald trump promised anyone who reps

him in the mueller probe. and dear madam president, our friend jen palmieri names names. the future leaders of the free world. today, big thinking in the finger lakes is pushing the new new york forward. we're the number one dairy and apple producers in the eastern united states supported by innovative packaging that extends the shelf life of foods and infrastructure upgrades that help us share our produce with the world. all across new york state, we're building the new new york. to grow your business with us in new york state, visit esd.ny.gov thisat red lobsterest. with exciting new dishes like dueling lobster tails and lobster truffle mac & cheese. classics like lobster lover's dream are here too. so enjoy these 10 lobsterlicious dishes while you can because lobsterfest won't last. when it comes to travel, i sweat the details.

late checkout... ...down-alternative pillows... ...and of course, price. tripadvisor helps you book a... ...hotel without breaking a sweat. because we now instantly... ...search over 200 booking sites ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. don't sweat your booking. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices. woman: where are we taking him? i have no clue. we're just tv doctors. if this was a real emergency,

i'd be freaking out. we are the tv doctors of america. together with cigna reminding you to go, know, and take control of your health. schedule your annual check-up today. you know what's not awesome? gig-speed internet. to go, know, and take control of your health. when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids, and these guys, him, ah. oh hello. that lady, these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh,

sure. still yes! xfinity delivers gig speed to more homes than anyone. now you can get it, too. welcome to the party. president trump might be right about one thing, he may come to find the sex scandal will blow over, his poll numbers may not be affected by his attempts to cover up alleged affairs with stormy daniels, karen mcdougal, and other women. his base may wave off the mounting accusations as old news. trump may walk away from his presidency unscathed.

the collateral damage is everywhere. as mike gerson writes in the "washington post," "trump forces everyone around him to become complicit in his corruption. members of congress, white house staffers, party officials, conservative media figures, and religious leaders are all expected to be accomplices and we're left with a vacuum of integrity at heart of our government." joining the table, democratic congressman joaquin castro of texas. thank you for being here. >> thanks for having any. >> you missed the wall. i'm sure you were on the wall. >> they were talking about it, all the names up there and stuff. >> how did the democrats turn the president's numerous political vulnerabilities into assets for the democratic party? >> well, first and foremost, i think we can't just be a party that is against donald trump and against what he says or does. it's true that the policies he's pursued, the rhetoric he's used, has mobilized a lot of people and inspired a lot of people to take action. we have to make sure we stand up for our own values also. freedom, democracy, opportunity, for the people of america. that said, i also think there's

a good chance that donald trump is doing himself in. that these investigations are closing in on him. even though the house republicans closed the house investigation into russia. you've still got bob mueller's investigation, the senate investigation, and now what looks like could be legal trouble with two women coming forward potentially with lawsuits. >> but what do you do to a guy -- his numbers have actually ticked up a little bit as john said. what do you do to a guy that is so clearly -- i mean, he was -- he displayed such depravity of character as a candidate. i mean, how you hurt him as a president who continues to act depra depraved? >> well, the first thing is, you know, he is fortunate in that his poll numbers have gone up. i think we're going to see them fluctuate between 38% and 42%. 42% is still a very unpopular president. >> sure. historic low. >> and so, you know, democrats just have to make sure that in 2020 that we go out and compete everywhere and get our message across to folks that -- >> how do you break through,

though? there's not a lot of room. >> you're right. this is a president, remember, who tapped into lot of different grievan grievances, actively stoked and turned people against each other. that is tough. running against an incumbent in the temporary era of politics is a tall order. i do think democrats can win in 2020. >> gene, let me read something you wrote today, this might represent one such opportunity. "president trump's most urgent political problem doesn't involve robert mueller, stormy daniels, vladimir putin or hundreds of thousands of voters who marched for gun control, rather it's his diehard supporters might be starting to realize how thoroughly he's played them for suckers." >> well, he has. i mean, he signed a spending bill on friday that has -- doesn't have the wall. that does fund planned parenthood, that is the total opposite of everything -- >> let's not leaf ove out the b thing of it, it totally triggered ann coulter. >> yes.

set coulter off. congratulati congratulations, president schumer. >> someone has to check on her. i'm sure she has friends. >> yeah. so they're not -- you know, especially on immigration, which he was insincere about so many things during the campaign. i think racism and the x xenophobia were sincere. everything was sincere. yet he's been unable to deliver on it, i'd say firefigortunatel. that's the issue on which he connected so viscerally with a hardcore part of his base. you know, the ann coulter, the people who respond to ann coulter, too, who are going to be reading her and her reaction. >> can i give a counterargument that i'm not happy with, but my friend, matt, made today, and made on friday, in the "washington free beacon" which is maybe the rally in his poll numbers has something to do with the aggression on tariffs which would be something that -- >> yes.

>> -- would be a sock to his base, his people. we are hearing all sorts of words about how south korea's now bending to his will, they're going to negotiate with china and all of that. if he can pedal that line that the tariffs are good, that they're going to have america great again by beating down our trading partners, that could go a long way to mitigating the potential effect of not getting the wall. the other thing is in the end, and this is true, true of, say, republicans on pro-life issues for 30 years, obviously, he wants the wall so the -- you can't go to him and say, well, you said you were going to give them the wall, they didn't get the wall. he's like, well, i was i want t wall. they're not giving it to me. the people who want the wall say, at least he wants the wall. it's not that he doesn't want it, it's not working out that way. >> let me ask you something that has to be exasperating to

democrats. i worked for a republican politicians who navigated the evangelical vote very carefully. i mean, george w. bush disappointed evangelicals when he didn't make an even bigger effort to pass a marriage amendment. he also disappointed the majority of americans who thought that was a terrible idea. donald trump who has, you know, my flats have more integrity and character than he does, has, in the words of sam nunburg in the woe"washington post" "the presit is correct believing his solid group of supporters including evangelicals and protestants are the going to leave him on this issue. he's delivered for them on judges which is really the most important issue and on life." a reference to abortion policy. how did democrats sort of counter a politician for whom none of his deeds are worthy of any demerits and the single action of appointing judges they like is enough to erase everything else? >> we did feel that in the 2016 ad campaign i would say,

particularly at the third debate where judges and abortion were a big part of the debate and we felt republicans come home to trump afterwards and that's when we started to get into trouble because, and i understand what's the beliefs that are behind, you know, people that -- there are people who that is -- >> single issue. >> that is a single issue that trumps all others. so to -- so to speak. and i think that, you know, with some of these voters that might be disappointed that they didn't get the wall or that they didn't -- or other things in the bill, i think it depepds on what did you put your faith in donald trump for? is it because of what he represents and the beliefs he held, or is it because of what he was going to get done? i think for a lot of people, it's the former. and if he doesn't deliver, and i think democrats are -- it is foley for them to discount much of his support is about what he represents and the beliefs that

he holds and people having their beliefs validated. so democrats need to have something very different, not try to do -- not try to o out-trump him. >> it's not a question of whether people who are anti-immigration, pro-life, pro-gun, it's not a question of whether they, you know, drop him and vote for democrats. it's a question of whether they vote. it's a question of how enthusiastic they are to come out and support republicans in the fall, in this fall, and possibly to support trump in 2020 if, in fact, he hasn't delivered on the jaeagenda. now, he has been a defender of the nra and gun rights. if that's your single issue, you know, it may be that you're going to come out and vote for him. if abortion is your single issue, if immigration is your single issue, you know, are you getting what you need to be enthusiastic? >> just really quick on the hypocrisy of evangelicals, that's at the heart of the question i posed to jen. the idea that they can overlook -- never before in

republican politics has there been someone this egregiously lacking in morality who has such a commitment from evangelicals. >> so it's a negative polarization. you really don't want to know what it is, it's that they don't want him in power. so they don't want joaquin castro and his friends in power and trump promises to prevent them from getting into power and then he -- then he jokes with them and says, yeah, i like norman vincent peele and that is enough, that's where american politics is now. negative polarization is huing the evangelicals to trump. >> go ahead. >> i think the worst could be ahead for him also. he benefits from the fact you still have an economy that's holding up very well, right, in texas, for example, the unemployment rate is at about 4% but he's also doing very alarming things in addition to every other alarming thing he's done, he's bringing on john bolton as new nsa person, and i'm convinced if diplomacy fails that this is a president and administration that wants to go

to war with north korea, and i think the hiring of john bolton is an affirmation of that. all right. when we come back, tweets and consequences. a president at war with his own doj and fbi is having a hard time finding a lawyer. and a former justice department official offers a legal theory about those conflicts we reported on yesterday. stay with us. older, your brain naturally begins to change which may cause trouble with recall. - learning from him is great... when i can keep up! - anncr: thankfully, prevagen helps your brain and improves memory. - dad's got all the answers. - anncr: prevagen is now the number-one-selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. - she outsmarts me every single time. - checkmate! you wanna play again? - anncr: prevagen. healthier brain. better life. when it comes to strong bones, are you on the right path? we have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture, so with our doctors we chose prolia® to help make our bones stronger.

only prolia® helps strengthen bones by stopping cells that damage them with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it, or take xgeva®. serious allergic reactions, like low blood pressure; trouble breathing; throat tightness; face, lip or tongue swelling, rash, itching or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems, as severe jaw bone problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip, groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping prolia®, as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium; serious infections, which could need hospitalization; skin problems; and severe bone, joint, or muscle pain. if your bones aren't getting stronger isn't it time for a new direction? why wait? ask your doctor about prolia.

rejection. from the "washington post," "a prominent chicago defense attorney said monday that he had declined an invitation to lead president trump's legal team, responding to special count robert s. mueller's russia investigation, underscoring the president's difficulty in attracting toll legal talent to represent him in the probe." aside from being a possible client, the president's legal situation could be more dire than it appears. yesterday we reported that four former senior justice department officials thought that the fact that last week's candidates for

the job, joseph digenova and victoria tensing, conflicted out, suggested their client, former trump legal team spokesman mark curallo, offered testimony damaging to trump. in new reporting from "vanity fair," a former acting solicitor general under president obama, has this provocative analysis. "the conflict of interest issue was apparent on tuesday, and yet we were told they were joining the team and mark curallo, with the most significant conflict, waived any concern. dowd resigns. by sunday digenova and tensing are gone leaving the president with two lawyers." vanity fair" reports, "that strange development means mueller, when they see someone doing something profoundly dangerous to their self-interest will raise it with the defendant and suggest they rethink it.

if it did happen, it would strongly suggest that mueller is formally thinking of trump as a target of his investigation." joining us is former u.s. attorney and now an msnbc contributor, barbara mcquade. let me first get you to respond to neil's theory, sources close to neil says he has no proof for, it's simply a legal and prosecutorial theory. >> yeah, it's a little bit speculative, but, you know, i do share his observation that they make the announcement one day that digenova is joining the team and a few days later say, no, they're not and nothing seemed to happen at that time. mark corallo already waived the conflict. there could be many things. one theory is the one neil posits, this is a gene you knui conflict. technically we have conflict, everybody is fine. if there's a true adverse interest where mark corallo may

be testifying against president trump, this becomes a much more serious conflict and prosecutors do have an interest in avoiding those conflicts not just to be nice guys because they don't want to ruin the investigation in some way, creation an issue for appeal that could cause a problem down the road. prosecutors are sometimes proactive in alerting parties to a potential conflict, especially when there's information they don't have. the trump team would not have perfect information about the cooperation of mark corallo, for example, so they may have had to alert them to that so they could make a meaningful decision about representation. >> let's put a little meat on the bone and explain that to nonlawyers. what you're also saying, i want to make sure i understand this, trump's defense attorneys would not know what mark corallo had testified to in his interviews and interviews we know he's had with bob mueller and his investigators. is that right? >> well, joseph digenova would know if he's representing him. >> his wife is. >> his wife would know if she is representing him. and so as they're making this

decision, they might have to point out that you've got this information on the one hand, whatever it is mark corallo has said, and punitive role of president trump which is potentially punitive defendant. if the interests are adverse to each other, it may be that robert mueller had to point that out. it seems likely they would have known the corallo said but perhaps lacked an understand ing of the significance, theories robert mueller is pursuing with respect to president trump. >> there's a red hotanalysis, t target. let me read you something, a lawyer representing a witness, someone informed by bob mueller's investigators, that he is a witness, said to me about the kinds of questions he got when he was interviewed by bob mueller. he said, "my client has been told he was a witness and all the questions he got were about trump's conduct. he said to me, there is no doubt that the president is a subject, the term used in a very wide

way, a subject of at least part of the mueller investigation. does that ring true to you? >> yeah, so, you know, you kind of got three categories of people who might appear before a grand jury. there are witnesses who are just providing information, they are not in any legal jeopardy, themselves. there's another group of people referred to as summitbjects. that is their conduct could fall within the scope of the investigation. they could get charged. that's not clear. targets are people at the top end of that spectrum. people who are referred to as pudative defendants. if the investigation pans out, evidence can be obtained, these are the people likely to be charged. sounds like from what you said, president trump pay be a target. >> a target or a subject? is it a sequence where you go from being a subject, they're gathering more information, doing what this attorney suggests, they're asking questions about trump's conduct around certain flash poichbt fl widely reported by news organizations, do you take the intermediary step where you're a subject before you're a target

or do the prosecutors know where they're heading and do they have an obligation to tell the lawyers? >> so they don't always know. usually you start without knowing much at all. at some point the people who are the subjects come into focus as you learn a little more about the case and ultimately typically people become targets as the evidence becomes clear and you realize these are the people very likely to be charged with a crime. does a lawyer know that? if someone is called to testify before a grand jury and he is a target, he's entitled to know that because he might be in some, you know, legal jeopardy in that situation. in case he wants to assert the fifth amendment, in case he wants to appear and may need to be on high alert about the consequences of his answers. so in that scenario, it is typical to alert someone that they're a target of the investigation. >> joaquin, your committee looked at a lot of the issues bob mueller's investigators are looking at and are you surprised to hear an attorney representing a witness says there's no doubt in his mind that the president is a subject of at least part of

the mueller investigation? >> it wouldn't surprise me at all. of course, our committee, the purpose of it, was to figure out who interviewed with our elections, whether any americans helped, and then to make recommendations to prevent it in the future. whereas mr. mueller is going to prosecute people who've done wrong, but i think the president has potential liability on three different issues. collusion, obstruction of justice, and money laundering. and any one of those could get him. >> and steve bannon sounds like he thinks so, too. if you go by his analysis in "fire & fury," said the way through trump is straight through manafort and jared kushner. >> i believe he referred to him as the lebron james of money laundering. >> this is not a wacky left-week theory and neil is not some fringe attorney. he's a forming acting solicitor general of the united states. these are not legal theories posited out of left feel, these are four former justice department officials who said the only reason that the -- vick

to victoria and joe were conflicted out is if provided testimony dire to the president. the legal picture is becoming dire for the president at the same hour hiring lawyers is becoming next to impossible for the president. >> it's a concern being shared by people inside and outside the white house. there are a number of west wing officials trying their best right now to seal themselves off from the russia probe. they don't want to know what's going on. being in the building, our reporting, there's a palpable sense of concern here that there is real danger being posed to this administration. you're right, it comes to the point where it's a skeleton staff legal team right now that they can't find anyone -- you'd think representing the president of the united states would be, especially one who has plenty of money to pay you, would be the prestigious, the pinnacle of your career. and he can't get anyone in there to do this. and i think that is setting off alarm bells even further. >> come on, this is like the greatest sitcom ever, imagine, like, you got some lawyer in oxford, mississippi, you know, the office of the second floor across from the courthouse, and,

you know, suddenly his door o n opens and there is donald trump saying i need you to represent me. i mean, that's where this is going. >> think that's where we are? >> going to chicago looking for lawyers. god knows where he's gong ing t go. obviously, aside from the fact he can't get people to agree, he's also more comfortable not having lawyers than having lawyers that he worries he can't trust. he's, you know, very -- >> how's that end? >> very paranoid. we know how it ends. he -- you know, i said the other day on this network, like, who spent more time in litigation over the last 30 years than donald trump? >> this isn't litigation. >> he's, like, you know, defendant, plaintiff and defendant 701. he's making these decisions. there are lawyers he could have, i'm sure he doesn't want. that's -- >> barbara mcquade, communicators come to me and ask me my advice about whether they should go in and talk to this white house about working in a communications capacity, i tell them all to put on sneakers and

run. far, far away. if attorneys in the republican party, it's usually not a partisan thing, came to you and asked your advice about whether or not they should meet with the trump team about defending the president, what would you tell them to do? >> well, you know, lawyers have a history of representing even the most notorious of didn'ts. john adams represented the british soldiers in the boston massacre. so everybody has a right to an attorney. so i would advise them to think about it. i think what is turning off a lot of lawyers are two things, the taint and the tweets. with respect to the taint, i think there is a concern that if you represent this president, it could taint your career forever. and if you are already a very prominent lawyer, maybe you just don't need this. and the risk is just too high. and then the tweets, this is a president who seems not to take the legal advice of the lawyers around him. i am absolutely certain that his lawyers have told him to stop tweeting about this because every statement he makes can be used against him as an admission down the road. you know, think about the statement about -- i had to fire mike flynn because he lied to

the fbi, that was a fact we didn't know before. now his lawyer has to take responsibility for that tweet. who wants to deal with a client like that? you want to deal with a client who will follow your advice and at least make reasonable calculations based on it and this president has shown himself to be someone who does not follow legal advice. i think for those two reasons, many lawyers are not going to want to touch this case. >> and you are -- you are correct. two more say no today. barbara mcquade, congressman joaquin castro, thank you so much. when we come back, we have seen the future and she is glorious. jen palmieri's new book "dear madam president," and her advice for the new generation of leaders.

i accept i don't bike the miles i used to. i even accept i have a higher risk of stroke due to afib, a type of irregular heartbeat not caused by a heart valve problem. but no matter where i ride, i go for my best. so if there's something better than warfarin, i'll go for that too. eliquis. eliquis reduced the risk of stroke better than warfarin, plus had less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis had both. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical

or dental procedures. i'm still going for my best. and for eliquis. ask your doctor about eliquis. i own my own company. i had some severe fatigue, some funny rashes. finally, listening to my wife, went to a doctor. and i became diagnosed with hodgkin's lymphoma... that diagnosis was tough. i had to put my trust in somebody. when i first met steve, we recommended chemotherapy, and then we did high dose therapy and then autologous stem cell transplant. unfortunately, he went on to have progressive disease. i thought that he would be a good candidate for immune therapy. it's an intravenous medicine that can affect the patient's immune system and unleash it against the cancer.

with chemotherapy, i felt rough, fatigue, nauseous. and with immune therapy we've had such a positive result. i'm back to working hard. i've honestly never felt this great. i believe the future of immunotherapy at ctca is very bright. the evolution of cancer care is here. learn more at cancercenter.com appointments available now. my grandfather had a dream that his four little children will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. i have a dream that enough is enough.

and that this should be a gun-free world. period. >> my friends and i might still by 11, we might still be in elementary school, but we know life is not equal for everyone, and we know what is right and wrong. we also know we stand in the it shadow of the capitol, and we have kevin short years before we have the right to vote. >> i can't watch them all day long. young women showing that they're not afraid, that their voices will be heard. it's a phenomenon my friend gen palmieri explores in "deer madam president." i watched your interview last night with rachel and this morning on "morning joe." i was so -- we rehash the past,

and part of the privilege of serving is, i suppose, to detail these experiences to people learn from them. my favorite thing about the book is your look to the future. what do you see? this is what's amazen about yolanda king this is so much confident and joy, and there's nothing with more confidence that this a little girl, right? they think they can do anything and they have so much power, but at some point they lose that and they become inhibited. you know, that's learned behavior, to start to doubt yourself, it's learned behavior in society for us to -- to be perplexed by well seeking power.

i wrote the book hoping for young girls like yolanda, young women like emma gonzalez, who stood up there and cried for about 6 1/2 minutes, the length of the time, and was proud there having tears run down her face, when we're told not to show emotion. that's leading in a new way. i wrote the book so that generation of women can learn lessons that i did and i think you probably relate to it as a woman working in politics. there's obstacles, but i think that i have learned ways to understand that my voice mattered. men helped me a lot along the way, women helped me a lot. that's what the lessons are about. we talked think outsome of the crieses of the clinton campaign, when they were ropes around hillary clinton when he walked in the parade.

>> that's a big press crisis. >> we talked on the day on the commander in cheer debate, when her whereabouts were unknown. there's an open line of communication among press people, the good ones, and the people that cover them, but through the lens of what you write about, if any of one of those crises are ones that you would advice her to deal with differently? i was so frustrated by the commander in cleave forum. >> i talked to you -- >> i was here.

in her 18 minutes -- >> i don't want to relitigate the substance, but anything about how you responded? >> no, i think we didn't know any different way. what i said in the book is we realized -- or i realized, anyway that we had set out to prove she could do the job, just like any man could do the job. just as well as anybody who had the job before her. in doing that, you sort of reduce her to a female facsimile. and that robs her of a lot. i think even if she had one, and i want to be clear about this. even if she had won, she could still have these obstacles. people are comfortable with candidates -- and they have a problem with, that's where you start to hear things, you know, there's something about her i just don't like, something about her i just don't trust.

if people step back, it's a radical notion for women to be in charge, to be involved in politi politics. it's only been 100 years that women could eep vote. so they es places where we do politics, they were built up for centuries, and not with women in mind, there's still some obstacles, you shouldn't expect to fit in, but it is your right to change it, and lead and work the way you want to. so this is why i have a chapter called nod less and cry more. you don't have to just absorb that everything is told to you, and if you're a little frustrated and you want to let some tears out, that's okay to do, with the workplace, too. it's yours to shape. there's something about that trump election that made us feel empowered, that we're going to do things a different way. it's a life motto i'm going to adopt -- nod less, and cry more. >> get ready viewers. we're going to sneak in a break.

we'll be right back. if yor crohn's symptoms are holding you back,

and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. this condition has not been reported with entyvio. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach.

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.

ear eu-- we cut the "a" off north korea. order has been restored. this wall is now free of misspellings, even if the president's twitter feed is not. thank you all, that does it for our hour. "mtp daily" starts with katy tur in for chuck. nicolle wallace, thank you very much. a wonderful graphic today. the midterm forecast for the gop government is stormy. tonight, blue wave/red alert. could president trump's latest drama by just what