thank you so very much for being here with us and good night from nbc news headquarters in new york. we have just learned where the president is tonight. we had known that the president of going to a dinner in a private home tonight, somewhere in the d.c. area. he hasn't done all that many of these since becoming president. when he leaves the white house, he tends to go to one of his own private properties somewhere or his d.c. hotel, for example, but the white house today emphasized that the president would be leaving the white house to go to a dinner with supporters. he's done a couple of these in the last two weeks. the white house went out of its way to say this is not a fundraising dinner. so we've been wondering where he would be. the dinner is at the home of

jess -- giuseppe cecchi. he's described as a trump loyalest. but just because history is a dog that not only chases its tail, it catches it and bites hard, "the new york times" further reports tonight hopefully that cecchi at one point was known as the condo king of washington. among his most famous achievements in business is he was the developer of the watergate complex. yes, that watergate complex. the president holding a private dinner tonight with the guy who built watergate. you can see the president's dinner host here at work on the future watergate building. that's the puppy's tale in the news tonight. buying on to it is something else in the news this hour. i think we should have expected this to happen at some point.

i don't know why it happened today but i'm curious about it and we have to go to watergate to make sense of what is happening tonight. this was the front page of the "new york times" on sunday, october 21th, 1973. you see the big banner headline there across all eight columns of the front page. three big lines of capital letters, so much happening that the freaking headline had not one but two semicolons in the headline. quote, nixon discharges cox for defiance. abolishes watergate task force; richardson and ruckelshaus out." this was, of course, the sunday morning after the saturday night massacre and we've all memorized

what happened. nixon freaked out and ordered that the watergate special prosecutor should be fired. he told the attorney general to fire the special prosecutor. the attorney general said no and resigned. that's him on the left side of your screen. then with the attorney general out of the way, nixon went onto the next man in the line of succession, the deputy attorney general on the right side of your screen and he said he would not carry out the president's order to fire the watergate special prosecutor and he, too, resigned as deputy attorney general. so then the president had to keep chewing his way through the upper ranks of the justice department until he found the guy who was the third down the line of success and he agreed to

do it. the general said he would fire the prosecutor. this was in washington that saturday night, by the next morning it was earning double semicolon headlines and the hair was on fire about nixon's behavior and after the saturday night massacre politically he never recovered. but you know, that did not happen by happenstance. they ordered to fire the watergate prosecutor. they did that. they said no sir, i will resign instead. they did that because somebody thought ahead. go back to the big front page again. big headline, summing up the big news across the top of the page but then look a little bit further down the page. look at this article. this is the article that explains the third line of the big headline. it explains why the attorney

general, richardson said no, mr. president, you're going to order me to fire him in the protest, you see the subheadline, the explanation, attorney general says he couldn't oust prosecutor cites the autonomy vow. what's the autonomy vow? he said he could not carry out president nixon's order to discharge the watergate prosecutor in light of the pledge to provide mr. cox with full authority to contest claims of executive privilege. during his confirmation hearings, mr. richardson promised the prosecutor would have unimpeded authority to subpoena from any source including the president himself. elliott richardson insisted he would not counter or interfere and he promised the special prosecutor would not be dismissed except for improprieties on his part.

if there were not extraordinary improprieties on his part, he wouldn't fire the guy. that's what he had to promise to be attorney general. he was nominated to be attorney general in the middle of the water skate scandal. the previous attorney general ended up going to prison on perjury and obstruction of justice charges on the same day he ousted john dean and john all -- john ehrlichman and h.r. halderman, who would all go to prison for watergate. so when those guys were being pushed out and trying to bring in a new attorney general, comes time for the senate to confirm the new attorney general in the watergate scandal and they were thinking ahead there might be a problem in the nixon administration. they obtained that promise from him under oath as part of his confirmation proceedings. he promised he would not fire the watergate special prosecutor unless there were extraordinary improprieties on the part of that prosecutor. they got that promise from the

attorney general. when the new deputy general was nominated and confirmed, bill ruckeli ruckelsha ruckelshaus, he promised he would not fire the watergate special prosecutor unless there were extraordinary improprieties. dude, subpoena the white house tapes, which is pushing but not

extraordinary impropriety. the attorney general said no, it was only earlier that year he promised he wouldn't fire the guy except in extraordinary circumstances. he basically was able to tell the president, listen, i made a public promise i wouldn't do what you're asking me to do so i won't do it. i'll resign instead and the deputy attorney general had to say the same thing, i made a public promise i wouldn't do that. you're telling me to fire the guy, i made a public promise i wouldn't do that so i'll quit, too. that's why the saturday night massacre happened the way it did. it wasn't just the goodness of their heart and stoic virtue, at least it wasn't that alone. it was key, it was instrumental. that was how they explained their behavior at the time to the public, to the press and to the president. they made a promise publicly because somebody thought ahead to ask them to make that promise before push came to shove. so because we have that history, i think we should have expected

this to happen at some point but now tonight it has. and i'm cure i don't see as y c curious as to why it has tonight. nine democrats wrote to protect asked for the same kind of commitment to protect those in the mueller investigation did to protect the watergate matter back in 1973. the person at the justice department who oversees the mueller investigation is, of course, rod rosenstein. he's made this kind of public commitment. >> if you were ordered today to fire mr. mueller, what would you do? >> as i've explained previously, i would follow the regulation. if there were good cause, i would act, if there were no good cause, i would not. >> if there were no good cause, i would not act. i would not follow that order.

rod rosenstein is already first in the succession. he has already made this public commitment that he will not fire robert mueller unless there is good cause to do so. well, if the president fires rod rosenstein, though, the line of succession would go from him to the assistant attorney general for the office of legal counsel and then to the head of the national security division at the justice department and then it would go to two specific u.s. attorneys, first, the u.s. attorney in the eastern district of north carolina who is bobby higdon and aaron cox, no relation to archer cox, although i should check. these nine senators wrote to the whole line of succession. at the saturday night massacre, you had to go through three. this is written to all five,

rosenstein, francisco, engel, demerce, higdon, cox. and this is what he said: in this case it's written to all five below rosenstein, francisco, higdon, cox. we have significant concerns he could order the authority to interfere with the probe or shut it down. you fall in the line of succession at the department of justice if the deputy attorney general were resigned or removed. we request you provide a written and public commitment that you will not interfere in the special counsel's investigation into russian meddling in the 2016 elections. possible collusion with such meddling by the trump campaign, efforts to obstruct justice or any related inquiry. as such, we ask that you publicly commit to refuse any

order or request expressed or implied to interfere in the investigation including but not limited to firing mr. mueller, cutting off funding or resources, limiting staffing or inhibiting his ability to follow the facts wherever they may lead. so again, that letter is being sent out tonight from democrats on the senate judiciary committee and they are saying they want a response right away. so far there is no word prom -- from these five officials whether they will make that kind of promise. it is worth noting that the man above them in d.o.j. in the oversight position now, rod rosenstein, made that promise. so it wouldn't be weird if other officials followed in his stoot ste -- foot steps and did so as well. we'll have to wait over the next few days to see if they think they ought to make this kind of promise. very interesting. imagine being in their shoes right now knowing the history and the way the president talked about special counsel and railed against the attorney general for recruiting himself and against rod rosenstein and the way he railed against mueller, knowing

the history of the saturday night massacre, knowing how richardson is viewed in history versus how robert boric is viewed in history because he said yeah, i'll fire him. imagine being a justice department official facing that letter saying should i make the promise? other thing i'm curious about is why senators felt compelled to send these letters requesting this promise. i am interested in that particularly because only about 90 minutes before this letter went out tonight, we also out of the blue got this. right before that letter to all these justice department officials, we also unexpectedly got this joint bipartisan statement from delaware democratic senator chris and republican north carolina senator thom tillis that released this tonight. quote, we've heard from constituents and independents that agree robert mueller should be able to conduct his investigation without interference. this should not be a partisan issue.

we introduce the special counsel integrity act because we believe the american people should have confidence in the department of justice's ability to conduct independent investigation and its commitment to the rule of law. we urge president trump to allow the special counsel to complete his work without impediment, which is in the best interest of the american people, the president and our nation. okay. good to know. that special counsel integrity act they referenced there is in fact bipartisan legislation that chris coons and thom tillis released to protect the mueller investigation itself in case the president tries to kill it off. that's not gone anywhere because republican leadership has not let it. maybe this unexpected joint statement tonight from these two senators is just an effort to put a new spotlight on their old bill that still is kicking around and hasn't been acted on. but i'm curious why now? why tonight? and why less than two hours later did we get this we need

some promises here letter going out to the whole line of succession at the justice department? i don't know why both of those things happened tonight but i'm about to get to ask somebody who should probably know. joining us now is senator richard blumenthal, member of the senate judiciary committee, who signed that letter calling for justice department officials to commit they wouldn't interfere in the special counsel's investigation. and he also co-wrote an op-ed for "slate" tonight that calls out parallels for what happened in 1973. that does feel like quite a curtain opener for what we're seeing right now. thank you for being with us tonight. >> thank you, rachel. >> i'm not suspicious but i'm curious as to why now, why you and these other eight senators on the judiciary committee have sought these assurances from the

justice department tonight, particularly given that we also saw this interesting statement tonight from senator koons and tillis on a similar matter. >> the reason i wrote is for an increasing alarm of swirling concerns tonight and more and more concerning that the president may attempt to fire bob mueller. he tried it last june. and he stopped only because his white house counsel threatened to resign. now his legal team is disintegrating, including the possible departure of that white house counsel, the departure already of one of his lawyers and his tweets are increasingly erratic and extreme, but most fundamentally is the fact that the investigation is coming closer and closer to donald trump himself. he may well be interviewed shortly.

there are three guilty pleas of witnesses potentially against him with very relevant and important information that could incriminate him. there is a credible case of obstruction of justice right now against the president of the united states and that case becomes more and more compelling every day. in fact, the president's actions themselves are creating that case unfolding in realtime right before us. so this letter with congress now out of town and therefore unavailable to take action is meant to send a warning but also to elicit the commitment of these five officials who are in line of succession to rod rosenstein they will not fire bob mueller or interfere in the investigation by limiting staffing, cutting resources, constraining in any way his way to follow the facts and law. >> i'm struck by the fact deputy attorney general rod

rosenstein has given that public assurance more or less. he's told congress on several different occasions that he will strictly follow the special counsel regulations, that he would not follow in order to fire bob mueller if there weren't good cause for that order to have been issued. given the fact he's already made public assurances related to this matter, has the justice department or any individual justice department officials who you have approached, have they given you any indication whether they would see it as appropriate or inappropriate, whether they plan to address your concerns through any public statements? >> they have given no indication whatsoever, which is also a reason for alarm because it is very uncomplicated. there is nothing particularly elaborate or challenging about adhering to the rule of law and i'm alarmed by the republican

leadership blocking these bills. there is strong bipartisan support for the bills i introduced as well as senator koons and tillis. democrats have supported it. senator graham, republican of south carolina. and so i think that there ought to be a hearing. in fact, there ought to be votes in the judiciary committee that approve that legislation, bring it to the floor, allow to us vote on it and dispel a lot of the concern that there may be that we will be too late and the president will have acted and we will have this constitutional conflagration unnecessarily. but in the meantime, the pledge from these five officials in line of succession to rod rosenstein are very, very important, and they've given no indication about what they will do. >> senator richard blume nthal

from connecticut, thank you and thank you for helping us understand the way you're thinking. >> thank you. >> we've got a lot to get to. it's been a busy news day and night. stay with us. your sorry not sorry thing. your out with the old in with the new, onto bigger and better thing. get the live tv you love. no bulky hardware. no satellite. no annual contract. try directv now for $10/mo for 3 months. more for your thing. that's our thing. visit directvnow dot com looking for a hotel that fits... whoooo. ...your budget? tripadvisor now searches over... ...200 sites to find you the... ...hotel you want at the lowest price. grazi, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor.

my doctor recommended i switch to miralax.on, stimulant laxatives make your body go by forcefully stimulating the nerves in your colon. miralax is different. it works with the water in your body to hydrate and soften. unblocking your system naturally. miralax.

the person that ran the sense us -- census under our last republican president, president bush, he says, quote, it would be a horrendous problem for the census bureau and create controversies. the guy who ran the census under richard nixon and ford and carter says adding this question would be, quote, beyond comprehension at this point, it would be really bad. four former census directors told the supreme court in a legal filing, if this particular question was added to the census, the sum effect would be bad census data. and yet, the trump administration is going ahead and doing it. they announced they are adding a citizenship question to the next census, which is set for 2020. they are adding this question without even testing it, without doing any preparation on what effect this might have on the overall census. that's despite the fact that everybody who has run the census for the last 40 years says don't

do it, it will screw everything up. they like decided they will pour sugar in the gas tank. why have they decided that? everybody says no, everybody knows it's really bad for your car to put sugar in the gas tank but, yeah, they are going ahead they got a different idea. why is that? the census data we get every ten years is used to determine all kinds of things, congressional seats, electoral votes, how hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funding is divvied up and how much health care and schools and areas and businesses use census data all the time and everybody that's overseen the gathering of the data in the past says what the trump administration decided to do will throw a wrench into it. will screw up the data. the likely effect of adding the citizenship question is not just bad and accurate data but

specifically an undercount. adding the citizen ship question is likely to result in an under -- undercount because not just immigrants but anybody with an immigrant anywhere in their family or household might rashly -- rationally or irrationally have a worry about reporting that fact to the government. that person is therefore less likely to stand up and be counted, and therefore we're less likely to get an accurate count of the people in the country and the government knows this is the likely effect because internal focus group data from the census bureau shows people are already so freaked out by the current administration and attitudes. they are already more reluctant than they used to be to answer census questions from a

september census bureau memo. quote, census researchers heard respondents express concerns about topics like the muslim ban, discomfort registering other household members, the daca program and customs enforcement. researchers emphasized facing a new phenomenon and reporting fears have increased markedly this year. getting a bad count, specifically the undercounting of america, it's already a significant problem for communities of color or immigrant communities. the census burro estimated they under counted the hispanic population in the u.s. by 1 .5% in 2010 for the last census, which is big when you talk about the population of the country. this is certainly assuredly going to make that way, way worse. which is bad for the latino community in this country and also bad for anybody who uses the census data for anything and counts on it being true. and that's why this sort of seemingly technical rejection of expert advice on the subject clearly has a purpose and has

led to the blooming of 1,000 lawsuits today and that story is next. stay with us. i'm a concrete mason. i had severe fatigue, became diagnosed with hodgkin's lymphoma. he was a good candidate for immune therapy, which is allowing his immune system to attack the tumor. learn more at cancercenter.com

rest. rived to put unwelcome lawn weeds to rest. so draw the line. roundup for lawns is formulated to kill lawn weeds to the root without harming a single blade of grass. roundup, trusted for over forty years.

california has already jumped in. california has already filed suit to stop this. new york has also announced they're going to sue. at least ten other states say they're going to join that new york lawsuit. former attorney general eric holder's organization is suing. it's been barely 24 hours since the administration announced late last night that they would add a question on citizenship to the next census.

they overruled career officials at the bureau who warned that adding that question would lead to an undercut of the american population and they pressed forward despite the warning of every living person who has run the u.s. census before. yeah, a dozen states and a group run by the attorney general of the united states already filed at least three different major lawsuits against the trump administration's decision here and it is only day one. joining us now is the former head of the civil rights division and ceo of civil rights. miss gupta, thank you for your time. >> great to be here. >> why is an undercount on the census such a big deal and are you confident in the data that suggestions that will be the result of this action by the trump administration? >> an undercount on the census is a very big deal. the census is the basis as you said for congressional

representation, for the state and federal dollars to every part of the country. what i think is really important to note here is when the justice department sent a letter to the department of commerce back in december asking for the inclusion of this question, jeff sessions's justice department said that they needed this question to enforce the voting rights act. you and i may know jeff sessions has been no champion of civil rights and has called the voting rights act an intrusion and so suddenly jeff sessions has found religion on the voting rights act is the basis for this i think is laughable. and the decision to add a citizenship question that was made yesterday by secretary ross in effect weaponizes the census

for the kind of native partisan agenda that donald trump and jeff sessions have been promo promoting and this is a deeply alarming thing because ultimately the census is a constitutionally mandated program that's supposed to count every single person in the country, not just is the sense. every person. >> i know a little bit about the interesting constitutional origins. we have few things that were actually actively directed to do by the founding fathers and constitutional inheritance. we have to have a post office. there aren't that many of those. i'm familiar with that. i'm also familiar with the political importance of the census, the different things it's used for from the business world to academic research to the allocation of federal dollars and very, very important allocation decisions, what i don't know anything about at all, though, is the census has a

subject of litigation. how clear is the case law and the president in terms of conducting the census fairly, conducting it in a way that is designed to be effective and not purposely under count people. what do you make of the chances the various lawsuits have at challenging the decision here? >> as you said, there are very few things mandated in the constitution and conducting a fair count of every person who is in this country is one of them and it's for the purpose of being able to determine to ensure a certain participation of certain vulnerable communities. and so i think that these lawsuits are making a very strong and viable claim that in so doing, there is purposeful constitutional efforts to

undermine the census. and frankly, it's really important that the leadership coalition continue to urge con to take the right step. it's why people need a vote in november, to make sure that this kind of thing, the politicizatiopli politicization of the census and undermining of our constitution is not going unaccounted for. >> the obama administration, now president and ceo of the

leadership conference on civil rights. thank you for helping us understand this. when you say there will be more litigation to come. i believe you. thanks for being here tonight. >> thank you. >> also, the last point she was making there that congress can overturn this in november 2018, obviously that won't happen with republican control. people are realizing the democratic takeover in november should in some ways be predicated on this issue. if democrats are going to be procedurally disenfranchised or at least disadvantaged in electoral politics, this will be a big deal.

i no wondering, "what if?" uncertainties of hep c. i let go of all those feelings. because i am cured with harvoni. harvoni is a revolutionary treatment for the most common type of chronic hepatitis c. it's been prescribed to more than a quarter million people. and is proven to cure up to 99% of patients who've have had no prior treatment with 12 weeks. certain patients can be cured with just 8 weeks of harvoni. before starting harvoni, your doctor will test to see if you've ever had hepatitis b, which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after harvoni treatment. tell your doctor if you've ever had hepatitis b, a liver transplant, other liver or kidney problems, hiv or any other medical conditions and about all the medicines you take including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with harvoni can cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects of harvoni include tiredness, headache and weakness. ready to let go of hep c? ask your hep c specialist about harvoni.

this is a good story with a bad ending. but it's a good story. when boris yeltsin announced he was running for reelection in russia in 1996, his advisors famo famously wept. he was in fifth place in the polls, his staffers said he seemed old and frail and sick. they thought they were witnessing their guy's last hurrah in russian politics.

so they stood backstage and cried when he announced he was running for reelection. but then yeltsin made a big comeback. he did it with advertising. he has a picture of this guy's face and in russian it says, "this could be your last chance to buy food i ". vote for boris, otherwise you'll starve! wo wow. et be-- yeltsin beat his oppone. "yeltsin campaign rose from tears to triumph." one said people were so bamboozled by that campaign that it turned their brains to mish mash.

that's a technical term, mish mash. that that campaign was developed by mckale lesin. and for that yeltsin made him his press minister and he stuck around the kremlin for a while, through the beginning of the vladimir putin years. he was an important person in putin's inner circle, he helped run oppo against critics, they called him "the bulldozer." and most recently he worked for russia's state-owned gas companies, head of media there. in russia it's not weird for the state gas and state oil companies to have their own tv station and media empires but mikhail lesin announced he was

quitting his cushy job at gazprom media. there were reports he was going to be investigated in the united states for money laundering. reportedly fearing for his life, he contacted the fbi and the u.s. justice department and reportedly told them that he was ready to cooperate in that money laundering case if they could keep him safe. during that time his wheres about were kind of a mystery, until he turned up dead in a hotel in washington, d.c. with an appointment to go to the justice department the very next day. hold that thought. and tank. and tiny. and this is laura's mobile dog grooming palace. laura can clean up a retriever that rolled in foxtails, but she's not much on "articles of organization." articles of what? so, she turned to legalzoom. they helped me out. she means we helped with her llc, trademark, and a lot of

other legal stuff that's a part of running a business. so laura can get back to the dogs. would you sit still? this is laura's mobile dog grooming palace and this is where life meets legal. as being your moste note important note. so ave-ma. if you nail that then you're golden. i look where the rim and the net meet. put that basketball right on those hooks, and that's what i lock in on. let's talk about the equation of cooking. ingredients and execution. ingredients are controlled by somebody else. execution is all about you. 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. ♪

♪ applebee's to go. order online and get $10 off $30. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

in november 2015 an employee at the dupont circle hotel in washington, d.c. opened up the room, opened up the door to the penthouse suite on the ninth floor and found a dead guy laying face down on the carpet. lessin, vladimir putin's former media czar found dead by hotel staff. according to the medical examiner, the cause of death was blunt force injuries to the head and also to the neck, torso, upper and lower extremitieextre.

quote, the manner of death -- undetermined." so we have the cause of death not determined. the justice department opened the investigation to figure out how an ex-russian was found dead. they got it, they figured out the manner of death and what kill that russian guy, how he got blunt forced to death all over his body. they concluded that the death of lesin was an accident. all that blunt trama to his head and his neck and his torso and his upper extremities and lower extremity was an accident. the justice department determined he died alone in his hotel room after days of heavy drinking. he drunkenly fell down multiple times, which is how he got all t those injuries that killed him. he got trunk and fell down until he died. that's how they closed the case. there was still a ton of open questions around his death as you might imagine. for months people speculated whether he did fall to death

in a d.c. hotel room over and over again while all alone. it was a big mystery. there was a lot of discussion about it. and then three fbi agents came forward and spoke to buzz feed news last summer and said unequivocally that lesin did not drink and fall himself to death in that hotel room. three fbi agents spoke to buzzfeed news last summer. they said unequivocally that mikhail lesin did not drink and fall to himself to death. he was bludgeoned to death with a baseball bat. he was beaten to death there isn't a single person inside the bureau who believes this guy got drunk, fell down and died.

everybody thinks he was whack and that putin or the kremlin were behind it. which is news. but it still left open the question of why he got whacked in the first place, and whether this would ever be solved as a murder. those fbi agents had an answer for that, too. quote, it was the department of justice that paid for the hotel room where lesin died. d.o.j. officials invited him to washington to interview him about the workings about rt. but lesin never made it to the interview. he died the night before it was scheduled to take place. so these anonymous fbi agents coming to buzzfeed and telling them that hours before mikhail lesin was scheduled to talk to u.s. investigators, he was murdered in his d.c. hotel room that report from buzzfeed news for obvious reasons went off like a rocket last year when they opened it. opened a cascade of fresh questions about that case and what the u.s. government would do about it if those agents were right. now today buzzfeed has added more supporting evidence to the dramatic claim. and this time it's from a different but familiar source. quote, the fbi possesses a secret report asserting that mikhail lesin was beaten to death by hired thugs in washington, d.c. according to the report, lesin fell out with a powerful

oligarch close to putin. wanting to impress putin, he contracted with russian state security agents to beat lesin up. the goal was not to kill lesin, but lesin died from the attack. the report according to four sources was written by the former british intelligence agent christopher steele, who also wrote the famous dossier alleging that russia had been cultivating, supporting and assisting donald trump. just yesterday the united states joined more than 20 countries and expelled a whole bunch of russian diplomats out of the country. closed a consulate in seattle. kicked out those russian diplomats, all in response to the poisoning of sergei skripal, attacked by on a park bench in britain earlier this month. britain has blamed moscow for orchestrating that assassination attempt on their soil. the foreign minister says it's attributable to vladimir putin. the uk has kicked out diplomats. yesterday we kicked out 60 russian diplomats from our country in solidarity of britain and all these other countries around the world. now that buzzfeed has broken this news today that the fbi

has, among other things, a report from christopher steele that a similar attack might have been carried out right here in the united states a mile away from the white house, what happens next in this story? joining us now is jason leopold, senior investigative report were buzzfeed news. mr. leopold, this is some reporting, man. >> thank you. >> congratulations. >> it was a heavy lift. >> yeah. >> we spent a year reporting this out. and just to, if i may add, it was not just christopher steele who handed this report, but in addition, three sources independent of steele also went to the fbi with basically the same story about mikhail lesin and about the way -- the manner in which he died. >> i'm going ask you a steele question that i don't think you're going to be able to answer in terms of protecting sources. >> sure. >> but you don't say why christopher steele did a report on this nor who he was being -- who was paying him to do it. are those things you can't talk about? >> correct. but let me just be clear.

i'm continuing to do additional reporting on it. >> there is no indication that this reporting that he did on this death in d.c. is directly connected to or paid for by the same people who did the russia trump steele dossier? >> i have no evidence at all. >> okay. so what is not unbelievable about this reporting is that this guy might have been killed because of his connections to russia. it does seem unbelievable that the u.s. government came to this conclusion about his death. >> yeah, i mean, it's crazy. when they came out -- when he died in november of 2015, it was undetermined. and march of 2016, that's when the coroner said it was blunt force injuries, head, neck and torso. multiple blunt force injuries. they spent a year investigating this. and we know now from our freedom of information act lawsuit against multiple government agencies that they had a grand jury investigation, that they

were investigating this as a homicide, multiple witnesses came before a grand jury compelled to give evidence, that the metropolitan police department in d.c. had asked the fbi to step in, help them look at surveillance footage to make sure nothing was tampered with. they had asked the fbi to -- fbi agents to pay particular attention to the back of mikhail lesin's head in some of this surveillance footage, which sort of indicates that perhaps when they found him body, what the back of his head may have looked like. the one thing, however, that in the documents that the government has released and is part of their narrative, they have not explained how he sustained those blunt force injuries. they only in a press release they've said that he fell down multiple times. but in these documents, there is nothing there. so in the course of our reporting, and also you noted

previously about fbi agents coming forward, we went aggressively to try to get fbi agents, current and former and intelligence officers to speak to us about this case. so it was an explanation as to why it took so long. and it was during the course of that reporting that we discovered that christopher steele himself had written a report in 2016, had looked at this, that he had sources inside and -- the kremlin who provided him with this information. and then we had additional sources who basically said that mikhail lesin had a professional relationship with an oligarch that he fell out of favor with, and that's ultimately was the catalyst that led to the beating

and his demise. >> because of these multiple rounds of reporting you have now done on this subject, and because there were multiple fbi agents who were willing to talk to you about this, is it impossible that this could be reopened as a case and reinvestigated in the idea that putin might have gotten away with something like this on u.s. soil is distressing. >> sure. with regard to reopening it, we asked the metropolitan police department in d.c. they said if additional evidence is presented, they'll reopen it. >> here is some. >> they'll reopen it. i also want to make it clear that in these documents, right, and they said they don't have any evidence that there was foul play here. but again, the fact that they're claiming that he fell down multiple times alone in a drunken state in his hotel room -- >> until he died is hard to -- jason, congratulations on a heavy lift of the scoop here. >> appreciate it. ♪

tired of wrestling with seemingly impossible cleaning tasks? using wipes in the kitchen can be ineffective.

try mr. clean magic eraser. simply add water, to remove burnt on food and grease. try mr. clean magic eraser.

(vo)is ahhhmazing!ful simple goodness meaty morsels. a tender texture. with real meat and a blend of peas and carrots i can see. a totally new kind of awesome going on here! (avo) new beneful simple goodness. tender, meaty morsels with real ingredients you can see. that does it for us tonight. we'll see you tomorrow. now it's time for "the last word" with the great lawrence o'donnell. i'm sorry to go to you three seconds early. i screwed up. do you want me to hum a few bars? >> no. take a look at this wall behind me. i don't know if you had your tv on this afternoon when nicolle wallace was on. this is a wall created by her graphics team. it's all the people -- it

actually covered her whole set. it's all the people donald trump has found a way to attack. it's a sample. it's just a tiny sample. and stormy daniels' name is not up there because he just hasn't gotten around to it. by the >> that's okay. >> the stormy daniels of msnbc, apparently. >> hey, wait! >> apparently he is so afraid of you. that's what it means if he hasn't attacked you. he is so afraid of you, he doesn't want people to know you exist. that's how afraid he was. >> also there was that shark week thing between us. >> that's exactly right. >> thank you, lawrence. >> thank you, rachel. that worked. got a little bit of a blush out of rachel. the news of the night is there is no white house. have you realized that yet? there is no white house. not since donald tru