discussed -- >> i do know that they discussed syria. they absolutely discussed syria. the focus of that discussion -- i think president trump has shared this -- was an effort to find a political resolution there and to get the displaced persons the opportunity to return to syria. and i think the president has talked about one more item. as the president shared, i feel like i can as well. i think he also talked about america's continued commitment to ensure that israel was secure from threats in syria as well, and that topic was discussed by them as well. i think the president has previously shared that. >> do you know if there was any sort of downgrading of our u.s. presence in israel -- i mean in syria that was discussed? >> there's been no change in u.s. policy with respect to our activities in syria. >> i understand. but that's not exactly the question i'm asking. >> senator, it's what matters. it's what matters. what matters is what president trump has directed us to do following his meeting with

vladimir putin. it's what he has told his senior leadership team to do and how he wants us to deploy his foreign policy strategy. >> and do you know if the frozen stabilization funds for syria, the $200 million, was that ever discussed? >> senator, there's been -- we are still working to review that policy. that's a state department policy. we are still working to review it. that policy was the same the day before as it was the day after the president's meeting with vladimir putin. >> and do you know if iran was referenced in the context of syria in their discussions? >> senator, again, it's not, it's not for me to disclose the contents of those conversations. i can tell you that each time i have spoken with president trump, both before helsinki summit and after, iran has been a central point that we have focused on with respect to u.s. policy in syria. i'm confident it will remain so. >> so -- >> hi, everyone.

it's 4:00 in new york. we are going to keep listening to secretary of state mike pompeo testifying on capitol hill, answering questions about what happened in that two-hour one on one meeting between vladimir putin and president trump. we are also waiting to hear from the president, an unscheduled precedent in the rose garden alongside the european commission. we expect them to make an announcement on trade, but hope springs eternal and we hope trump will answer questions about an audio recording released last night by the president's former fixer, michael cohen. our panel is here. but right now we're going to continue listening to the secretary of state. >> and also posted on social media, and again, i'm quoting the russian media. they say -- ministry, i mean. with his statements, the general not only discredited the official position of his supreme commander in chief, but also exacerbated the illegality under international law and u.s. law of the military presence of american servicemen in syria. can you tell me what our

response has been to the russian ministry of defense with respect to this statement? >> senator, my guess the response would be most appropriately from the department of defense and not the department of state, but i will humbly suggest to you, you ought to have more confidence in statements in general vo tell statement. >> that's why i'm raising this question. it steams to me our response to the russian ministry of defense ought to be very strong to say they have nothing to say about what our generals are doing in syria. that's not their business, that's our business. and i would hope that that's a point that we make very strongly. i had the opportunity to visit syria a little over two weeks ago, and i was very impressed with the work that our military has been doing in northern -- northeast syria along the turkish border. i was very impressed with the work of the syrian democratic

forces. and what i heard over and over again, both from the men and women who were serving and from the civilian -- syrian civilians on the ground was, please don't leave us here to the fate of either assad or the russians or other forces that may come into that part of syria. and please, just a little bit in help for reconstruction efforts would go a very long way. that part of syria has stabilized. they are into reconstruction. they are sending back people who have been displaced to their homes and it would be, i believe, a realtor i believe reversal of policy for us to leave those folks after what we've done, and to turn them over to the russians or to assad's forces. >> senator, if i might, just so the facts are clear, the

previous administration is the one that enabled russia to have the capacity they have in syria today -- >> i'm not defending the previous administration, mr. secretary. i want this administration to continue doing what's working. >> it's policy. this administration is policy. you're advocating for the continuation of this administration's policy. i think that's important for everyone to understand. >> senator flake. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, secretary, for your testimony. i want to commend the state department. you in particular for quick statements with regard to the nature of the conversation as it was between president putin and president trump regarding certain individuals, like mr. mcfaul and others traveling to russia, to be interrogated by the russians. the state department came out and said that was inappropriate, despite the president's statement that there was an

incredible offer. it took the white house a full two days or three days to contradict that statement that president putin had made, but the state department quickly said that was inappropriate. and so thank you for doing that. >> senator flake, you give me a little too much credit. i am doing my level best every day to implement the president's policies. although that statement was from united states president's state department. >> okay. but the united states president said that it was an incredible offer, and so that's why i'm pointing out the difference in commending you. please take it. with regard to what else was said during that meeting, i know you've given some indication of what was discussed. let me just give a sense of how russia is characterizing that meeting, and this is the problem with a private meeting like

this. many of us voiced strong concerns about having a private meeting like this with no read-out officially for what happened, and here's what happens when a private meeting like that is held. vladimir putin's meeting with donald trump was, quote, better than super, russia's top diplomat said. it was fabulous. lavrov said that. the remarks reported by russian news agency summed up the mood that mr. trump sided with the kremlin over his own intelligence agency. so they are reporting that as well. here's how one paper in russia characterized it. trump has failed to dominate putin. another tabloid said, a quiet modest trump has paled in comparison with vladimir putin. it's clear that putin has outmaneuvered the u.s. president. that's the russian media characterizing a meeting and we have no read-out to dispute any

of it. all we have are the statements made by the president that he made an incredible offer, for example, to have former u.s. diplomats shipped off to russia to be interrogated. i'm glad to hear that, one, a little more time will be had before a new meeting takes place between the two principals. i think it's good our president and russian president meet and speak together. that's a good thing. i don't think it's a good thing to meet in private with only a interpreter present with no read out so what is characterized is only characterized by the russian side. so, do you have any response or thoughts on that? >> so, i have a personal experience. i had a private conversation with north koreans. we didn't issue a read-out on the conversations quite intentionally. and the north korean press chose to characterize it. we thought it was in america's best interest not to respond tit

for tat about the nature of that conversation. we knew the truth. we knew what had taken place there. and, you know, it's the north korean press, and so i assume that most reasonable people will discount it fairly significantly the same way one might the russian press. these are important decisions about how much to disclose about private conversations because everyone knows that you may have an expectation that you'll have another private conversation one day, and the absence of their belief that that private conversation has the capacity to remain in that space reduces the freedom to have those conversations. i know you've had this in your life, too, senator. i know you've had private conversations and you valued them. it was just you and someone else in that room and it was important. and you didn't give anyone a read-out from it because you wanted to have the chance to do that again because you thought you could make real progress with that person. >> let's talk about north korea. you brought it up. you mentioned that you traveled

to north korea to continue on as you put it, i guess to follow-up on commitments made in singapore. let's talk about those commitments for a minute. you mentioned they have committed to denuclearization. they may have a different read-out than we do on what that entails. but so far they seem to be walking back any commitment, real commitment that was made there. what commitment, firm commitment, other than discussion of returning remains -- i'm not discounting that, but in terms of denuclearization, what real commitments were made? >> i'm not going to get into the private commitments that have been shared. i don't think it's fair to characterize them walking back from commitments. remember where we were, right? so it all depends what you draw as the projected line to say, are we in a better place or a worse place than we would have been absent the singapore summit? one can draw counter factual

reference, we never know where we might have been. but i will concede there is an awful lopping way to go. i'm not trying to oversell the accomplishments that we've had towards the path of denuclearization to date. there remains a great deal of work to do. it will be highly contested. that is the modalities, the means, the timing of this. things i'm confident we'll be discussing for a period of time. there have been public reports -- and i know the united states is tracking the disassembly of the missile test site. it is something chairman kim commit toda committed to orally. it wasn't in writing. they are beginning to dismantle that. it has to do with the missile program. it's a good thing. steps forward. >> okay, thank you. quickly before the time is up, something completely different, the country of rwanda right now -- and you may be familiar with this because of this week's focus on religious freedom. >> yes.

>> has indicated a move of severe restrictions of religious freedom particularly outside groups. what plan is the state department to let them know that that is not in their own interest nor ours? >> senator, i share your concerns. i'll need to get back to you in terms of what actions we think -- i know we'll call it out. i know we'll label it for what it is. we do need to see what -- it is tragic and -- anyway, i share your concerns. it's a huge challenge for us. >> thank you. >> thank you. senator kaine. >> thank you, mr. chair. thank you, mr. secretary. mr. secretary, just a couple of thoughts. i was very discouraged at the helsinki summit when the president basically was offered a choice in some of the questions that he believed u.s. intel or did he believe vladimir putin's protestations that he engaged in hacking of the election. he basically said my own people made a great case to me. vladimir putin has made a great

case to me. i don't see why russia would have done this. he came back and corrected it the next day in the united states. at the end, he said i believe my intel community, but there's a lot of people out there. it could have been someone else. then this dragged on for a couple days. you know where i live. i have a lot of constituents who used to be your employees at the cia. people come to me in virginia and say i'm with the i.c. and they're very demoralized by this. when they stand up to president putin, the president's words were he trusted vladimir putin over them. there was the suggestion when president trump said it was an incredible offer about ambassador mcfaul, that he was also potentially willing to throw not just intel folks under the bus, but state department diplomats under the bus. they live in virginia, too. they feel the demoralization as

well. what i want to ask you about is our military, the military leadership. there was an article yesterday in the washington post, general joseph f. dunford, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff as of monday, dunford still hadn't been briefed on helsinki, even though it directly affects more than 1 million troops dunford over sees. do you know why there have been no briefing of general dunford about the discussions that took place at helsinki? >> senator, you have to ask the department of defense or chairman dunford. >> but you don't dispute that that was -- you have no knowledge that there was a briefing of general dunford to today about the helsinki discussion, do you? >> senator, you just read me a piece from the washington post. >> i'm asking your knowledge. do you have any knowledge that the administration has shared discussions about u.s./russia military issues with the united states head of joint chiefs of staff? >> i was with him yesterday in a series of meetings.

we had a chance to have a conversation about it, yes, absolutely. >> so yesterday may have been the first time he was briefed about it. >> it is possible, yes. >> i was going to ask about general votel, but the information that jean shaheen -- senator shaheen mentioned earlier, he expressed wariness about working with russia and the russian defense ministry. this is an interesting statement. they went after general votel ahead of cencom who over sees middle eastern syria. he not only discredited the official position of his supreme commander in chief -- are you aware what the official position is that is being referenced in that statement? >> you'd have to speak with the russian ministry of defense to know what it was he was referring to. >> but you can understand why we're concerned if it's being reported in russian press as senator flake and senator shaheen said they're talking about official positions the

president has outlined. as far as you know general votel's statements did not violate any positions of the united states, did they? >> you seem to be giving a great deal of -- >> let me ask you about general votel. >> i have great belief in his truthfulness. >> you do not believe any of the statements he's made including those that i read violate any official position of the united states, do you? >> senator, if you would, that's best approached with general votel. i'm three orders removed. >> if i could introduce for the record, there is an interesting article in buzzfeed news just recently -- today -- that just listed a whole series of headlines. i think these are instructive, mr. chair. trump's announcement that he will end u.s. korea drills catches pentagon off guard. pentagon is surprised by pledge to stop military exercises. trump signals withdraw of troops from syria, surprising pentagon and state department. pentagon caught by surprise by

trump's travel ban pushes for some iraqis to get special consideration. u.s. joint chiefs blind sided by trump's transgender ban. north com caught off guard as trump orders troops to u.s./mexico border. if i could introduce this for the record, mr. chair. >> without objection. >> i worry about an administration that would take the putin position over our intel community. i worry about the administration that would suggest it might be a great deal to consider handing over a former diplomat for questioning. i worry about an administration that is catching the pentagon off guard, that is not consulting with general dunford or briefing him for a week after a summit of this importance to our military. mr. secretary, you're aware of the ndaa prohibition, the current prohibition on russian and military -- russian and u.s. joint military operations, are you not? >> i'm aware of the existence of that provision, yes. >> the provision prohibits any use of funds, it's in the nda,

use of funds to support joint russia and u.s. military operations and it also gives the secretary of defense the ability to undertake a national security waiver if he thinks that's the right idea. does the administration accept the legality and binding nature of that provision of law? >> senator, i -- i think the d.o.d. general counsel would be the right person to ask about the intricacies of an nda provision that had to do with complex issues that span the gap between i think what you're getting between coordination. it's a complex undertaking. not a waiver that the state department has the authority. but broadly, yes, this administration follows the law if that's the question. >> sitting here today, you're not aware of a legal concern that the administration has about this nda provision, are you? >> we're going to go from capitol hill to the rose garden where the president is about to make an announcement about trade.

>> thank you very much. appreciate it. and i appreciate all of our great senators and so many of our representatives for being here. senator john boseman -- john, you're here someplace. thank you. senator mike crapo? thank you, mike. senator steve danes? senator hoven? thank you. they're all here. senator cindy hyde smith. cindy, thank you very much. senator james lankford. james? thank you, james. senator pat roberts. he loves those farms. he loves the farmers like i do. representative diane black. diane, thank you. representative kevin brady. with our new tax bill, how is it coming, kevin, good?

representative mike conoway? thank you, mike. represent dan new house. thank you, dan. representative christy nome. have to call her governor. that was a great win. thanks, christy. representative david reikert. david, thank you. so, we had a big day, very big. we met right here at the white house to launch a new phase in the relationship between the united states and the european union, a phase of close friendship, of strong trade relations in which both of us will win, of working better together for global security and prosperity, and of fighting jointly against terrorism. the united states and the european union together account

for more than 830 million citizens and more than 50% of the global gdp -- in other words, together we're more than 50% of trade. if we team up, we can make our planet a better, more secure and more prosperous place. already today the united states and the european union have a $1 trillion bilateral trade relationship, the largest economic relationship anywhere in the world. we want to further strengthen this trade relationship to the benefit of all american and european citizens. this is why we agreed today, first of all, to work together towards zero tariffs, zero non-tariff barriers, and zero subsidies on non-auto industrial goods. [ applause ] thank you. thank you.

we will also work to reduce barriers and increase trade-in services, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, medical products, as well as soybeans. soybeans is a big deal. and the european union is going to start almost immediately to buy a lot of soybeans. they're a tremendous market, buy a lot of soybeans from our farmers in the midwest primarily. so, i thank you for that, jean-claude. this will open markets for farmers and increase investment and lead to greater prosperity in both the united states and the european union. it will also make trade fairer and more reciprocal, my favorite word, reciprocal. secondly, questiwe agreed to a strengthen and strengthening of our strategic cooperation with respect to energy. the european union wants to import more liquefied natural

gas, lng, from the united states, and they're going to be a very, very big buyer. we're going to make it much easier for them, but they are going to be a massive buyer of lng, so they'll be able to diversify their energy supply, which they want very much to do. and we have plenty of it. thirdly, we agreed today to launch a close dialogue on stand ashds in order to ease trade, reduce bureaucratic obstacles, and slash costs dramatically. fourthly, we agreed to join forces to protect american and european companies from better and really better than ever -- we've never done like we're doing. i can say from the standpoint of the united states, we've never done this well, but we're going to do a lot better after we do this deal and other deals that we're currently working on.

likewise, the european union is going to do better, stronger, bigger. we will, therefore, work closely together with like minded partners to reform the wto and to address unfair trading practices, including intellectual property theft, forced technology transfer, industrial subsidies, distortions created by state-owned enterprises, and over capacity. we decided to set up immediately an executive working group of very intelligent people on both sides. they'll be our closest advisors and they're going to carry out this joint agenda. in addition, it will identify short-term measures to facilitate commercial exchanges and assess existing tariff measures and what we can do about that to the betterment of both. while we are working on this, we

will not go against the spirit of this agreement unless either party terminates the negotiation. so we're starting the negotiation right now, but we know very much where it's going. we also will resolve the steel and aluminum tariff issues, and we will resolve retaliatory tariffs. we have some tariffs that are retaliatory and that will get resolved as part of what we're doing. and with that, jean-claude, please. >> mr. president, ladies and gentlemen, when i was invited by the president to the white house -- >> i will say the president making an announcement on trade. phil rucker color me skeptical, cynical, but i think someone wants to change the subject. >> he sure does. trump has been feeling so much heat, including importantly from republican lawmakers over the retaliatory tariffs that other countries, including china, have

put in place targeting farmers in this country. it's been a hot issue all week. the president pleaded for patience yesterday when he was in kansas city for the speech to the vfw. he's here at the road garden trying to make a big announcement, trying to announce the deal. i want to withhold judgment until we see sort of in writing what this deal is. and if it's a concrete deal or more of one of these sort of loose agreements to arrive at some sort of a compromise that we're used to seeing from this president. >> michael steele, if you look at our negotiations with north korea, their nuclear program, i'm going to bet my last dollar on loose as phil rucker just laid out the options when it comes to donald trump. but talk about -- and we are monitoring this rose garden event. if the president takes any questions that are about anything in the news, the release of the tape from his former fixer michael cohen, the specifics that phil rucker just alluded to, or the grilling that his secretary of state is taking

up on capitol hill, we will, of course, bring those right to you. but michael steele, this is not a white house on offense on any front today, is it? >> no, it's not. this is, i think phil put his finger right on the bright shiny object that this all is. you toss it in the air. it will go down a particular rabbit hole, and the hope is the media especially will go down that rabbit hole and focus on this brand-new breakthrough in our trade relationships with the european union. i think as phil said, we need to see what the document actually says. my suspicion is given everything else that the president has said in this area, this is a loosy goosy arrangement. there is no up side for our farmers. and the soybeans, okay, that's great, but they're getting impacted as you know, nicolle, by more than just soybean futures. the fact of the matter is this is one of those moments where the president is being

confronted on the domestic front by some serious issues surrounding the ongoing probes into his campaign and the early days of his administration. and this now serves as an opportunity to talk about something else other than that. >> michael steele made the turn for us. i'm going to make it for all of you. frank figliuzzi, let me get one question in to you about the backdrop with which the president went to the rose garden. obviously eager to change the subject, turned his back on reporters shouting questions about the things in the news, namely that leaked audiotape from a recording where he seems very, very, very conversant in a hush money operation to silence at least one woman with whom he had an alleged sexual relationship. >> yeah, so that's the backdrop. what we're seeing here is essentially a distraction. he's called a press conference to announce as we used to say in atlanta, he's fixing to get ready to do something good, and it might involve soybeans, but

we don't have any details y. is he doing this? he's troubled by the release of this snippet. i'll be the first to admit there is not on its face any chargeable act in that clip that we've got. but seconds later when that thing breaks off, we don't know what's being said. we don't know the context of it. here's what i zero in on. number one, cohen is talking about needing to create a company to do a structured payment, a payment of some kind, to a mistress who needs to be kept silent or to ami in order to get the rights to the story of the mistress to keep it silent. then we hear the word cash and we hear the word check, and we hear the word financing. to an fbi agent, what that raises is the question of possible money laundering, possible bank fraud, and wire fraud. why are you setting up a company to pay someone if it's on the up and up? why aren't you writing a check that says trump organization on it? when the president says, check or cash, when he says cash, is he talking about let's keep it off the record, let's not do any documented issues? when he says check, and cohen

says, no, no, no, what's going on with that? are they avoiding suspicious activity reports, which would be triggered by a large cash payment? we don't know. but it's troubling trump enough to call press conference to announce nothing. >> frank figliuzzi is today serving as a human tease. we are going to dig into every single one of those questions on the other side of this break. don't go anywhere. jean woke up with knee pain.

but she's got work to do. so she took aleve. if she'd taken another pain reliever, she'd be stopping for more pills by now. only aleve has the strength to stop tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. aleve. all day strong. you may be learning about, medicare and supplemental insurance. medicare is great, but it doesn't cover everything ...only about 80% of your part b medicare costs.

a medicare supplement insurance plan may help cover some of the rest. learn how an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company might be the right choice for you. a free decision guide is a great place to start. call today to request yours. so what makes an aarp medicare supplement plan unique? these are the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp because they meet aarp's high standards of quality and service. you're also getting the great features that any medicare supplement plan provides. you may choose any doctor that accepts medicare patients. you can even visit a specialist. with this type of plan there are no networks or referrals needed. also, a medicare supplement plan... ...goes with you when you travel anywhere in the u.s. call today for a free guide.

your hair is so soft! did you use head and shoulders two in one? i did mom. wanna try it? yes. it intensely moisturizes your hair and scalp and keeps you flake free. manolo? look at my soft hair. i should be in the shot now too. try head and shoulders two in one. we have just started discussing the open warfare between dwup and his former fixer michael cohen who last night released a recording that puts donald trump smack-dab in the center of that hush money operation used to silence a woman in the weeks before americans went to the ballot box in 2016. the woman karen mcdougal is a former play boy play mate. she had an alleged sexual relationship with donald trump ten years earlier. it is the clearest indication yet that donald trump could end up in some legal jeopardy in terms of potential campaign finance violations.

a reality his attorney rudy giuliani seems to understand as a possibility as well as he draws on his experience prosecuting mafia families to make sense of the tape release last night. >> i've done about 4,000 hours of mafia people on tapes. i know how to listen to them, i know how to transcribe them. this tape is crystal clear when you listen to it. i've dealt with much worse tapes than this. >> while some of the recording is indeed muddled, here are the headlines. donald trump discussed the decision to silence karen mcdougal and pay her through his ally, david pecker, the owner of the nargsal enquirer. donald trump and michael cohen seem to debate how to pay for mcdougal's silence and whether to use cash or a check. the cash was on the menu as something we'll ask frank and joyce about. donald trump was concerned about a lawsuit with "the new york times" over records related to his divorce from ex-wife ivana. donald trump was aware of the need to keep damaging incidents out of the news until a future point in time seemingly but not

explicitly the november election. we're going to watch that tape together and talk about it on the other side with some of our most favorite reporters and friends. >> you know what's happening, okay? oh. oh. maybe because of this it would be better if you didn't go, you know? maybe because of this, for that one, you know, get rid of this because it's so -- such bull shut. i think, i think this was -- i think it's probably better do

the jones thing, just this time, yeah. it's fine. i think right now it's better, you know? okay, honey, you take care of yourself. thanks, dan, yeah. so long. >> great call, by the way. great call. big time. >> you guys are -- >> what's happening? any more? >> hundreds million more firms. >> i don't mean that. black burn, can we use them? >> i'm sorry, he just called. he had an idea for you. >> we got served from "the new york times." i told you this. to unseal the divorce papers with ivana. we're fighting it. kasowitz -- >> never be able -- >> they'll never -- they don't have a legitimate purpose.

>> a woman that doesn't -- >> correct. for about two, three weeks now. >> all you have to do is delay it for -- >> even after that, it's not ever going to be opened. there's no purpose for it. i told you about charleston. i need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend david so that -- i'm going to do that right away. >> give it to me. >> and i've spoken to alan weiselberg about how to set the whole thing up with -- funding -- yes. and it's all the stuff -- >> -- >> all the stuff. here you never know where that company -- >> gets hit by a -- >> correct. i'm all over that. i city of oakland alan about it. when it comes time for the financing -- >> listen, what financing? >> well, i have to pay -- >> pay cash? >> no, no, no, i got -- no, no, no. >> all right.

still with us phil rucker from the washington post, frank figliuzzi, michael steele still out there somewhere beautiful with us. joyce vance former u.s. attorney washington post columnist. eugene. emily has been in contact by phone throughout all this. and ken dilanian national security reporter. joyce, i've now listen today that five or six times. i do not have any experience with the mafia. unlike rudy giuliani, i don't think it is at all clear that, that, that the information on this tape doesn't raise more questions about exactly how the trump campaign was using ami. i worked on campaigns. it was my job to put out to the press the annual financial disclosures. you had to put anyone who did anything. what about a meal for the staff? if they sent over doughnuts or bagels, it went on the campaign disclosure. they were using ami as a vendor to the campaign to help squash bad stories. they were so aware of it, they talked about buying that

information back. this seems to me like a flashing red light in terms of real knowledge of the sort of trouble they could be in legally. >> you know, that's exactly what it is and that's precisely the role that this tape plays. it flags a lot of questions that prosecutors will want to ask. it's not a smoking gun in and of itself, but with the witness who can explain what's going on in the tape, perhaps back it up with documentary evidence or other contemporaneous e-mails or some other indication, it could become a real land mine for exactly the reason you said, campaign expenditures. >> it also seems to put donald trump in the fox hole with michael cohen. he may have been the fixer, but donald trump was right there, arms locked doing all the dirty stuff, wasn't he? >> my first thought when we heard the tape, we heard for months the stormy daniels situation.

michael cohen didn't tell the president about stormy daniels because he didn't have time to talk. he was running a campaign, he was in the thick of it, traveling so much, doing campaign rallies. what is immediately clear is that this seems like a meeting that happened repeatedly and often, and these particular issues were things that he didn't have to catch the president up to speed on. they were talking in shorthand as if these kind of conversations happened all the time. >> you must note that these conversations probably did happen. this was michael cohen -- >> that's his job. it seemed like this was an employee talking to his boss about things that they talked about regularly. that is how familiar this conversation seemed and these topics seemed to both of them. so, the idea that the president had been putting out for months and months and months about these are things that michael cohen did on his own. you have to ask michael. >> exactly, ask the president. he knew every detail. >> it also renders inoperative the president's statement aboard air force one as president. we have to look back to his time as a private citizen when he was

shady. i was going to say shadier, but that's a known unknown. it also just is right in our face the ease with which they lie about everything to everyone. >> right. i don't know anything about it, never happened. oh, yeah. >> always a lie. >> yeah, it kind of happened. i didn't know about it. well, actually i was involved in the whole thing, right? i mean, that's the progression that we've seen, you know, lie after lie after lie and that's a typical pattern. step back for a second. his lawyer is comparing this to conversations -- >> i love that. >> -- that he overheard among the mafia. that is just extraordinary. and so, well, it's not as bad as a lot of the mafia conversations. >> rudy is talking about tapes, but yes, he does draw that parallel. my experience listening to mafia recordings. >> how many conversations have

you had for which that parallel can be drawn? >> zero. >> i rest my case. >> everyone should read it, the parallels drawn to john edwards and the predicament he was in because one of his donors paid some expenses and those expenses were viewed as a campaign finance violation. this is much more direct engagement with someone delivering an obvious service, getting rid of a bad story much closer to election day. so, how is he not in deep do-do? >> i think he may well be. to joyce's point, the tape is ambiguous on a couple points. it is not a smoking gun in and of itself. look how lanny davis, michael cohen's lawyer is characterizing it. he's the one that brought up john edwards in an interview with katy tur. he said it was a payment made to squelch coming up in his campaign. a willful failure to disclose a campaign contribution is a felony punishable by five years

in prison. the prosecutor going to make that case against the president the of the united states? i don't know. it seems like they were willing to make it against a former senator john edwards, it's a big issue. >> phil rucker, i want to know if the state of mind that the president displayed on the day of the cohen raid where he described the raid of his former lawyer's offices and homes as an attack on the nation is still the current white house position. was the raid on michael cohen's offices and homan attack on the country? >> well, that's what the president thought at the time, but since then there's been a real rupture in the relationship. and what's so important, i think, about this audiotape coming out and the performance of lanny davis, michael cohen's lawyer last night and today on tv is there is now open warfare between the president and his long-time personal attorney and fixer and that can be so dangerous for the president. it's why people inside the white house today are very concerned about this because it's one thing to have the fbi raiding michael cohen's office and hotel

room and home and who knows what they might get. it's another thing to have michael cohen now turning against the president, willing to push things out publicly that could be damaging to the president, willing, perhaps, to testify against the president in this case. that's very troubling within trump's orbit and we're hearing just in reporting from people around trump who are trying to trash cohen. cohen feels very isolated right now. he's got lanny davis out there, you know, pushing his points on the tv. but that's sort of it. he's persona non grata to trump at moment. >> emily, you know michael cohen better than anyone at the table. i want to bring back something from fire and fury that always stuck with me because mark dasowitz who came up, we have

14u7b wom 100 women, he took care of them all. if michael cohen has knowledge of the 100 women he took care of, is it possible there are 10 or 11 or 50, potential crimes, potential violations of campaign finance laws michael cohen knows everything about? >> from all reporting from the times i interviewed him, he did not indicate that there were a hundred women that the president was with during the campaign. the reality is michael cohen worked with the president in lockstep with his family for more than a decade. what he knows, we have no idea the depth of it. and from all of my reporting in the last couple days, someone very close to him said to me today, it's not what's on this recording. it may not be what's on other recordings, but it's the back story from all of them that is going to count. it seems like from his state of mind he is getting to a point where all he wants to do is share that back story. >> and that back story, frank

figliuzzi, be very well something that is -- i don't want to use the wrong words, but a clear case against the president that an investigation into collusion with an american adversary. i mean this could end up being something that is resolved and that is easier to investigate and prosecute in a shorter timetable than russian collusion. what do you make of the fact that these things are going on on parallel tracks, both of them triggering the president? he had a loony tweet this morning. what kind of lawyer would tape a client? so sad. i think he talked about taping the fbi director, but never mind. is this a first? never heard of it before. why was the tape so abruptly terminated when i was presumably saying positive things? i hear there are other clients and many reporters that are taped. can this be so? too bad. this is not a man, you know, sort of keeping it together. >> so, look, it's the public unraveling of the president that continues. me thinks he does protest too

much. he presumably was saying positive things. maybe he can't remember. so what's going on here, you're right, nicolle, it's much easier for investigators and prosecutors to get their hands around something like this involving bank fraud, wire fraud, money laundering, fictitious businesses than it is to get into the very complex issue of collusion. so i think ultimately mueller will be found to have been correct, to have spun this off to the southern district of new york, let them get their teeth into it. and i'm telling you, if we heard more of this conversation, right, this is a tease that cohen is giving us here. so, as soon as you have an overt act toward a conspiracy, right -- and i'm not saying we are hearing the overt act. but it certainly sounds like there is knowledge of this happening. these are not two guys recapping wednesday night bible study. they're talking about paying off a tabloid newspaper to silence a mistress. they've done this before. and if we listen to it and continue it, and if the fbi determines that a fictitious

company was set up later as a result of trump saying, yeah, go ahead, or it's been done previously, he's in a world of hurt. and so is cohen. >> michael steele, you can almost que the republican lemmings in congress. we don't care about russian collusion. we don't care about this and that. we don't care about campaign finance. do you think that's coming? >> yeah, it is. >> i was hoping wherever you are was going to give you some inspired response to my where are the republicans refrain, no? >> well, no, no, no. i'm back on frank's point. i'm sitting here thinking, two corinthians walk into a bar. [ laughter ] >> with a little bit of hush money cash or check? can we all stop, though? the idea that they were debating a cash or a check, that's the story. that's the scandal. >> right. >> doesn't matter that he settled on a check. the idea there was a bag of $150,000 cash, that to me is the real scandal. >> it is, it is the real

scandal. they're just trying to decide which is the best vehicle to deliver this payment. you know, to the earlier point that was made, you know, i believe by joyce, was setting up this company. what is the point of that? i mean, i don't understand all of these other pieces that are kind of put into a system here to create a system for donald trump to engage with, you know, these women with, i guess, some sense of nondisclosure. i don't know. so that raises a lot of questions. and on the republican side of this, looking at all these facts at this point, nicolle, looking at the fact pattern, i mean, it's not about supporting the president, not supporting the president. this stuff is screaming there's a problem here, you better get in front of it as a party. you can sit there and hold hearings and try to tear down witnesses all day long, but that will not redound to your benefit

in the long term when these stories lines begin to unfold as they are starting to with these tapes. and lord knows where this goes when mueller starts talking and delivering his points sometime this fall or early next year. >> one quick point on the of th. you hear a mention of an allen on the tape. that's allen weisselberg who's been working for the trump organization since the 1970s. he goes back to trump's father, fred trump. to the extent he comes under scrutiny by prosecutors, if you think michael cohen knows secrets about donald trump, this guy knows where all the bodies are buried so it's a very dangerous situation. >> he helped bury them. joyce, what do you make of the idea that we have no ability with the sort of current makeup of congress to have any sort of norms around illegal conduct or potentially illegal conduct? and i say that because if they aren't bothered by the actions of russia, and to be fair they're giving secretary of state pompeo some tough

questioning today, but this is 18 months in the making. what can -- and i know the prosecutors don't need any green light from congress, but are they at all weakened by the ongoing war between the fbi and the justice department? >> it's an interesting situation because ultimately doj's policy is that a sitting president can't be indicted. so let's say that emily's backstory turns into an unfolding conspiracy between trump, cohen, pecker, take your pick of all of the participants to engage in campaign finance violations. we just have to laugh and move past. but at this point you think, well, there could really be a conspiracy indictment here and you would expect congress to act, particularly people in congress who led the charge, who wanted to see this earlier campaign finance indictment

involving john edwards, a case that was indicted by a holdover u.s. attorney, a republican u.s. attorney who was held over in the early years of the obama administration to get that case to fruition. and so it's going to be difficult to see them not leading the charge here or at least not peeping up a little bit in what's a much stronger case. ken is dead on the money. >> if you want congress to act, you better elect a new congress, because this congress as made it to me abundantly clear that its intention is to do absolutely nothing. >> i know you have to leave us, but i want to give you the last word here and i want to ask you if michael cohen feels like at this stage it's unfolding the way he'd like to see it unfold or if he still has a lot of fear he may end up in jail. >> i think that anyone in his position would be shaking in their boots a little bit about what's to come. i think that the hardest part is that there is this great unknown about what is going to happen, when it's going to happen and how it could unfold. but i think this morning people in his orbit were waking up

feeling like for the first time in a very long time they were able to control a narrative that was at least better than the narrative that unfolded on friday afternoon. >> and they felt like it was more rooted in the facts. the facts are that donald trump was right there by his side doing anything that he did on behalf of donald trump? >> yeah. on friday the way rudy giuliani painted the narrative was this was completely exculpatory for the president and michael cohen and those around him over the weekend were stewing over the fact that that was accepted as the narrative when they believe that was just not the truth. so this morning was a little bit of a relief, but there is just so much left to unfold, i don't think there's any true sense of feeling better right now. >> and joyce had to explain -- had to define exculpatory for me on friday. we have to sneak in a break. when we come back, that media company at the center of the unfolding scandal. hepatitis c. it's like a load off my shoulders. i was just excited for it to be over. 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 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.

are you ready to take your then you need xfinity xfi.? a more powerful way to stay connected. it gives you super fast speeds for all your devices,

provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it's the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome. i need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend, david, so that i'm going to do that right away. i've actually come up -- i've spoken to allen weisselberg about how to set the whole thing up with funding. yes, and it's all the stuff, all the stuff because you never know where that company -- you never know where he's going to be. >> so they had a hit by a bus plan for david piecker, the hea

of "the national enquirer." and they went through campaign staff faster than i go through, i don't know, socks. what kind of exposure could ami have if they were not functioning as a media organization but rather as an apparatus of the campaign. >> or even if they were functioning as both, there's a real possibility here that prals for the company could find themselves ensnared in a conspiracy. if they were helping to avoid donation limits, if they were helping to engage in illegal activity, we don't really know until we hear the rest of the evidence. that's what's so frustrating here is we're just seeing this one piece. >> frank, is this a first amendment fight or is this a news organization that really operated bike the oppo research aarp of a campaign? i was involved in the dark arts of campaigns and ami operated like the trump campaign's oppo research division. >> i'll give you a real quick story just in case you need a

flavor of what ami is all about. so i actually talked with david pecker. i was the on-scene commander of the first anthrax murder in the united states that happened at boca raton, florida, at ami headquarters. i told him we had a team suited up. we had one shot at getting his most valuable possessions out of that building. what can we get for you? he said the framed photograph of elvis in his coffin and the photo of bat boy. >> i'm going to spend the rest of the night wanting to unhear that. phil rucker, let me give you the last word on whether the white house has got its arms around the fact this is still unfolding for them, questions about the "national enquirer" and the relationship to the trump campaign and trump organization. >> the white house officials are really flying blind in part because they just don't know, you know, where this is headed.

they don't know what the feds in new york have. they don't know what michael cohen is willing to talk about and how loudly he's willing to sing, so to speak. it has them quite worried. there's a great deal of concern in the orbit and we'll see where it goes. >> all right, my thanks to phil rucker, frank, michael, joyce, eugene and ken. that does it for our hour. i'm nicolle wallace. "mtp daily" starts right now. hi, chuck. >> bearing, bearing, i'm happy. >> you have to have mike pompeo before they got all the great folks here. >> that's all good. that's all good. i'm just happy to be back. >> we missed you. >> i missed you, i missed everybody, so it's good to be back. >> welcome back. >> thank you. if it's wednesday, it's a summer grilling on the hill.