color, millennials. >> turning out marginal voters is easier said than done. >> thank you for joining me. before we go, i have to say i really enjoyed reading your feedback to the newest episode of podcast, why is this happening, thanks for listening. if you haven't yet check out my conversation with giorgio angeli ni. "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. >> good evening, chris. thank you, my friends. thank you for joining us this hour. happy to have you with us. all right. playing the part of united states federal district court judge, tanya s.chitkin, playing that part will be me and playing the part of thomas m. saunders federal prosecutor in the d.c. u.s. attorney's office, that part will be played also by me,

and playing the part of robert driscoll, who represents accused russian secret agent maria butina, as her defense attorney, that part will also be played by me. i know that sounds cheap. it's a delicate balance here. what we're saving on the salaries of actors with speaking roles, we're making up for in terrible acting by me. so what's going on here is that accused russian secret agent, maria butina, has been in jail a week and half. she was arrested last weekend right before the trump-putin summit in helsinki. she was actually arrested before the summit started even though we didn't find you about it at the time. the court didn't unseal the case against her until a few hours after the summit was concluded. the coincidence of those two events is interesting because she is accused of being an agent of the russian federation, right, secretly mounting an

operation in this country on behalf of the russian government to influence the republican party around the 2016 presidential election. since they unsealed her case, we have learned a lot of interesting stuff about what exactly the government is accusing her of. it's all fascinating. i think we are all hard wired as humans to think secret agent stuff is fascinating otherwise there wouldn't be books with shiny covers in bookstores. we love this stuff. in terms of the country and this presidency and the big scandal that has followed the president home from that summit with putin in helsinki last week, there does remain one really big as yet unanswered question about the maria butina case. does her case stand alone or does it link into the larger russia scandal, the other prosecutions, the russian government's effort to swing the

election? does it link in to the crucial question whether the president and his campaign were somehow in on that russian operation to influence the election? so, today, court hearing for maria butina. i should tell you, the bottom line here is that part of what came out in this court hearing today is that prosecutors say her case is connected to the larger story, at least the evidence in her case is connected, they say, to other ongoing case and investigations. i should warn you in advance, there is a little argument about sex and her personal diary, i swear it is relevant to the larger questions here, but you should know what happens. here goes. this is the initial discussion in court, starts right away. it's about discovery. it's about the evidence and materials, the prosecution has seized in their case against maria butina. there's questions now being litigated in court as to whether

and when and how her defense lawyer is going to be allowed to see all that stuff the government has seized. here we go. mr. saunders, the prosecutor. good morning, your honor, thank you very much. the judge, good morning. prosecutor, we've had preliminary discussions about discovery. where we are the government has substantial discovery they're ready to turn over right away. right now we already have about 4 to 6 terabytes of data the equivalent of over 1.5 million files that we're ready to turn over just as fast as it can be loaded onto a portable hard drive. another batch of data of -- the court. let me stop you. with regard to that first batch, how long do you think that will take to trans fer? mr. saunders barring the issue of protective order it shouldn't take more than a couple of days. the second batch should be route in maybe two weeks? once it's ready it shouldn't take more than a couple of days

to put it onto a hard drive and provide it to defense counsel. judge, okay. bottom line is the government wants to provide this to the defense right away immediately so they can begin to prepare their defense in the courtroom. the problem we're having is, your honor, agreeing on a protective order. a protective order from the government's position is essential, not just for the normal reasons of protecting third parties' personal identifying information, but also to protect potential ongoing investigations. and just given the sensitive nature of this case. in our discussion, the question that seems to be overlying the conflict between the two party, to put it frankly, is whether or not the defense counsel wants this information right away so he can prepare for a defense in this court or defense counsel wants this information so they can use it on cable news. the reason i put it that way, your honor, we proposed a basic protective order that says the information can be used for defense in this case.

it gives the defense wide latitude to use it in this case, including showing it to the appropriate witness, showing it to those witnesses' attorneys. defense rejected that offer and the defense's response is, no, we should have free rein to use that material however we want. our protective order says you can use it for this case but you can't use it for other purposes including public disclosure, like going on the press. the defense says, no, no, no. we should have free rein. an exact quote from defense counsel. our concerns about protecting this information -- the judge jumps in, other than personal identifying information, what are your other security concerns? prosecutor. our concerns are protecting integrity of potential ongoing investigations not just related to this case but potential other cases as well. the judge says, all right. potential other cases as well. that might be affected by the

disclosure of the evidence in the maria butina case. so the prosecutors here are telling the judge it's bad maria butina's defense lawyer has been going on dreaded cable news and talking about her case and defending her in the court of public opinion. during the course of this hearing today they go on to fight with him why that is bad at one point. the judge says to butina's defense lawyer, do you think it's in your client's best interests to have your case tliin the press. i don't want to impose a gag order as other judges have in this court but i will entertain a motion to do so if i think it crosses the line and violate our local rules. i am cautioning you. there's this fight in court over the defense lawyer of maria butina talking to the press about her case and the

prosecution is pressing their argument and the judge seems to basically agree butina's defense lawyer shouldn't be doing that. the judge warns her defense lawyer he should watch it. she also later tells the defense counsel there will be a protective order in this case, at least for some material, which means the judge said today in open court she will set limits on what butina can do and can't do with the evidence against her the government has turned up once the government has to hand that over to them so they can prepare their defense. they had this fight today. it definitely lands in a very one-sided way. for us watching this case and thinking about the national significance of this case and how it looms over the extensional scandal of the presidency, does this dramatic case against this accused russian agent play into the russia, election and other indictments that have come out,

the prosecutors said today, yeah, this case is connected. it's connected to other ongoing cases and other potential cases as well. they're saying that's related to why we need to stop her attorney from putting the evidence against her out in the press. that stuff is sensitive and relates to ongoing cases and potential cases as well. the judge goes with that. the defense lawyer quote your honor the government's theory that the documents and items possessed by my client before they were seized by the government somehow become confidential once they're seized by the government. when the government gives them back they can protect them under a protective order. the judge jumps in, mr. driscoll, the if it's in an ongoing investigation merely because it's in the possession

of your client -- the fact it's in your client's possession doesn't give it possession. i'm not clearly understanding your position. defense lawyer. it's my position it's the government's burdton say what needs to be protected and why. for example, my client's diary and my client's notes, documents of my client. p my client's immigration records simply because they came into the possession of the government she doesn't lose her first amendment rights or ability to do with those documents what she wants. the judge:well, this is a pending criminal case. i'm curious what you would be planning to do with her immigration documents or diary in advance of the trial. defense lawyer:well, i mean, they might be evidence at the trial but there might be other purposes for which they would be used. there are ongoing congressional investigations we've been dealing with. a lot of these same documents

have already been introduced to the intelligence committee. the judge: if those documents are the result of a subpoena you can go and say they are the subject of a subpoena. >> this is the judge whittling the defense lawyer down to a toothpick here. he's saying, hey, this was her stuff the government seized. we should be able to do whatever we want with it. you can't stop us from giving it to the press. the judge says, seriously, it's evidence in a criminal trial and if what is seized from her is relevant to other ongoing open investigations of course you can't do anything you want with it. on that last point of the transcript how his client has already been questioned by other parts of the government he raises congressional investigation and stuff that is critically important. we'll come back in a second. there's this one last thing you should see from the hearing today. i mentioned there was a discussion about sex related allegations. this is that part.

it does not go well for the defense lawyer. remember where this came from. last week, the prosecutors laid out a case for the judge maria butina shouldn't be released on bail. they were arguing she's a flight risk and might go back to russia. there's no reason to expect she would feel bound to stay in the united states and face this trial. in order to make that case the prosecutors argued what appeared to be her personal ties, even her emotional ties to the united states, they argued those ties weren't real. this is what they filed with the court last week under the headline "butina's quote tie to the united states is a duplicitas relationship." during the course of the investigation the fbi determined maria butina gained access through u.s. person 1 to an extensive network of u.s. persons in positions to influence political activities in the united states. butina, age 29 and u.s. person

1, age 56, are believed to have cohabitated and been involved in a personal relationship during the course of butina's activities in the united states. but this relationship does not represent a strong tie to the united states because maria butina appears to treat it as simply a necessary aspect of her activities. for example on at least one occasion butina offered an individual other than u.s. person 1 sex in exchange for a position within a special interest organization. further in paper seized by the fbi butina complained about living with person 1 and expressed disdain for continuing to cohabitate with u.s. person 1. that was the prosecution last week. they're saying, listen, she's a spy, she's only involved with this guy because it's part of her cover as a spy. today, butina's defense lawyer went off on that. he and his client are absolutely not going to stand for that from the prosecution.

he went after them on this specific issue in court today and it didn't go well. defense lawyer: we did make a special request with the government to receive on an expedite basis any evidence they had to back up their claim miss butina traded sex for a job. that has become unfortunately a big issue in the media. as proffered in the bond hearing before we have no idea what the government is talking about and don't believe it is true. the government has -- we presume they could give that part of it to us so we could see what it is. the government has not agreed to do that. they said we can wait for discovery to do that. the judge jumps in, mr. saunders, speaking to the prosecutor now, what's your position with regard to the information mr. driscoll just requested. our position is two-fold, we want to make sure the protective order is in place before giving over anything. second, we're concerned as to what use anything will be put. if the defense is seeking

particular pieces of evidence to take them to the news media we don't want that violation of local rules. the judge. right. i think, mr. driscoll, you're certainly entitled to discovery and to know the basis of the charges against your client in accordance to the local rules but not sure you're entitled to certain pieces of evidence to rebut media reports. i'm sure it's not pleasant to read incorrect things about your client. no lawyer likes that. and my goal is to get this case resolved in an expeditious and fair manner. as to when you get that information you will get it as any other in this trial. no, i'm not helping you figure out why the golf said that thing about you and your client and trading sex for a job. the prosecution said part of butina ease operation in this country was she was supposedly involved with this older man a political activist in south

dakota. the government is making that case because they say that relationship wasn't an earnest relationship, it wasn't real, they're saying that was part of their cover story as a secret agent carrying off this influence operation on behalf of the russian government. whether or not it turns out to have been true love, this ends up being sort of a key element in how the maria butina secret agent case relates to the rest of the russia scandal and potentially the president's campaign. there's a few of these connections, actually, this is one of them. one of the links already established, prosecutors say maria butina was funded for this u.s. operation by a russian billionaire. the "washington post" has since named that russian billionaire and reported that russian billionaire's son worked on the trump campaign. we contacted the trump campaign to ask them whether that was true and what role he funded

during the campaign. so far we have not heard back from the campaign on that and let you know when we do. another link is this guy, u.s. person 1, the unnamed american citizen maria butina was involved with in this personal relationship. he lives in south dakota. i am here to sing the praises of a local hero south dakota journalist named seth tupper from the south dakota journal because he tracked down a proposed order of cooperation between maria butina and federal prosecutors in south dakota, an offer that dates back to may of this year. maria butina was apparently considering offering testimony or evidence to federal prosecutors for their investigation of her supposed boyfriend in south dakota. she was offering the u.s. attorney in south dakota or considering an offer from the u.s. attorney in south dakota

she would cooperate with them in their investigation of her supposed boyfriend. depending how things worked in that particular relationship that would seem to bolster the prosecution's case maybe this wasn't true love, if she was talking to prosecutors about what evidence she might be able to give them against her guy. well, her guy, this american man, has not been charged with anything as far as we know but he has been described in court filings basically as a c co-conspirator with her efforts in large part through the nra. it is remarkable the nra has had no comment on this case at all. no comment on this indictment since it was first unsealed. this is federal prosecutors including veteran espionage prosecutors saying there is

evidence in court used by the russian government in an illegal intelligence operation. really? no comment by that nra, for more than a week now? in january, mcclatchy reported whether the russian money help trump but that was before we got information how else russia was trying to influence the election before butina's defense lawyer said in court she was contacted by the fec in march whether certain political donations had been made to campaigns before the "washington post" said butina testified to the intelligence senate committee one of her sources of funding in 2016 was a $5,000 a month consulting deal she had with the outdoor channel television network to provide advice on a

planned program on hunting in russia. how did she get hooked up with the outdoor channel? quote, the outdoor channel's chief executive, jim liberator accompanied to moscow in 2015 and there he is with accused russian agent maria butina. december 2015 exactly the same time that trump national security advisor, mike flynn, was also in moscow sitting next to vladamir putin at a banquet for russian tv. same time period, right before the republican presidential primary started. what was the nra all doing in moscow right before then? what was mike flynn doing in moscow before then? the outdoor channel would not

confirm to the "washington post" today they did have this accused russian agent on their payroll for $5,000 a months in 2016. we were able to reach them late in the day today and they did confirm to us that, yes, they did, they had her on the payroll, $5,000 a month. there's no reason to think that the outdoor channel knew at the time that the person they had put on their payroll was a secret agent who is now accused of running a russian government influence operation to influence our election, no indication that they knew that's what they were doing at the time but that is what they did. so, last point here. were these gun rights folks potentially a conduit for russian money alongside other forms of russian government influence on our 2016 campaign? mcclatchy was on that story first. honestly they took tons of heat for that story and stood by it

throughout. but now i don't think they'd take heat for that story today. now, it is a much more open question. it would be really really good to find that out. the nra, according to federal prosecutors was a conduit for a secret government operation designed to hit the campaign. were they a conduit for another kind of influence from russia, too? mcclatchy reports the fbi has been looking at russian money flowing through the nra to benefit trump. did that happen? on the day we learned maria butina was arrested, her arrest warrant and criminal complaint against her, the atf against her, the day it was unsealed, on the day of the trump-putin summit in helsinki, they announced a new rule they would be dropping a new requirement existed nearly 50 years in this country, dropping the requirement organizations like the nra have to disclose their major donors to the irs.

on the day the maria butina case was unsealed they dropped that requirement. seriously. why that new rule and why that day? a hotel can make or break a trip. and at expedia, we don't think you should be rushed into booking one. that's why we created expedia's add-on advantage. now after booking your flight, you unlock discounts on select hotels right until the day you leave. ♪ add-on advantage. discounted hotel rates when you add on to your trip. only when you book with expedia.

tired of constantly battling lingering smells in your home, like pet, shoe, and body odors?

for long-lasting, continuous freshness, try febreze plug. febreze plug provides 45 days of freshness, with a unique dual chamber design that alternates between harmonized scents for a continuous renewal of fragrance. plus, febreze plug is formulated with odorclear technology, which cleans away odors instead of just masking them. for freshness you'll notice week after week, try febreze plug. [sfx: mouse click] 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.

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.

they are take their first whack at it. here we go. the deputy attorney general, rod rosenstein, is not just the second in command at the u.s. department of justice, he's also basically robert mueller's boss, in charge of overseeing the special counsel's investigation. because of that general rosenstein has been under house attack from house republicans trying to protect the president by undermining the mueller investigation however they can. the most controversal way they have approached that thus far by demanding the justice department hand over lots of secret law enforcement sensitive material from the ongoing investigation so congress can get ahold of it and so in many cases it can either be made public or presumably given to the white house for their defense or both. we've been watching that for

months. now, republicans in congress have gone to a new level, pro trump republicans in congress late tonight introduced articles of impeachment against deputy general rod rosenstein accusing him of high crimes and misdemeanors, both crimes, high crimes and misdemeanors. these congressional republicans are allege ing five articles of impeachment rod rosenstein has failed to respond to their demands to hand over justice department materials related to the investigation. they say he signed off on improper searches and surveillance. by such conduct he warrants impeachment and trial and removal from office. the attacks by pro trump republicans against the fbi and justice department have been going on for the better part of a year now. senior officials at the justice department and fbi have promised that they wouldn't give in to efforts to shut down their work, they would hold a firm line against any politically motivated attacks designed to

undo or undermine the ongoing work of the justice department and fbi as law enforcement agencies. tonight, 11 republican congressman have now changed that fight, they're calling for the deputy attorney general to be thrown out of office. it's not clear tonight whether or if republican leadership might take this thing up, but the president's conservative allies in congress are officially now making their run at it. what happens next here. joining us now is kyle, a congressional reporter at politico.com joining us now. thanks for being here. appreciate it. >> caller: thanks for having me. >> we have heard these articles of impeachment were around and deputy rosenstein had made comments where he teased the republicans for leaking their own draft of these articles of impeachment. we've known they were circulating for a while. do we have any understanding why they may have been actually

introduced tonight? >> this has been, as you noted, long in the making, these pro trump republicans in particular have made rosenstein the symbol for all of their frustrations with the justice department and the mueller investigation. why tonight? it's not entirely clear. the house is about to leave on a five week rees, by dropping this tonight it insures this is part of the conversation going forward at sort of a critical moment in some of these investigations. there's been a lot of new headlines in the mueller investigation lately. this will now be part of that discussion over the next few weeks. >> that makes it sound like the strategy is sort of a political messaging strategy rather than a legislative strategy. to that end, do we have any indication from leadership in the house whether or not this might conceivably come up? they're not bringing this up an

as privileged motion not forcing the house to vote on it and not sure whether it's anything other than a message motion. >> absolutely. that's when you know it's a message motion when they could have forced a vote on it. this is not a unanimous feeling among house republicans. house speaker ryan has kind of minimized their dispute with rosenstein and the justice department and not really favored this drive towards impeachment. this is really coming from members of the freedom caucus and trump's allies in the house. it really divides the republican conference here. there's not a big appetite among leaders to take up this fight especially in an election year. >> i was thinking about the comments of trey gowdy retiring but influential part of the membership, asked about impeaching rosenstein, he said, impeach him, for what!

obviously divisive issue among the members. i know today a couple members of the caucus who filed this, jordan and mark meadows were told they met with the general couple of the fbi, dana dente and inspector of the fbi mike scal horowitz, inspector general of the justice department, michael horowitz. >> do we know if that meeting had anything to do with the decision to file these tonight? >> i think they certainly did. this was a last ditch attempt to get together and head something like this off. other members were in that meeting. people like trey gowdy and bob goodlap, two powerful members didn't have what they had to say and where they were is what it was when they left and didn't solve anything and why they came

out and filed the impeachment articles right away after this meeting. kyle cheney, joining us on short notice tonight after these impeachment articles were filed, kyle. thank you very much. good to have you here. >> thank you. >> in response to this, as you heard kyle report there, very clear about it, this is not something expected to unify republicans, nor is there any indication there will be actual legislative movement on this, sort of pro trump members of congress to hype up their constituents before they head home for a long recess maybe? it is being greeted critically and seriously by people who oppose it. dianne feinstein, veteran democratic senator on the judiciary committee, she reacted strongly to republicans doing this. a lot of people are dismissing

this but senator dianne feinstein had a strong response, called the filing of these impeachment articles partisan nonsense. then she also said, quote, it's dangerous for the rule of law and it needs to stop. they're clearly doing this as some sort of messaging thing. the message may be loud on this on both sides. we shall see. much more to come tonight. stay with us. little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable after just 4 months, ... with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression.

tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ♪ otezla. show more of you. i never thought i'd say this but i found bladder leak underwear that's actually pretty. always discreet boutique. hidden inside is a super absorbent core that quickly turns liquid to gel. so i feel protected and pretty. always discreet boutique.

here's a trip tip: when you search hotels on tripadvisor... enter your destination and the dates of your stay. tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites... to find the best deal on the right hotel for you. tripadvisor.

sacrilegious question, i know, forgive me ahead of time. does that tape thing really matter at all? that tape, that tape of donald trump and his lawyer, michael cohen, talking about how to pay off karen mcdougal for her story about donald trump and maybe a check or cash and somebody said, pam, or hon, get me a coke. did we actually learn anything from that tape? i know it's got antun of news coverage but does it deserve it? honestly, is there anything we have learned from that thing other than the fact the president apparently did not tell the truth when he said he didn't know anything about any payment to karen mcdougal, we've learned that. in terms of potential legal jeopardy and how this may relate to other difficulties the president is facing on a legal point, honestlyy i don't know. it doesn't sound like there was any crime committed on that tape?

did we learn anything from hearing it? some day maybe we will find out from prosecutors if this is legally relevant. i want to posit, if you like me, are skeptical why this tape between trump and cohen merit so much attention. i think there is one known reason why this thing is interesting. i say this as a skeptic on this story in general. there's one thing here that grabs me. we have known that the publisher, who paid this woman, karen mcdougal $150,000 for the story and killed the story, didn't run it. they publish the supermarket tabloid and enquirer and men's journal and other names you have heard of. we have known that company, american media got a federal subpoena at some point this spring in new york. today, "wall street journal" today was the first to report american media's subpoena arrived on the exact same day

michael cohen got his office and his home and hotel room and safe deposit box raided by the fbi. he got raided april 9th. american media got a subpoena from the feds that same day, april 9th. cohen gets raided april 9th and american media gets a subpoena that same day. that means legal pressure of various kinds was brought to bear on people close to the president, on his lawyer, this publishing firm basically his best friend, does that kind of pressure on people closely related to the president does that go to the president's own legal woes? we don't know but we've been watching the dynamics after the raid. nine days after they got the subpoena they announced a new settlement with karen mcdougal with very specific plans for her to start appearing more often in their publications, including

the cover of men's journal magazine in september. men's journal, karen mcdougal, mostly on men's journal, it's ben afleck, but it's going to be karen mcdougal apparently. a couple weeks ago the "wall street journal" checked in on that plan the paper reported back, current and former employees of publisher of american media ink said they believe karen mcdougal's planned appearance on the cover of september's issue is intended to protect the company from a federal investigation in new york. they said they always planned to put her on the cover, strictly a business decision. nos unnamed staffers are not buying it. they said putting her on the cover was meant to bolster the argument they were putting her on the contract for editorial reasons rather than benefit mr. trump's campaign. now, i'm interested. now it raises the question

whether or not this was an actual publishing contract rather than political expenditure to help donald trump win an election. after seeing in the "wall street journal" about the timing of the subpoena, we asked american media and they directed us to the original statement from april about the settlement and cover date from men's journal, otherwise we got nothing new from them at all. i have one big question and a half here. is american media potentially in legal trouble here? if they are trying to make it look like they were doing something as a publishing company under their own first amendment rights it was just a business decision for them as a publisher, even their own employees don't believe that and believe they are backtracking trying to cover up what was actually a political act and an expensive one by that company, are they in legal trouble for that? the reason i care about that. there is the possibility legal trouble and entities close to the president could ultimately

become legal trouble for the president if in fact that legal trouble is so worrying those entities and people consider flipping and cooperating with prosecutors for any other larger case this is a might be bringing. that part i care about. joining us now is rebecca o'brien who has been on this story. thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me here. >> my preface is totally honest, i don't care about the personal dynamics between president trump and michael cohen and don't feel eddified by the tape. but the legal jeopardy for people associated with the president in that case, do i get that right, is there anything wrong with the ways those might shake out? >> i think what our reporting revealed today and what federal prosecutors are paying attention to, whether the dynamic between michael cohen and donald trump and ami, this publishing

company, at times shifted away from being just a strictly media -- whether ami wasn't a straightforward media organization all the time and whether at times it acted as an appendage of sorts of donald trump and his campaign. >> there would be legal consequences of that. obviously, if you're acting as a publisher, you can hire and fire editors and contributors and make decisions who's on covers and who gets columns. all of those decisions are absolutely protected by the first amendment and the government has no say there. there would be no criminal implications of any decision like that. but if those decisions were a ruse in order to disguise what was in effect a political action, political action designed to cause political effect especially done in conjunction with the campaign, ami itself might have some legal concerns? >> right. sure. first of all, it is a big deal to subpoena a media organization

especially without any prior warning. if prosecutors choose to bring a campaign finance case, these guys could find themselves in -- considered a party to a conspiracy to commit campaign -- if they decide -- this amounts -- these rather overt acts, they publicly favor donald trump in print, they savaged his opponents, if they decided that amounts to campaign finance violations they could be considered part of a criminal conspiracy. >> when we talk about criminal campaign finance violations, everybody laughs because they think we don't actually police those or enforce those anymore in this country. those come as two different kinds of apples, right, you can have a campaign finance violation everybody says is terrible and gets laughed off or have a knowing wilful campaign violation particularly carried out as part of a conspiracy and

those do get handle not just fcc but handle as prosecutable cases. >> sure. >> theoretically at least. >> theoretically at least. >> is there any sign they are behaving differently since they received the subpoena or concerned? >> i think the timing of the subpoena was important, the fact it was served the same day, same morning as the raid on michael cohen, suggesting something about the relationship between the president's lawyer and this organization. i think, as you pointed out, our reporters have previously dug into some of the men's health journal cover for september and whether what karen mcdougal is doing on that cover, they sort of seem to have, you know, i guess what will end up being of interest is what they produced for prosecutors. i can't say much more than that. >> yeah. with the subpoena you don't have a choice. it may just turn out this is all

about her amazing abs. >> secrets. >> rebecca, nice to have you here. >> thank you very much. >> stay with us. crabfest is back at red lobster! discover our largest variety of crab and crab dishes all year! like new crabfest combo. your one chance to have new jumbo snow crab with tender dungeness crab. or try crab lover's dream. sweet, juicy king crab and jumbo snow crab cozied up with crab linguini alfredo. even our shrimp is crab-topped! so hurry in and get your butter-dunkin' game on!

'cause crabfest will be gone in a snap. and now bring home the seafood you crave with red lobster to go. call or order online today.

you crave with red lobster to go. ahoy! gotcha! nooooo... noooooo... quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker and is 2x more absorbent. bounty, the quicker picker upper. 3 toddlers won't stop him.. and neither will lower back pain. because at a dr. scholl's kiosk

he got a recommendation for our custom fit orthotic to relieve his foot, knee, or lower back pain, from being on his feet. dr. scholl's. born to move. following up on the report last night from the helsinki press conference i can tell you white house officials are now admitting yes, the white house transcript of that press conference is wrong, but they're still not correcting it. after our report and a piece speculated perhaps the white house transcript video were wrong because they were transcribed from a wonky audio

feed, the white house did finally say today, yes, their >> that quote an updated version was sent to the arkevist. the white house still has an official transcript of trump and putin's press conference online and it still omits vladimir putin saying that he wanted trump to win and i can also tell you that the white house still has a video posted tonight that omits the same thing. so i guess the update is the white house wants to get away with this in the sense that they're sticking with their false record of what happened with vladimir putin, but they don't want to be blamed for it

while they do it. they don't want anybody to see it as a bad thing even as they keep doing it. so judge for yourself. i'm going to -- i'm going to go to break right here. we have one more segment coming up. as we go to break, i want you to watch this one more time and check out the white house transcript alongside it. you judge for yourself. >> president putin, did you want president trump to win the election, and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that? >> yes, i did. yes, i did. because we talked about bringing the u.s.-russia relationship back to normal. two motorcycles, a boat, and an r.v. i would not want to pay that insurance bill. [ ding ] -oh, i have progressive, so i just bundled everything with my home insurance. saved me a ton of money. -love you, gary! -you don't have to buzz in. it's not a question, gary. on march 1, 1810 -- [ ding ] -frédéric chopin. -collapsing in 226 -- [ ding ] -the colossus of rhodes. -[ sighs ] louise dustmann -- [ ding ] -brahms' "lullaby," or "wiegenlied."

-when will it end? [ ding ] -not today, ron. -when will it end? [ ding ] moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis was intense. my mom's pain from i wondered if she could do the stuff she does for us which is kinda, a lot. and if that pain could mean something worse. joint pain could mean joint damage. enbrel helps relieve joint pain, and helps stop further damage enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma other cancers, nervous system and blood disorders and allergic reactions have occurred. tell your doctor if you've been someplace where fungal infections are common. or if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure or if you have persistent fever, bruising, bleeding or paleness.

don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. since enbrel, my mom's back to being my mom. visit enbrel.com... and use the joint damage simulator to see how joint damage could progress. ask about enbrel. enbrel. fda approved for over 18 years. when heartburn hits... fight back fast with tums smoothies. it neutralizes stomach acid at the source. tum tum tum tum tums...

smoothies... ...and introducing new tums sugar-free. 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.

heads up about a deadline coming up tomorrow. by the government's own count, we now know the trump administration has taken away from their parents 2,551 kids between the ages of 5 and 17. they took them away at the border. now, a federal judge, as you know, has ordered the administration to give those kids back. the deadline for the kids ages 5 to 17 is tomorrow. at a hearing in that case yesterday, the justice department said that it has so far on the eve of the deadline only given 1,012 of those kids back to their parents. again, 1,012 kids out of more than 2,500 taken away. as of last night, the night before the deadline, they have only given back less than half. worse than that, the government said last night they were not

even going to try to give back more than 900 of these kids. the trump administration now says they have decided that 914 of these kids who they took from their parents are not eligible to be given back to their parents. judicial deadline or not. so what's going to happen to those more than 900 kids who the government took but now the trump administration says they're not making any plan to give them back? honestly, we do not know. the aclu has been leading this case against the government. they tell us their lawyers are still working on trying to work on reunification, that the government says they're not bothering with. the aclu says they're trying to get more information from the government to make these reunifications happen, but for now the trump administration says for 914 of these kids they're not going to do it. court ordered deadline is tomorrow. watch this space. just one free hearing test at

his local miracle ear helped andrew hear more of the joy in her voice. just one hearing test is all it took for him to hear more of her laugh... and less of the background noise around him. for helen, just one visit to her local miracle-ear is all it took to learn how she can share more moments with her daughter. just one free hearing test could help you hear more... laughter...music...life... call now for your free hearing test from an industry leader: miracle-ear. whoooo. tripadvisor makes finding your perfect hotel... relaxing. just enter your destination and dates. tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites

to find the hotel you want for the lowest price. dates. deals. done! tripadvisor. with tough food, your dentures may slip and fall. new fixodent ultra-max hold gives you the strongest hold ever to lock your dentures. so now you can eat tough food without worry. fixodent and forget it. man: we hold these truths to be self-evident. woman: that all of us are created equal. woman: until we became one nation under trump. man: these truths are self-evident. woman: brett kavanaugh on the supreme court endangers protections for people with pre-existing health conditions. woman: puts a woman's right to choose gravely at risk. man: and threatens to continue selling out america to powerful corporate interests. woman: we hold these truths to be self-evident. man: and we will hold our senators accountable. end citizens united is responsible for the content of this advertising. no sooner do i admit on

television that the cohen taped donald trump story is not really about the tapes. and the tapes themselves aren't -- the washington post has just reported that the government has seized more than 100 tapes that michael cohen made of his conversations with people discussing matters that could relate to donald trump and his businesses, including with trump himself talking to michael cohen on the tapes. i want to go to sleep and wake up when the tape story is over. is there a snooze alarm for that? that does it for us tonight. i'll see you again tomorrow. now it is time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. >> you are lucky because i love the tapes. i'll take all the tapes they can send me. 100, so that's, let's say, i'd go for one every other day. >> yeah. i don't know why it makes me so crazy. part of it