she had complete editorial control of her shoot, a first for the magazine. and with that power, beyonce got to choose the photographer, a 23-year-old named tyler mitchell, the first black photographer to shoot a "vogue" cover in its 125 years. beyonce gets very candid about what she wants for her daughters and herself. that wraps up this hour for me. "deadline: white house" starts right now. hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. the trial of donald trump's former campaign chairman paul manafort has entered its sixth day. rick gates is on the stand, describing for the jury exactly how he and manafort defrauded the government. paul manafort is on trial for bank fraud, tax evasion, and other crimes related to his dirty book of business, largely for pro russian clients. it's a trial that's brought to the surface manafort's lavish spending and the inconvenient truth that he went to work for

donald trump for free at a time he was in debt and linked to russian oligarchs. he worked for president trump at a time that the gop policy platform at the republican national convention was changed for the very first time in history to advance policies supported by russian president vladamir putin. the manafort trial is playing on a loop in donald trump's white house, along with coverage of the continued fallout for the president's tweet sunday which he appeared to throw his sunday, donald trump, jr., under the bus for meeting with, wait for it, russians to get dirt on hillary clinton. these troubling story lines intersect for the president at a time that he finds himself under ever increasing pressure to sit for an interview with special counsel robert mueller. "the washington post" reporting --

>> here at the table for the hour, steve schmidt and matt miller. but first, to react for the first time, single threads -- different threads of a single story. questions about russians and contact with people in the president's inner circle. former cia director john brennan, lucky for us, now a senior national security and intelligence analyst for msnbc and nbc news. i understand now, sitting here today, why donald trump a week or so ago said don't believe what you see, don't believe what you hear on the news channels, because when you take all these events just this week together, they paint a very compromising position for this president on the question of russian influence. >> i think that's right, nicolle. i think we've seen over the course of the last two years basically an effort on the part of president trump and others to pry to inoculate public perceptions of what actually

happened during the campaign. first, there were no meetings. then there were meetings, but they were focused on adoption. they were benign. then they acknowledged there was meetings and some issues discussed. but now we're at the point of them saying collusion is not against the law. so i think this just reflects just this steady slide of the trump team to try to acknowledge that some things happened but they weren't illegal. that's where it's up to the special counsel and his team to uncover exactly what happened, the motivations for those who went into those meetings, and to come to the conclusions that i think the evidence will bring forth. >> is there any question in your mind about what the motivations were for the people in the meetings? i mean, the trump tower meeting was attended by natalia and others who were known to be close to the kremlin. when you first heard about that meeting, was there any doubt in

your mind about what the motives were for that meeting? >> i think anybody who would go into a meeting like that with individuals known to be associated with russian intelligence should have realized that they were getting into some very, very deep and hot water. what has come out in the public reports over the last year and a half in terms of what the anticipation was, in terms of dirt on hillary clinton and people eagerly looking forward to that, i think there's 2340 question in my mind, that they thought they were going to get something that was going to assist the campaign effort of donald trump. >> did the american intelligence community have realtime knowledge that agents of the kremlin, like natalia, were meeting with representatives of the trump campaign, including the president's son and son-in-law and his campaign chairman? >> well, i think obviously n ll nicolle i'm not going to tell you what law enforcement capabilities were at that time,

and still may be in terms of monitoring these developments. but the fbi and the u.s. intelligence community are the world's best in terms of being able to detect and to then uncover. sometimes realtime, but often you're able to determine exactly what happened by putting together some bits and pieces of data until you can see more of the puzzle. >> i think i hear what you're saying, and unlike this president, i respect the need to protect sources. i guess what i'm trying to get at is one of donald trump's attacks on the intelligence community where you spent the vast majority of your career and on law enforcement, which is both sides of those, cia run by his hand picked appointees and before that, by a political supporter, mike pompeo. the fbi now run by his hand picked nominee, christopher wray. he attacks them constantly. is it -- should he have been warned by the fbi that there

were russian agents in trump tower? do you know if there was enough information in possession of the u.s. government that in hindsight maybe he should have been warned? >> certainly the campaign was given defensive briefings by the fbi what they should be on the lookout for. but if there were ongoing investigations at the time, which jim comey and others have acknowledged that in late july, there were -- those investigations were opened. it's very, very difficult to reveal details of an investigation while at the same time protecting the integrity of that investigation. so i know that the bureau tried to balance their need to warn and to advise the two campaigns about the potential for foreign interference. but at the same time, continue to pull those investigative threads and they continued to pull them throughout the course of the campaign and during the period between election and

inauguration day and subsequent to that. but the bureau has to be able to protect sources and methods and be able to ensure that their investigation is going to be able to continue. >> and that was something that was cherished and held dear by every democratic and republican president until this president was sworn in, in january of the beginning of his first term. so i wonder if you take that, that the fbi has to be able to preserve an ongoing counterintelligence investigation, which that was, now it's also a criminal investigation. i wonder if there's any regret or remorse that all of these norms, all of these law enforcement norms, all of these intelligence agencies were -- >> i think law enforcement and intelligence professionals take their responsibilities seriously. and they free yequently will encounter issues that are rather unique. and this was a unique one. in my experience, we never had

during an ongoing, hotly contested presidential campaign this type of foreign activity, as well as the type of activity that was uncovered in terms of interactions between people affiliated with the campaign and these foreign actors. so it was a very, very difficult balance. i'm sure there are individuals who, looking back on it now, say maybe we should have done more of this or less of that. but trying to preserve their ability to understand the facts and not to in any way impugn individuals' reputations prematurit prematurity. i think these were some of the things that were of concern to the fbi and others. >> i understand all that. what i'm getting is that you were protecting the presumption of innocence of people. so it seems like now looking back at however many months of the trump administration, people were acting in a way that they thought would be reciprocated in terms of understanding the

functions of the american intelligence community and law enforcement. i do want to get to the manafort trial. jeremy bash on this program once said that it was possible that there was a russian plant, that there was somebody who was -- who sought out employment on the trump campaign. we know that paul manafort sought out tom baric and asked to get in front of trump and paul manafort served as the chairman when the platform at the republican national convention koicoincidentally perhaps, maybe it's president trump's one true intellectual impulse on foreign policy, changed to a pro russia position. what do you make of the fact that paul manafort, while i understand this trial is about financial crimes, is one of the first characters who could have been perhaps planted or placed there as a russian agent inside the trump campaign, is that implausible to you?

>> no, it's not implausible. i see so many dimensions of how the russians take advantage of opportunities. so many elements of russian trade craft that could be present here. identifying individuals who may have direct or indirect access to centers of power, either current or future. individuals who have different types of vulnerabilities, whether it is financial vulnerabilities or vulnerabilities as far as being prone to flattery and their ego needs to be polished. people who have foreign business connections that could be exploited. opportunities to dangle a business opportunities in front of them. and a lot of times individuals who may have these weaknesses and vulnerabilities will seize upon it. sometimes they turn a blind eye to the potential that it could be a ploy by a russian

intelligence element. but a lot of times people recognize that there are vulnerabilities here in themselves. but still will pursue this because they have tremendous financial pressures upon them. and i think what's coming out in this case is that paul manafort faced very, very serious financial problems. and was seeking to capitalize on them. so i think the special counsel's team has done a good job of what i've seen so far publicly in terms of uncovering some of this. and rick gates now is acknowledging his role in this. you know, when i see this continued case evolve, i keep thinking about sort of those who are affiliated with president trump, it's almost like a pack of cars going down the highway being pursued by law enforcement. and some of those cars have been pulled over and are now cooperating with the authorities. the mike flynns and george

papadopoulpap dap -- papadopoulos and rick gates. and the other cars are going to be outmaneuvered by law enforcement or go off a cliff. they're not going to get away. >> let me ask you about a white bronco here. don junior largely thought to be thrown under the bus by his own father. they seem to have a strategy for avoiding maybe not even impeachment but conviction. but he appeared to throw his son under the bus when he said don junior took a meeting with the russians, it happens all the time. you never meet with a foreign government, let alone a foreign adversary. there are plenty of allies who have information. you never take the meeting. you don't meet with the uk or the israelis. you never, ever, ever correspond with american adversaries. so what do you think trump's doing by saying hey, don junior met with russians to get dirt on hillary clinton?

do you think it's sort of trying to signal the same defense he has for himself, collusion isn't a crime, or doesn't he understand that his son could be in serious legal jeopardy for conspiracy? >> i think both. he believes he can convince his base and supporters that there was no crime here and trying to explain it away. but also i think he has an exaggerated sense of his ability to navigate these legal shoals. and i think he has done a lot of damage to his legal defense and his son's legal defense. and i'm sure some of the lawyers that are trying to defend president trump and others, the real lawyers, not rudy giuliani, but the others are rolling their eyes and are very concerned about all of the things that president trump continues to either tweet or to say, that it's complicating and making their jobs much more difficult. >> let me ask you something else about russians. they seem to be popping up everywhere. a russian spy that infiltrated the nra, which may seem you have

t -- off topic, but it's about russians manipulating the republicans. are the russians being embold emboldened or are we getting better at catching them? >> russian intelligence spans the spectrum from very sophisticated, exquisite operations that are really difficult to detect and uncover, to maybe some of the more entrepreneurial efforts on the part of those who may be working directly or indirectly with one of the russian intelligence services, whose profile is maybe a little bit more prominent than a traditional russian intelligence officer would like. and so therefore, people like her who have come across the radar, to me it doesn't smack of very sophisticated russian intelligence trade craft. it is very aggressive and asserti assertive, and she had a profile that i think was inconsistent

with what a russian intelligence officer would want of his or her asset or person working on their behalf in the united states. >> i read "red spareio." i think i know what you're saying. you talked about whiting and unwhiting accomplices. i put don junior in the unwitting category. do the events move him over to the witting accomplices? he responded i love it. his father said he walked into a meeting with the russians, people now that we know have ties with the kremlin and sat there, wanting to receive dirt on hillary clinton, would you now, in terms of his sort of legal standing and the role that he has played in all this, would you move him into the witting category? >> i think i would put him in the witting category, in terms of knowing -- going into that meeting with an anticipation and expectation that he was going to get dirt from those individuals that were associated with russia.

whether he was witting of just how bad that action was, i don't know. but if he had that position within the trump campaign, he certainly should have been aware. and those working with him should have been aware that going into that meeting, in and of itself, just by definition, would be problematic. so i think it was a bit of knee yoo -- naivety, self-confidence, and also believing he could get away with it and not be held to account one day. and i think he was wrong on that score. >> yes, he hadn't met mr. mueller. john brennan, thank you for your time. thank you. matt miller, so much there. but this idea now that we're putting our finger on it, the witting accomplices to the russian effort to meddle in the 2016 election feels like maybe the public facing part of what bob mueller is investigating, the conspiracy. >> that's right.

if you stake everyone in that meeting at trump tower -- >> it's jared kushner, paul manafort, donald trump, jr. and a bunch of russians with ties to the kremlin. >> that's right. >> what did they think they were doing? >> it's not just the e-mails that we see jared kushner responding to, but you have to take that into context of what happened before. in april, george papadopoulos had been told that the russians had obtained hillary clinton's e-mails. dan scavino, a close aide to president trump, had tweeted about the russians having obtained hillary clinton's e-mails. we haven't seen this confirmed yet, but i guarantee they went into that meeting thinking they were going to get hacked, stolen e-mails from the russians. >> and we talked to a person close to the trump legal defense effort u who said that every person who told a lie about that meeting, told lies to other people repeatedly, and the idea that every single one of them

had the sensibility to walk in and tell the truth the first time to robert mueller is a fantasy, that every one of the people who probably known't the meeting, because it is a small campaign, not a lot of chances that they didn't know what the meeting was about, they all told this lie to the press, to each other, to the rest of the white house, that the idea of every one of those people on the list of six names that robert mueller sent over, after it came out wasn't about adoption, could be in serious legal jeopardy. >> no doubt that's true. what we've known for a long time, was there collusion? of course there was. when the leading officials of the presidential campaign go to a meeting with russian intelligence operatives for the purpose of receiving dirt on the democratic party's nominee for president, they were colluding with a hostile foreign intelligence power. what i don't know is does it meet the legal definition of felony conspiracy against the united states? and that's what we're going to find out over the course of the investigation. but i know this for sure -- on

any of the campaigns that we worked on together and we worked on two presidential campaigns together, and i know for sure whether you're talking about the senior people who we were in opposition against on the obama campaign, on the john kerry campaign, people that we know well. not a single person on any of those campaigns around barack obama or john kerry, the they were called and asked do you want to meet with russian intelligence operatives, officials, people with ties to the kremlin to get dirt on george w. bush or john mccain, the answer would have been hell no, and they would have called the fbi. >> that's what people do. when we come back, we go inside the courtroom where the prosecution's star witness pulled back the curtain on paul manafort's criminal enterprise. also ahead, blue wave rising. how anger at the president could get a democrat close enough to rattle republicans in a deep red part of ohio. stay with us. but he has plans today. so he took aleve this morning.

hey dad. if he'd taken tylenol, he'd be stopping for more pills right now. only aleve has the strength stop tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. tylenol can't do that. aleve. all day strong. all day long. now introducing aleve back and muscle pain, for up to 12 hours of pain relief with just one pill. the nation's largest senior-living referral service. for the past five years, i've spoken with hundreds of families and visited senior-care communities around the country. and i've got to tell you, today's senior-living communities are better than ever. these days, there are amazing amenities, like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools,

public cafes, bars, and bistros, even pet-care services. and nobody understands your options like the advisers at a place for mom. these are local, expert advisers that will partner with you to find the perfect place and determine the right level of care, whether that's just a helping hand or full-time memory care. best of all, it's a free service. there is never any cost to you. senior living has never been better, and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. call today. a place for mom -- you know your family, we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice. ♪ keep it comin' love. if you keep on eating, we'll keep it comin'. all you can eat riblets and tenders at applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

robert mueller's star witness in paul manafort's trial is being cross examined at this hour. today's testimony includes the first direct references to president trump and his presidential campaign. gates, who held high ranking positions on the campaign and transition team, telling the court just this afternoon that manafort pressured him to use his influence with trump to offer favors to manafort's lenders. at the courthouse is alexandria virginia is barbara mcwade and

ashley parker. barbara, take us through some of the more important moments of today's testimony. >> reporter: well, some of the testimony that rick gates gave was very tedious, walking through financial documents. they showed him e-mails, bank records, invoices and other things, which corroborated his testimony. he kind of connected the dots from all the things we've seen that shows paul manafort was using earnings hidden in bank accounts to pay his own expenses. when the money ran out, he started engaging in bank fraud because he needed cash. i thought that went very well. some of the things more interesting, once paul manafort had left his job in the trump administration, he used rick gates to try to get him favors like getting a lender of his a position on the council of economic advisers and even to be considered for secretary of the army. >> i'm reading some of your notes about the body hang wage between paul manafort and his one-time deputy rick gates. tell us about that.

>> reporter: yeah, it's really interesting. when gates is testifying, he never looked at manafort, he looks at the lawyers and the jury. but manafort himself stairs directly at rick gates, you might say staring daggers at him. from time to time, the judge calls the lawyers up, and rick gates is just left there dangling in the wind sitting alone awkwardly, not knowing quite where to look. manafort continues to stair at him, and gates looks around the room, waiting toer this awkward silence to end. >> i understand that all of the assurances the president was given about how this trial would have nothing to do with him have been erased in robert mueller's prosecutors and the idea that he's seeing the kinds of questions and the threads that could be pulled through if the curtain were pulled back on the vast neness of the entire investigation, news that you and robert costa have reported today that rudy giuliani is getting ready to get ready to respond,

sort of, to rebuff the latest offer from the special counsel for an interview. see any connection? >> reporter: well, of course. the president, you know, the people in his orbit are watching this trial theglued to it. for the president, he believes that mueller is going after paul manafort in a way that is trying to be deeply personal and humiliating to the president. so that's how he views it. the president doesn't see this trial as separate from him. and frankly, it's not. so you have to understand, as the president watches cable news on a loop and grows frustrated, he associates all of this with mueller. of course, that's going to affect his decision and his lawyers' thinking about whether or not it's a good moment for him to sit down and answer a bunch of questions. >> i want to read you a quote that rudy giuliani gave to your colleagues there. he says they're trying to get something on perjury, and that's

not going to happen. the answers with regard to former national security adviser mike flynn and the firing of comey are well known and they're not going to change. he would say the same thing in an interview that he said publicly. the idea that they're trying to get something on perjury, you don't have anything on perjury until a witness purgers himself. so he's saying donald trump is incapable of telling the truth. >> that has been a concern of the president's lawyers, not just giuliani, but people who came before him. and there's a real debate and a divide between the president and his legal team. the president believes, believed and still does believe, that his own best negotiator that he didn't do anything wrong, that he has nothing to hide, and if he could just get in the room, he would be able to convince mueller and his investigators of that. his lawyers are far more cautious because they understand

that if you say something under oath or to investigators that is not true, even if you wish it were true, you could be in serious trouble, which is why there's been all of this effort to say maybe the president once answer some questions, but they will be written questions, not the president going off the cuff in a way that could get him in trouble. >> it seems to me, matt miller, that even written responses, if they're written by the president, are not -- they're going to end up letting robert mueller ask him about the weather. they're nothing that they have confidence letting the president talk about. i heard that everyone from chris christie to rudy giuliani to emmet flood, would later body down before they would let the president be interviewed by robert mueller. >> if we see written answers, it will be answers drafted by his attorneys that go through four or five attorneys that don't answer the questions. because he has -- he's stuck on the horns oh of a dilemma here, where, in many cases if he lies about what happened, he's

committed a crime. but i think a lot of times the answers are incriminating if he tells the truth. that's why he's not testifying right now. it's not just a question can they prepare him enough without lying. if he goes in and admits well, i did fire jim comey because i wanted the russian investigation to end, that's evidence of obstruction of justice. if he admits i wanted to know about this trump meeting before it happened, that puts him in the middle of this conspiracy. >> i talked to a source, a one-time participant in the president's legal effort, who said the reason this obstruction marker is being laid down, is because they think that there is a real chance that the president, by interrogating senior white house aides after they came back from their interviews, that the president may have subborned perjury. it turns out that's the kind of thing bill clinton was impeached for, for querying aides after they testified for before the

grand jury. there is an escalating concern that the president is vulnerable on the question of witness tampering, and the questions of obstruction of justice. >> he's not the first president who lies. but he's the most prolific liar to ever be president. and when you unpack all of this, the incapacity to be questioned about anything and give truthful answers, either because you just can't help yourself from lying pathologically, which may be the case with trump. but also because what's likely to be the truth is so incriminating here. every single representation that they have made as a white house, as a campaign, trump himself about what occurred here, somewhat happened, last unraveled from the first moment that they said it. >> barbara, thank you for being there for us. ashley parker, thanks for joining us. we liked it better when you were in studio. after the break, why you might see a republican freakout tomorrow if democrats get within

striking distance tonight in ohio. that's next. ♪and i just wanna tell you right now that i♪ ♪i believe, i really do believe that♪ ♪something's got a hold on me, yeah♪ ♪oh, it must be love ♪oh, something's got a hold on me right now, child♪ ♪oh, it must be love ♪let me tell you now, oh it must be love♪

your digestive system has billions of bacteria but life can throw them off balance. re-align yourself with align probiotic. and try new align gummies with prebiotics and probiotics to help support digestive health.

close your eyes and randomly point to any story in the newspaper these days and you're almost certain to see a theme, it's all about president trump and the special election happening in ohio. people there have voted republican in decades and the president won by double digits. so why is the margin between the democrat and republican razor thin? take a guess --

joining the table, a former communications director to president obama, and the hillary clinton 2016 campaign. and former republican congressman david jolly. it seems to me, david, that people are likely to misread this, and if the republican ekes it out, saying nothing to see here. that's not the point, that's not the story. this shouldn't be a race that any of us know anything about. this shouldn't be a race that anyone talks about. i would say if the democrat comes within five points, the republicans are in deep doo-doo. >> good reference. the takeaway from tonight and every other special do congressional election is this -- only republicans trust republicans. if you're a democrat or independent, you don't trust republicans or donald trump. it's why republicans are looking at a very difficult time in november. this could be the worst midterm

election in nearly 40 years for republicans. the fact that these are competitive, and democrats have overperformed, republicans have underperformed in every single special election since donald trump got elected. going into november where you have 23 to 24 seats, where hillary clinton actually won those congressional districts, but they're representatived by a republican in congress, you're looking at a wipeout year, because those seats are gone in november. >> why can't democrats lose the defensiveness? why not say, if it comes to -- impeachment, it comes to that, but why not run with this head wind? >> democrats should do their job if they're running for congress. it's right there in the constitution, your job is to be a check on the president of the united states. >> it's the republican's job, too. to be fair. >> why are you saying why are democrats defensive?

that is in their dna. matt and i shared this cross to bear, that they are almost always on the defensive and kind of get too much wrapped up in their own heads. yes, you should run a campaign that's on local issues that people care about. but it is your job if you're running for congress to hold the president of the united states accountable. what's happening in ohio, trump came and did a big rally, that used to be the insurance policy. if his rally has proven to hurt the republican candidate, that spells worst doom for republicans in november than we anticipated prior to this week. >> i'm rustier than you are, but what is the impeachment message for democrats in the midterms? >> this is a big moment in the history of the country. this is the most significant midterm election in american history. and we're heading into a presidential election, which is the most significant since the election of 1864, when the question that was really on the

ballot is whether we were going to continue to be one country, whether we would prevail in the civil war. this is a big moment. if the democratic strategists are sitting around, all this other stuff doesn't matter. i think they're missing the larger point. the attacks on america's institutions, the assaults on the rule of law, the personal degen degenrecy of donald trump, we look at the meanness, the corruption, the cruelty, the ability to call this out for what it is. i think it's fundamental for the democratic party achieving what i think would be a very significant wave. and by the way, to say explicitly and directly to republican college educated women, for example, we know that you don't agree with us on every issue. but on these big things, the couple of things that matter most to us as americans

transcend any partisan difference. and we must join together in this country to put a check on this. that, to me, is the compelling message. >> how do you nationalize that? if you talk to democrats privately, they'll say he got elected after "access hollywood." now we've had a year of seeing a president who accepts the support from racists, he's now governed as a year, someone who dispages bleep hole countries. >> you can -- you can win a fight in two ways -- you can bring your opponent to submission, think germany and japan after world war ii. or you can break your opponent's will to fight. and to some degree, trump is exhausting the electorate. he's wearying democratic constituents. what i would say is, what i would say is this on this

point -- he has performed some level of jedi mind trick. here's the deal -- he lost by 3 million votes. he won the popular vote, he won by 78,000 votes across three straits in a narrow victory. he is weaker. the majority of the country opposes this. it is only through the magical thinking of the trump cult that there is any capacity to believe that a majority supports it. it does not. >> what democrats have to talk about is the vast corruption of this administration, the personal corruption of donald trump and the people around him, the kind of moral corruption, and the fact that the republicans in congress will do nothing to slow him down. >> they embolden people like devin nunes who are just as corrupt. >> the republicans have nothing left to run on. we talk about the democrat's message, but the republicans started talking about the tax cut, the thing they promised for

years, and they delivered it and it's not working. they are now talking about nancy pelosi, talking about immigration, democrats wanting to abolish i.c.e. they sent the president in, the vanderbi vice president in. if none of that works, they have nothing left. >> donald trump and the republicans made a mistake when heelected, which is to suggest they have a mandate. in every one of these races, people are saying this is not the government we voted for. so we'll see that. steve is right, this was a moment in american history where donald trump won with fewer votes than the other candidate. and yet they have continued down this road of republicanism that nobody actually recognizes. democrats don't recognize it and republicans don't recognize it. after the break, a profile in pandering. new reporting from "the new york times" magazine about a man addicted to donald trump's atta boys.

alice is living with metastatic breast cancer, which is breast cancer that has spread to other parts of her body. she's also taking prescription ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor, which is for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole was significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus letrozole.

patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. alice calls it her new normal because a lot has changed, but a lot hasn't. ask your doctor about ibrance. the #1 prescribed fda-approved oral combination treatment for hr+/her2- mbc. 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.

it's one part exit interview, two parts greek tragedy. a new profile of paul ryan in "new york" magazine, like when the house speaker got a call in the middle of one of their interviews. he said to mark -- >> the panel is back. this was so galling to me. i mean, mark is one of the best writers, especially of these sorts of pieces where people -- they just say stuff to somebody, but it sure explains a lot. >> his weakness is just extraordinary. and i don't want to sit here and disparage paul ryan the man. because he's a good guy.

he's a moral person. he's a decent person. take him seriously when he says i want to spend more time with my kids and family, and i didn't want to fund-raise, i didn't want to do all these things, i'm not political, i'm a policy guy. the job required hardness, firmness, toughness, standing up to this lawless president. he's weak, he's feeble, unlike anybody who has ever held the position of speaker of the house. this is a constitutional office with immense power, second in line to the presidency. when you see the abdication of responsibility to the country from the republican leadership, it is galling, it is appalling, and his legacy will be a shameful one because of it. >> i was in the room when paul ryan was elected speaker and the house caucus was struggling with who is going to be the next

leader. he said i don't want the job, i'm not sure i'll be good at it. but he was the only choice we had in many ways. i think what we're seeing with his resignation, this is no longer paul ryan's party and he knows it. this is donald trump's party, not paul ryan's. he is, at this point, because of having transacted on the corporate tax bill, nothing more than a for profit republican we see in the finance community that sold their souls for benefit of president trump. the most shocking thing about that interview, though, was his admission that president trump has architected tragedies. >> what does that mean? this is -- this is from the -- from mark's piece. this is paul ryan. "i can look myself in the mirror at the end of the day and say i avoided that tragedy, i avoided that tragedy," ryan tells me. i advanced this goal, this goal, i locked in on the word tragedy. it sets the mind reeling to what

he might be talking about. i asked for an example. no, i don't want to do that, ryan replied. that's more than what i usually say. what is he talking about? >> donald trump got the nomination. i was on the u.s. senate trail, marco rubio was running for president. and when he secured the nomination, i believe coming out of indiana, every republican candidate was expected to say we support donald trump. paul ryan and i on the same day said comments that were uncoordinated where we both said, i'm not there yet. i stuck with that. paul ryan did not. and at some point, at some point, this is a reflection of somebody's own integrity, their own conviction. he was willing to satisfy the politics of convenience, and i'll tell you this, legacies will be remembered for people who stuck on principle and didn't fail in the face of adversity. he's failed in the face of adversity. >> there was no way back after "access hollywood." and i had friends that supported him. to me, some called me and said,

there's no way back. this isn't a question of a former political consultant, this is a question for your wife, daughters, for your parents. if you can get there after what you heard on "access hollywood," go for it. but i didn't see a way back and i was shocked that paul ryan did. >> i thought he might be the one person -- i had a moment after hillary lost where i thought maybe they'll get together and elect the house -- the republican house will elect somebody else president of the united states, because it was so clear this man couldn't do it. and they went along with it. >> they're still going along with it. >> the story is how mark isolates this lack of agency they think they have. what kind of conviction do you have that you think your own voice can't matter as the speaker of the house, that you think your own supporters are so bought in, that they can't hear a truth that you're willing to tell how dangerous this president is. and it's like what steve is

saying about the democrats being -- having a self-fulfilling outcome, where if we don't act as if trump is a danger, why are people going to think that? the republican party has also bought in. think that? republican party is all so bought in, they don't have the power of their own conviction or believe their own supporters could hear them when they flag him as dangerous. no wonder the republican party is aligned with him because no one else -- they don't hear anything else. >> we have a right to know what the tragedies are. he has an obligation -- this is government of the people, by the people, for the people. we have a right to know what he's talking about there. >> in the meanwhile the republica republicans, he's at his tweets all day. guess what donald trump is talking about on the golf course? we'll tell you on the other side of the break. george woke up in pain.

but he has plans today. hey dad. so he took aleve. if he'd taken tylenol, he'd be stopping for more pills right now. only aleve has the strength to stop tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. aleve. all day strong.

senator lindsey graham was asked about the mueller investigation last night at a local republican event. he said during his golf game with donald trump on sunday in new jersey, the president brought up the russia probe about 20 times. this is sort of back where we all started, the president obsessed with the mueller probe, lindsey returning to the form that we remember, what's on the president ooes mind which is refreshing. the conversation lindsey details is about having to convince the president that firing mueller would guarantee that republicans couldn't talk about anything but the russia investigation through the midterms. >> all i can think when i hear that, the golf round is four

hours long, 18 holes. must have been four hours that felt like 64 out on the course. look, he's clearly obsessed by it. not surprising. but again, what lindsey is saying, it's political. this is a campaign tactic, not about the subversion of the rule of law, not about the is undering of the western alliance and the advancement of interests. there are big controversial issues at stake and every comment by an elected republican leader of the party is small. it diminishes the epic question that's before the people of this country which is do we want to put a check on this or not. >> i had heard last wednesday that donald trump was again using on the phone in the morning or around the time he sent that tweet about firing jeff sessions. my thought when i saw this is

that i'm sure robert mueller has already thought to subpoena all his golf partners. he's talking to everybody about what is on his mind. >> including hope hicks who was back on the plane with the president this weekend. my takeaway from the lindsey graham story is tpt hasn't moved off the idea of firing bob mueller. it surfaces, goes away for a while. everyone tells him it won't work. we all like to think it's impossible. but it would be so cataclysmic. the one person who hasn't let it go is donald trump. the desire to fire robert mueller, jeff sessions and the efforts his aides have had to undergo are all flash points in the obstruction of justice investigation. >> it is. the president likely faces criminal culpability at some point. i think the gaslighting of the trump base is fully complete, the republicans on capitol hill are fully bought in. i think it's under serious

consideration to dismiss rosenstein and mueller ahead of democrats likely taking control in january. the president, what i saw in front at the trump rally is a base that would fully support him. >> we have to sneak in our last break. we'll be right back. it's time now for your "your business" of the week. in the summer of 2017, schepp her's was getting complaints from all sites, from customers to local officials. they didn't have good answers to problems like why their lines were so long. find out how this company redeemed itself and saved its reputation on "your business" sunday morning at 7:30 eastern on msnbc. back every step of the- back every step of the- whether it's the comfort of knowing help is just a call away with global assist. or getting financing to fund your business. no one has your back like american express. so where ever you go. we're right there with you.

the powerful backing of american express. don't do business without it. don't live life without it.

where we're changing withs? contemporary make-overs. then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today. book now at lq.com. i've been making blades here at gillette for 20 years. there's a lot of innovation that goes into making america's #1 shave. precision machinery and high-quality materials

from around the world. nobody else even comes close. now starting at $7.99. gillette. the best a man can get. not like you needed it, but steve smith adds a new credenti credential, star of "words matter" with our dear friend elise. that does it for this hour. mtp daily starts now with chuck. >> tell schmitt i'm already a subscriber. big congrats to him. if it's tuesday, midterms and manafort making big trouble for president trump. ♪ >> good evening. i'm chuck todd in washington, welcome to