west. that is our broadcast on a monday night as we start a new week together. thank you so much for being here with us and good night from nbc news headquarters in new york. happy to have you here. it has been a rollicking day and a rollicking few days of news. particularly when it comes to all the scandal stuff. the still unspooling scandal around this president. the one that appears to be getting him a little more wound one each passing day if his comments are anything to go by. the "new york times" reported that the serving white house counsel don mcgahn has done more than 30 hours of voluntary interviews with the special counsel robert mueller and his team of prosecutors. shortly there after we got new reporting from the "times" about the president's personal lawyer being sqozed, for look of a

better term. the "wall street journal" is first on the story as they have been on the criminal intrigue surrounding president trump's long time lawyer michael cohen from the very beginning. but following the initial reporting a couple weeks ago that the potential charges michael cohen might be facing, now "the new york times" as of yesterday and the associated press as of today, who have both match that had story. so the "wall street journal" and the ap and "the new york times," all now reporting that michael cohen's legal vulnerability may be at least in part related to tens of millions potentially fraud lend bank loans, and also campaign finance violations related to his payoffs. to at least a couple of women during the campaign who said they had sexual relations with the president. despite all that good reporting on michael cohen, we have three big news outlets all nafg same

basic substance about what michael cohen might be charged with. despite all that good reporting i remain convinced that the only way we'll ever be sure michael cohen is being criminally charged is that eventually we're going to see michael cohen being arrested and we'll be able to read the indictment. which lists criminal indictment against him. until we can read the document. until we get confirmation from prosecutors, i sort of feel like i won't believe any of it. there's so much spin being spun on the elements of this entire scandal surrounding the president. the michael cohen part of it is i think the worst in terms of the ratio between real information that we can publicly check and the noise and spin that might have nothing to do with real facts.

there's just a lot of bla bla bla about michael cohen and very little publicly checkable information that we can balance it against. to that end, i think there's one big red flag in the reason factual record about what is going on with michael cohen that we should take note of. that we should factor in and how that might relate to the legal jeopardy of the president. there's been so much ink spill, so much hot air blown over the last couple days, and frankly weeks when it comes to cohen. there's so much noise about it. they're both potentially interesting, right? lawyers getting lawyers is one thing. lawyers becoming corroborating witnesses is an even bigger thing. i think there are steps we should take to avoid being spun or misled on both those stories. so we'll get to some of that ahead tonight. i feel like, when you see a story about mcgahn or cohen coming down the pike, unless it

has publicly verifiable information, tread lightly. don't go too fast around this corner. this may be someone trying to trip you up. on top of the mcgahn and cohen news, there have been a bunch of new developments today and into this evening including one that relates to this guy. remember this guy? he is the one person who has gone to prison already. actually served his custodial sentence in the russia scandal. his name is alex van der zwaan. he's a lawyer that served 30 days in federal lockup as punishment for lying to investigators about his role in one of paul manafort's foreign lobbying gigs. it has always been possible there was a big biographical coincidence about him. it is totally possible it's a coincidence. but one of the more intriguing details about him, who has

served his time in prison. we think he's left the country since serving his time in prison. it has been fascinating to know that his father-in-law is a russian oligarch close to vladimir putin who turns up in the christopher steel dossier. he is married to the daughter of this man, herman khan, one of three wealthy russians who control a banking empire called alpha bank. it has popped up in a couple of different ways. first before the election, there were reports about some kind of computers. between a computer server in the bank and at the trump tower. it was associated with the trump organization. why was the alfa bank talking to the server? we don't know what that was about.

that saga has stayed in the news though in part because alfa bank ended up hiring an american law firm to clean up its reputation around that story. around the unexplained communications between servers in moscow and the trump organization. the lawyer who they ended up hiring to clean up that story, to clean up the pr mess. to declare the company innocent of any nefarious things during campaign was an american lawyer. a republican lawyer named brian bench cowsky. the reason it is still rattling around in the news in the russia scandal is because the trump administration decided they would hire that same guy to run the criminal division at the u.s. department of justice. so alfa bank has its own special role on that side of the intrigue. we still don't know what all the

computer communications were about. we don't know if it is a coincidence that alfa bank's lawyer ends up at the justice department in one most senior positions in the entire agencies. alfa bank appears in the research memos on the trump campaign and russia which have collectively become known as the steel dossier. in april of this year, herman khan, alex van der zwaan's father-in-law, brought a defamation lawsuit against christopher steel and the intelligence firm. it's interesting. the dossier didn't really say anything all that damning about alpha bank. it described herman khan. and these other guys as being

oligarchs. he described them as having a close relationship with putin. they said significant favors continue to be done in both directions. quote, still giving -- still giving informal advice to putin. especially on the u.s. so that's what's in the steel d dossier about alpha bank. they could each other favors. further, they maybe funneled money to putin in his st. petersburg days. this is not the world's most salacious stuff. but it has taken on a life of its own. republicans in congress, president trump, the white house more broadly, they have spent months trying to turn the steel dossier itself boo a huge scandal. it is against one serving justice department official. because bruce ohr's wife worked

at fusion gps. mr. ohr appears to have contact himself with christopher steel during the campaign. so house republicans have gone along with the attacks on the dossier, the attacks on anybody associated with the dossier, and they are now going i know what the attacks on the justice department official who the justice department has singled out as being connected to the dossier. house republicans have summoned bruce ohr. they threatened a subpoena but he will appear voluntarily. so there is been all this drama in the u.s. around the steele dossier. which continues to rattle around. but the other threatening action related to the steele dossier has been lawsuits. these lawsuits, like the one, filed by herman khan

and the other founders of alpha bank. today a judge dismissed the defamation lawsuits against christopher steele and orbis business intelligence. it was dismissed with prejudice which means the plaintiffs cannot bring it up again. so alpha bank. we still don't know if there was anything operational when it came to efforts to interfere in the 2016 election or any potential trump campaign involvement in that effort. we've seen no firm evidence but lots of suggestions about that possibility. we still don't know if it is just a coincidence. we still don't know if there's anything shady about the fact brian, hired by alpha bank to get them out of that russia related scandal ends up in a senior position at the u.s. justice department. but at least we do have this one

conclusive statement today. the effort to sue, to make their connection to the steele dossier go away. today that lawsuit failed in a way that seems quite definitive. >> the next person to go to prison in the trump scandal might be george papadopoulos. late friday we learned the special counsel recommended to the judge in this case that george papadopoulos should serve up to six months in prison. the actual recommendation range it was zero to six months in prison. the great lynn sweet at the "chicago sun times" report that george papadopoulos's lawyers intend to ask the judge in this case for zero jail time. the formal response to the sentencing recommendation is due at the end of next week. when you look at the sentencing recommendation for george papadopoulos from the special counsel's office, from the prosecutors, it was really not good for him. aside from the range of

potential prison time they are suggesting, the way they describe papadopoulos's behavior is not complimentary to him. it is not designed to put him in good stead in the eyes of the judge. the prosecutors told the court, the plea agreement entered into was not a standard cooperation agreement. prosecutors merely agreed to bring to the court's attention at sentencing the defendant's efforts to cooperate with the government. what prosecutors ended up bringing to the court's attention at sentencing was ten-page long list of ways in which george papadopoulos didn't help them out at all. quote, the defendant did not provide substantial assistance. the prosecutors later said that he lied over and over again in ways that materially hurt the government's case. quote, the defendant's crime was serious, both in terms of the underlying conduct and its effect on the investigation. the defendant knew the questions he was asked by the fbi were important and he knew his

answers were false at the time he gave them. his lies negatively affected fbi's russia investigation and prevented the fbi from effectively identifying and confronting witnesses in a timely fashion. they were not momentary lapses. he lied repeatedly over the course of more than two hours. the sentence imposed should reflect lying to federal investigators has real consequences. especially where the defendant lied to investigators about critical facts and an investigation of national importance. after having been explicitly warned that lying to the fbi is a federal offense. the nature and circumstances of the offense warrant a sentence of incarceration. so a couple things to watch. number one, this is the government emphatically saying, george papadopoulos should do jail time. according to lynn sweet's report, they said he shouldn't do any jail time at all.

but reference there that i read from the sentencing recommendation, this part here. the plea agreement entered into was not a standard cooperation agreement. that raises the possibility george papadopoulos may have some ongoing criminal liability here. this is not a recommendation that says, you know, listen, judge, our deal has been upheld on both sides. this guy was really helpful to us. not that. they're saying he didn't help us and he lied. this was not a formal agreement. we said we told the judge, if he helped us when it came time. they're saying, no, he didn't help us. the prospect of additional criminal liability. some indictment, some new indictment in the future. now that we know the government says he wasn't an earnest cooperator, that now looms over

this little part of this case. and the sense that there is something important unresolved and it comes to george papadopoulos was helped along by this public statement that he made today on twitter. 4:00 this afternoon. i'll quote it directly. quote, been a hell of a year. decisions. as a point of fact i'm not sure how many decisions he has to make. we'll get some expert advice on that in a moment. the last set of developments in today's news related to the scandal. centered around the campaign chairman, paul manafort, who incidentally, has a notable new neighbor. as of this weekend. in a move that was described as surprise to all involved friday night, look who moved in. accused russian foreign agent maria butina. on friday night was moved from the jail in d.c. where she was

held since she was arrested in july. they took her out of that jail friday night and brought her over to where paul manafort lives now which is the federal lockup in alexandria, virginia. the reason we have this unflattering picture of her is because i think she's been moved to that new facility in virginia. you see the alexandria sheriff's office. i think we get mug shots from that facility. that's why we've got paul manafort's mug shot, too. she hasn't been convicted of anything. she's being held in jail before her trial because prosecutors thought she would be a flight risk. basically, they argued to the judge that the russians would spirit her out of the country before she cover face charges if the judge left her out on the street. that's why she has not been let out on the street. but now for whatever reason, they have moved her from one

lockup to another. that means she's only about two blocks away from where paul manafort's trial has been underway in virginia. that's not the courthouse where she'll be tried. she'll be tried in washington, d.c. we know it is not unheard of for people waiting to end up in this virginia jail instead. and it is surprising that nobody knows why she was moved. according to her lawyer, neither she nor her lawyer had any notice before it happened 40 night. her attorney said, i got a collect call. i was discon nkted before i would speak. he visited her this morning. she was not in, i am still unaware of the reason. we contacted him today to see if he had learned today why his client was moved from d.c. to virginia.

he told us, quote, no news. i have no answers yet. you can ask the marshals service. it is their call. we did ask the marshals service and they didn't call us back. surprise! if we do get a call back from them, i will let you know. there's no reason to think that they'll have contact with each other while they're in the same jail but it is weird that they are now both in the same jail. in terms of paul manafort's case, we are expecting to get prosecutors' list of evidence that they planned to use against manafort in his next criminal trial due to start next month in federal court in d.c. the evidence list has been described as containing over 1,000 items. the deadline for the list is to be made public, is that it should be made public tomorrow. that should be a big long list. it should be a very interesting window into what paul manafort's next prosecution might look like.

and meanwhile, we're still waiting on the jury and his first felony trial. the jury considering manafort's fate in virginia, they deliberated all day thursday, they deliberated all day friday. the judge sent them home over the week. they've deliberated all day today. at 4:49 today, the judge announced the jury would stay late. last week they broke at 5:00. today, they asked to deliberate until later. they wanted to stay deliberating until at least 6:15 p.m. maybe they might be planning to release a verdict on manafort tonight. that turned out not to be the case. the court reconvened after 6:00 and many the judge announced, once again no verdict. they will come back tomorrow to start deliberating again at 9:30 in the morning. so two questions.

first of all, with a jury deliberating over the course of nine hours today and 24 hours in total. is that starting to feel like a watching the jury as they go on for the long stretches, not asking questions anymore, like they did on the first day, do you find that to be heartening or disheartenning, or do we not know. consecuti -- second question, last question. is it weird that the jury is like, on the loose, out in the wild? not sequestered, they are sent home every night. they were sent home for the whole weekend t judge himself suggested that the jurors may be reasonably afraid for their own safety. he stated in court, he received

threats in the case, he has decided to not release the jurors' names, but he allowed courtroom artists to show us what they look like and they are ming he wi-- and they are minge with the public, and with the media, and anybody that has business at the courthouse. meanwhile, with the jurors on the loose, despite the fact that the judge is talking about the potential danger that they are in. he is admonishing them. there's an unusual amount of ambient noise and pressure on this case. on which these jurors are deliberating. from the start of the trial, the president of the united states has made public statements praising the department.

every day, 2, thre3, 4, 5, 6 tia day, the president makes statements denouncing the prosecution in the case. and he has been praising the defendant, and denouncing the prosecution, he daily denounces the special council's office, in terms that are so stark that it may be tough for the jurors to avoid it. calling them angry democrat thugs that are ruining people's lives. saying it's a rigged investigation. the president deriding robert mueller and the special council's office is deriding the prosecution in the case. presidents have avoided weighing in on pending criminal cases to avoid the appearance of influence on jury deliberations or any other aspect of a pending case. in this case, with had this president -- with this

president, it's the opposite. he is absolutely trying to influence the case. and i know it is rare to sequester a jury to put a jury in a hotel and not give them contact with their homes or the outside world until they have a verdict. i know it's rare to do that. but given the very unusual firehose of public invecta from the sitting president of the united states, clearing trying to influence the verdict of the jury, is this one of those rare case where is the jury should have been sequestered in joining us now is barbara mcquaid, barbe, thank you so much, it's nice to see you. >> oh, my pleasure to be here. nice to see you. >> i believe, and again, i don't know the things. it's my impression that it's a rare thing for a jury to be sequestered but judges do order it when there's a high profile

case or the jurors have a particularly high risk that they will not be able to avoid media exposure or pressure on their to he poe verdict, is that true? >> it's rare that a jury is sequestered. i have not seen it in federal court, but i've seen it in the state high profile cases. the bill cosby, and o.j. simpson, there's a few where there's high profile cases. but one difference between state court and federal court proceedings, they are not televised, you are not going to see television tofootage of the trial, it's expensive and the other reason, you do not want to punishes pressu-- you don't wan put pressure on juries to want to get home. so, aside from that, the expense. i have never seen it done in federal court. >> and in terms of the president's remarks on this

case, i see his remarks here as being so starkly positive toward the defendant's lamenting what he describes as mistreatment, and unfair prosecution of the defendant and of course, his h withering attacks against the prosecutors, those look like the kind of statements from a president that may be designed to influence a jury's verdict. what can the judge do, other than instructing the jury to not pay attention to it to protect them from those kind of pressures? >> the judge does give that instruction, a standard instruction, when i was in the court, he gave it every day, not to read anything in the media and discuss anything in the case. there's case law that says the jurors are prezsumed to follow the instructions, unless proved otherwise. if they do get inadvertently exposesed to something. they are expected to self

report. there's four alternates in the case. if someone came in and s-- and said, i was home and saw this on the television, they could be replaced with an alternate. but i think a judge would likely ask them, what did you hear? has it influenced you? can you set it aside and decide the case based on the facts and the law that you hear in the court? most people can say yes, can i set it aside. so, you know, certainly they are highly inflammatory and highly irregular. the prosecutors are not allowed to say anything about the guilt of -- it's shocking that a president would say these things about a criminal defendant. >> one last question for you, barb, what do you make of the length of time that the jury is deliberating? >> it's not cause for concern yet. it's the case that the longer a jury deliberates the more likely there is that there's a hung

juror or a hold out. i don't think we have gone on that long yet. they say it's usually a day of deliberation for every week of testimony, with the complexity of the case and the fact that the judge did not allow the prosecutors to always publish or display the documents at the time they were discussed and he would say, they can look at it later, is causing a lengthier deliberation. you know, he speeded up the trial, the cost is the longer deliberation. >> and we end up on the edge of our seat. busy monday night, stay with us. i just switched to geico and got more. more? got a company i can trust. that's a heck of a lot more.

over 75 years of great savings and service. you can't argue with more. why would ya? geico. expect great savings and a whole lot more.

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. this wi-fi is fast. i know! i know! i know! i know! when did brian move back in? brian's back? he doesn't get my room. he's only going to be here for like a week. like a month, tops.

oh boy. wi-fi fast enough for the whole family is simple, easy, awesome. in many cultures, young men would stay with their families until their 40's. "the new york times" is reporting that the ongoing investigation regarding michael cohen is zeroing in on potential bank fraud involving michael cohen's involvement in the taxi business. also campaign finance loans in the payoffs that he helped arrange to at least two women who said they had sexual relationships with the president.

this follows same contours of what was reported a couple weeks ago by the "wall street journal." now "the new york times" has the story, too, as does the associated press. all of these stories have the same basic contours. and none of that is the same as us seeing a real live indictment. but it does at least mean there's a big pile of credible corroborating reporting that all lays out the same potential charges against cohen. if it is true about what michael cohen will be charged with, then first question is, oh, yeah? show me. when is this going to happen? second question is, is michael cohen talking with prosecutors about a potential cooperation deal to lessen his legal jeopardy to help prosecutors with information that they could use in other cases? that's what everybody is watching.

i'm not going to give you, we're chasing that story as hard as everybody is. everybody is chasing the same story. that potential drama of the president's white house counsel don mcgahn and his personal lawyer michael cohen, not just getting lawyers themselves but potentially enthusiastic witnesses in cases involving the president? yeah. there's a reason everybody is chasing this story so hard. but here is something specific to consider. late last week, there document was filed in federal court in manhattan. just two pages. from the special master who was hired by the court to review evidence that was seized from michael cohen's home. his home and his office and his hotel newsroom april. the special master was appointed by the court to check all the documents that were seized to make sure they were not covered by attorney-client privilege. and if they were not, then he would hand them over to special

prosecutors to review for charges against michael cohen. well, in this last little filing, from the special master late last week, the special master, this retired judge, gives a final accounting of just how many documents and files she found to be covered by attorney-client privilege. bottom line is not many. a found thousand out of millions of documents taken. but look at this. a special master also says, there was one thing that i couldn't ever review. i could never look to see whether it was covered by attorney-client privilege. just one. michael cohen's encrypted black berry. she said she never got and its contents on review because apparently they don't have the password to the black berry. so the special master said in this filing, if down the road the government does manage to crack it open, they'll to have

use a filter team at the u.s. attorney's office and check to it see if any of the stuff is privileged. and she hopes that's okay. because she's done now. she's wrapped up her work so that's the one outstanding matter. that still hand been taken care of. you'll to have deal with it some other way. here my question. nearly five months into the michael cohen saga, prosecutors still don't have the password to his blackberry? why have i read 5,000 articles in which michael cohen has given every conceivable signal that he wants to cooperate. that all this gossip and spin he is desperate to help prosecutors any way he can. if so, shouldn't michael cohen be sky writing his blackberry password over sdny headquarters? if they need that password, that's the one bit of his files and documents they haven't reviewed. the stuff on that blackberry. if they need and it they don't have it, isn't that a clear sign the two sides are not talking? or at least if they are talking, he's not helping.

so much spin around the michael cohen side of this story. do not fall for it. watch this space. let your perfect drive come together during the final days of the lincoln summer invitation event get 0% apr on select 2018 lincoln models plus one thousand dollars bonus cash. it was always our singular focus.

to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com appointments available now. ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma ♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun♪ ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma transitions™ light under control™ visit your vision source doctor to ask about transitions™ brand lenses light under control™ 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. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? monitor their blood glucose every day. which means they have to stop. and stick their fingers. repeatedly. today, life-changing technology from abbott makes it possible to track glucose levels. without drawing a drop of blood, again and again.

the most personal technology, is technology with the power to change your life. life. to the fullest. this era in d.c. has been marked by many mysteries. not chief among those but maybe deputy chief among mysteries, how come white house counsel don mcgahn is so good at playing the

hero in the press? how come he is so good at getting a heroic look at his stoic forebearance into the papers? how has he managed to get so many stories into the newspapers in which he alone, he bravely is secretly the real american hero? don mcigan is reported to have been the one who calmed the president down after rob mueller was appointed. so the president didn't do something truly crazy. don mcgahn has threatened to resign rather than fire robert mueller, which the president had ordered him to do. do you think the white house weirdly mishandled the firing of mike flynn after they were warned? no, no. he didn't mismanage anything. he reportedly warned the white house about the lying of michael flynn right away. he was right on top of it.

don mcigan shows up in the press as hanging in there through the chaos, self-lessly pulling back from quitting, hanging in there to take care of the country's needs despite really being pushed around by the president in an unfair way. i don't know who one day will pay the part familiar with his thinking when the movie is made of all this but the role is getting larger every day. this tweaked "times" reported that don mcgahn has cooperated extensive when i the robert mueller inquiry. he sat with investigators over 30 hours in the last nine months. he laid out how the president tried ensure the investigation though never going beyond his legal authorities. and yes, the white house may be a little freaked out to realize

they had no idea don mcigan had talked so much. they had no idea that in the 30 hours of testimony, that he don mcgahn had no choice but to selflessly give. the legal team told the lawyers he would have resigned if he thought he had witnessed the president committing a crime. the source tell nbc, there's no way of knowing how his testimony may fit with any other evidence that the mueller investigation has collected. the mystery, the secret heroism keeps growing by the hour. there are a few lumps in the ointment though. hold that thought.

when your blanket's freshness fades before the binge-watching begins... that's when you know, it's half-washed. next time, add downy fabric conditioner for freshness that lasts through next week's finale. downy and it's done. you never listen to your dad when you're a teenager.

my dad- he always gave me two pieces of advice. one was to always be humble. and the second was to always do the right thing. now that i'm the new ceo of uber, i've taken that advice to heart. and i'm using that advice to change our company. moving forward, we're taking into consideration what's good for our driver partners, our riders, and the cities that we operate in. and it's going to make us a much, much better service. i was 2 1/2 weeks old at the time so it is not like remember this from experience. but i almost feel like i do. this part of the story now so much a part of how we think about how things blow up in american politics when they blow up really badly. i was 2 1/2 weeks old. this was april 19, 1973. >> the statement issued today by john dean, the white house counsel, caught everybody by

surprise. specially white house. it was really not a statement. it was a warning to the people dean works for. anybody who knows me, anybody who knows the true facts about watergate, knows better than to try to make a scapegoat out of me. that was dean's statement and the implication was that he has a lot of unspilled beans the spill if he is forced to spill them. the white house's comment, nobody is trying the make anybody a scapegoat. we're just trying to get to the truthful he made his statement without notifying anybody at the white house in advance and the white house was obviously shocked. the press secretary asked if dean is stale mental in good standing of the white house team would say only that he is in his office. he has not resigned. he has not been fired. this could be the case for some time to come but it is clear that from now on, john dean is white house counsel in name only. nbc news at the white house. >> 11 days after that warning shot from then white house counsel john dean, president

richard nixon fired him. and nixon's supporters immediately began pointing to john dean as the person who everybody should blame for the whole watergate scandal and the whole cover-up. it should all be on dean's head. not the president's. that didn't work out well. but now we've got a current president of the united states talking about john dean in public, calling him a rat for having testified against nixon 45 years ago. and we've got the current white house counsel also citing the example of john dean. basically to say, he is trying avoid john dean's ultimate fate in watergate which is yeah, maybe now he's remembered as a hero, or a rat, depending on how you look it a. but at the time john dean went to prison. both sides are sort of misremembering how things worked out for john dean. michael beschloss is here next to sort it out.

chair, new laptop, 24/7 tech support. yep, thanks guys. i think he might need some support. yes. start them off right, with the school supplies they need at low prices all summer long. like these for only $2 or less at office depot officemax. mom: okay we need to get all your school supplies today. school... grade... done. done. hit the snooze button and get low prices on school supplies all summer long. like these for only $2 or less at office depot officemax. like these for only $2 or less you might be missing something.y healthy. your eyes. that's why there's ocuvite. ocuvite helps replenish nutrients your eyes can lose as you age. it has lutein, zeaxanthin and omega-3. ocuvite. be good to your eyes. 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.

jushis local miracle ear t at 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. now i know you're thinking, "i don't want to hear about insurance." cause let's be honest, nobody likes dealing with insurance, right? which is why esurance hired me, dennis quaid, as their spokesperson because apparently, i'm highly likable. i like dennis quaid. awww. and they want me to let you know that, cue overdramatic music, they're on a mission to make insurance painless. excuse me, you dropped this. they know it's confusing. i literally have no idea what i'm getting, dennis quaid.

that's why they're making it simple, man in cafe. and they know it's expensive. yeah. so they're making it affordable. thank you. you're welcome. that's a prop apple. now, you might not believe any of this since this is a television commercial, but that's why they're being so transparent. anyways. this is the end of the commercial where i walk off into a very dramatic sunset to reveal the new esurance tagline so that you'll remember it. esurance. it's surprisingly painless.

good evening. john wesley dean, iii, fired last april by richard nixon told the senate watergate committee today that the president was involved in watergate wrongdoing and having accused the president, dean said he hopes mr. nixon will be forgiven. that's how dean began his testimony today. >> it is my honest belief that while the president was

involved, that he did not realize or appreciate at any time the implications of his involvement. and i think that when the facts come out, i hope the president is forgiven. >> john dean followed that assertion with a 245 page statement that took all day to read, crammed with quotes, dates, memoranda and detailed recollections of talks with the president. >> a 245 page statement that he read outloud. nixon's white house counsel john dean had decided early on in the watergate scandal that nixon was going to try to make him the scapegoat. once he figured that out, he made 180 degree turn. he went straight to federal prosecutors. he told them he would cooperate with them fully. by the time nixon fired john dean from the white house counsel's job, dean had already for weeks been helping prosecutors on watergate.

so with this new reporting over the past couple of days that the current white house counsel has spoken for 30 hours with special counsel robert mueller, the president now is literally launching a new attack on john dean saying that dean was a rat for testifying against nixon back in the day. but the current white house counsel john mcgahn is in here of dean's legacy. he says he's determined to not have john dean's fate. he was prohibited from practicing law. that is what compelled him to cooperate with robert mueller. that's become the blueprint for this dynamic we have been watching unfold. is the white house counsel right to worry about john dean's fate? will testifying now help him avoid that fate?

and is the president right to be concerned about rats? joining us now the nbc news presidential historian. it is great to have you with us tonight? >> thanks, rachel. good to see you. >> the president today called john dean a rat. when dean came forward in 1973, what did nixon supporters do in response? how was he treated at the time? >> well, when he testified before the senate, as you were just showing and said that nixon was central to the coverup, a lot of nixon people were very angry. but what amazes me, rachel, is that if we were to talk to any president from gerald ford all the way through barack obama and say what do you think of john dean? they would have said a flawed person but ultimately a hero of watergate because he helped to expose richard nixon. this is another sign of this weird time we're living through that the current president,

donald trump, was use a word like rat. >> one of the things we're watching unspool now in this story is that nobody is quite sure whether or not don mcgahn acted heroically or whether he had to talk to the special counsel. did john dean at white house counsel have a choice in terms of whether he was going to cooperate? he worried he was going to get blamed and this was his effort to get out ahead of it. but how much of a choice did he have? >> in the end probably not much. you were so right tonight to say be very cautious about what we're hearing from the outside. in dean's case he knew he was central to the coverup. he knew nixon was trying to make him the scapegoat and blame watergate on him. when dean started talking to

people in the legal process, he did two things that ultimately were crucial. number one, he gave them information that showed that not only should they be investigating the watergate break-in, which is what they had been focussed on, but they should also look at nixon in terms of obstruction of justice that shifted the investigation. ultimately, obstruction of justice was article number one of the bills of impeachment that would have been voted against nixon. the other thing dean did was he said when i was talking to nixon nixon would say things like, well, i didn't do such and such, did i, john? it sounded as maybe i was being taped. that caused them to be aware of the possibility that there would be tapes that would show the real story. >> dean's recollections about the way nixon talked to him was a signal essentially to investigators that there were tapes they should look for. >> they were looking very hard and finally, alexander

butterfield knew about that, was approached by investigators for the senate watergate committee. he was the one that revealed those tapes to the public. ultimately, they brought nixon down. >> thank you, my friend. great to have you here. >> thank you. be well. >> thank you. stay with us.

i needed legal advice for my shop. that's when i remembered that my ex-ex- ex-boyfriend actually went to law school, so i called him. he didn't call me back! if your ex-ex- ex-boyfriend isn't a lawyer, call legalzoom and we'll connect you with an attorney. legalzoom. where life meets legal.

( ♪ ) stop dancing around the pain that's keeping you awake. advil pm gives tossing and turning a rest and silences aches and pains. fall asleep faster, stay asleep longer with advil pm. and if you get lost, just hit me on the old horn. man: tom's my best friend, but ever since he bought a new house... tom: it's a $10 cover? oh, okay. didn't see that on the website. he's been acting more and more like his dad. come on, guys! jump in! the water's fine! tom pritchard. how we doin'? hi, there. tom pritchard. can we get a round of jalapeño poppers for me and the boys, please? i've been saving a lot of money with progressive lately, so... progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents. but we can protect your home and auto when you bundle with us. two things to watch tomorrow. paul manafort 9:30 a.m. eastern time, the jury resumes its

deliberations for a fourth day. you should also know by the end of the day tomorrow we are expected to get the full stack of evidence. that part the prosecution intends to use in the next paul manafort, the case that is going to start in d.c. next month. we're told to expect there will be over 1,000 items of evidence in that list. but we will see our first glimpse of what the evidence will be. we'll see you tomorrow. now it is time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. >> you have done it again. i was watching your interview with john brennan on friday night. you set an aagenda for the weekend that continues now. now this issue of will john brennan sue over the removal of his security clearance? and what might that mean as precedent with john brennan said to you his interest in it was not for himself but for the precedent that might be involved