"deadline white house" with nicolle wallace starts right now. >> it's 4:00 in new york. breaking news -- professor christine blasey ford who has accused supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh of sexual assault, an allegation he denies, has just told the senate judiciary committee that she'd be prepared to testify next week on the condition the hearing is fair and that her safety could be ensured. the news breaking just about an hour ago and throwing judge kavanaugh's confirmation into further question. for his part, kavanaugh is eager to testify under oath and has been participating in prep sessions at the white house. kavanaugh's defenders had been feeling more confident about kavanaugh's chances of being confirmed when it appeared the professor ford may not have been willing to speak publicly and under oath about her account. but today's development will likely be seen as a setback for kavanaugh. here to help us sift through the latest in this high-stakes controversy, some of our favorite reporters and guests. from "the washington post," sung

min kim who has been following every development in this story all week long. at the table, phil rucker, elise jordan and now co-coast of the excellent podcast words matter. bill kristol and nick confisore for "the new york times." let's start with you sung min. >> so major breaking news. we're still waiting for chairman grassley to -- chuck grassley to release his statement on this and any response because if you recall, there were some ways that grassley and his staff and senate republicans were willing to accommodate dr. ford and her testimony. earlier this week they had offered perhaps flying senate investigators out to california to speak with her there at her home if that would make her feel more comfortable. they offered public sessions, private sessions. but the one thing -- two things they weren't budging on was that

monday date as well as the -- their view that an fbi investigation before she testifies was not necessary. but now dr. ford through her attorneys has offered a timeline that's not too far from the monday date line. she's still saying she's willing to come next week. she's still asking for that fbi investigation, and this aligns with what democratic senators called for, for days, when all this news broke. we actually at "the washington post," we went back and looked at old clippings about, during the anita hill hearings in 1991 and looked at how long the fbi probe in that case took. it took about three days. it wasn't very long. and democratic senators are saying the fact that dr. ford is asking for an fbi investigation actually bolsters her credibility. at an event on capitol hill, kirsten gillibrand said someone that is lying doesn't ask the fbi to investigate their claims. it will be interesting to see what chuck grassley says in the next, you know, five minutes or ten minutes or an hour, whenever

he chooses to respond, if he's willing to move that monday date. >> the white house view 24 hours ago had been this confirmation was looking more secure, more -- i wouldn't say sure but like it had sort of turned from the shock of the -- of professor ford's account over the weekend. this seems to reverse that tide a little bit. >> a little bit, but the white house has been preparing for her to come forward and testify. they've been spending all week with judge kavanaugh who has been hunkered down with don mcgahn to try to prepare for these questions and how he's going to answer these accusations. and i think there's a feeling in the white house still that his nomination will get through. certainly more confidence now than there was on monday at the beginning of the week when it wasn't clear what more evidence this accuser might be able to bring or whether there could be other accusers or other components to the story. >> are there chances there are

other accusers or components to the story? >> i'm not a magician. i don't know. >> the specter of a televised hearing with both judge kavanaugh and professor ford was ominous because of the unknown. that it was unknowable whether she would come across as a woman with nothing to gain and a credible story to tell. and whether, for all of the regard, high regard in which he's held in conservative legal circles and beyond that that would be insurmountable. are you hearing anything different from that assessment from sources close to kavanaugh? >> it's a source the white house told me that judge kavanaugh is confident in his innocence. he's confident in the case that he will present. and i think there is sadness that, clearly, dr. ford has experienced some kind of trauma. it's evidence from how she has

spoken of her experience, but judge kavanaugh is very confident in his innocence. perhaps this is a case of mistaken identity. everyone is waiting to hear what dr. ford is going to say and what evidence she can give to support that it, in fact, was judge kavanaugh. >> this seems to me, bill kristol, like the moment in time when the me too movement collides with this sort of idea, equally cherished belief in due process. and i don't think anybody knows where it's going to end. but it seems like for everyone else sort of swept up in the me too movement, there were a couple things different and distinct from the kavanaugh example. there were multiple accusers. that's why i asked if there were any reports of anybody else. but the other is that no one has been given permission to question whether a woman misremembered. this case does seem to be breaking the mold a bit. >> if there's a hearing in which

both testify and they can each make their case and professor ford wants to argue that other witnesses should be invited as well, mark judge who allegedly was there, if she wants to say that i'd like to have the fbi investigate, she can say that right to chairman grassley and have him explain why they shouldn't. >> what possible explanation for not -- >> i'm not sure. to say that, i was in the first bush white house. the fbi did about a three-day investigation. it didn't resolve anything. that was before the hearingings. they talked to acheetah hill. she said one thing. they talked to clarence thomas. they have -- so the fbi aren't magicians. and they can't just resolve it all. but the hearing would be healthy and maybe some additional witnesses would be healthy. i think it will happen in the middle of next week. probably not on monday. and i think the republican senators will not be foolish enough to do the questioning themselves but will get a counsel --

>> this is bold saying republicans won't be foolish enough to do -- >> you think chuck grassley and oren hatch aren't up to sensitive questioning of something that may have experienced a very difficult thing. >> i think they're up to it but they -- >> i think they'll get -- i've been told they're talking about getting a counsel who would do the questioning. i don't know what the democrats will do, all those people running for president may not be willing to yield their time or yield it to one or two of them who experienced questioners. so this is all sort of depressing in a certain way. maybe it will be healthy. they'll both testify and be treated respectfully. we'll learn what we'll learn. maybe this is a sense he wasn't either railroaded based on one accusation, nor was she treated in some way that was unfair or disrespectful. >> she seems to be holding the cards at this moment. she's not agreeing to the monday deadline. it's unclear what the magic was

in monday to begin with. and she's asking for some good conditions to be met that her safety be secured and that it's fair. that seems to have in mind maybe what you're talking about, a questioner that adds some gender diversity at a minimum to the all-republican makeup of the republicans on the judiciary committee. what do you make of where the power dynamic is in this moment? >> i think the only good scenario or the best scenario for republicans is to keep it moving and to keep the discussion within the bounds of he said/she said. that sounds cynical but it's one of the reasons they aren't pushing to bring in march judk or any other witnesses. they want to move on as fast as they can. the second it gets bogged down, i think kavanaugh is in trouble. i don't think that any publicized hearing or airing of her story is good for judge kavanaugh, is good for the republicans. it's going to be wrenching and difficult. and they have not shown

themselves as a party to be very smart and deft in handling these kinds of problems. >> that's the understatement of the century. let me ask you seung min to weigh in. already burdened by an unpopular president the male-dominated gop is now facing a torrent of scrutiny about how it's handling kavanaugh's accuser and whether the party's push to install him on the high court by next week could come at a steep political cost with women and independent voters who are the keystone for congressional majorities. your picking up on that anxiety as you walk the halls up there? >> it's interesting. publicly, republicans are confident until the news earlier just about an hour ago that dr. ford would be willing to testify some time next week. we've talked on the show all this week about how republicans have been publicly growing very confident in -- first of all, that they'd get or achieve a major conservative priority, that they would get judge

kavanaugh installed. they are looking at the longer term impact, particularly with women. it's too early to figure out what the actual impact will be on the -- on the republicans' handling of this. the independent voters, suburban women swing voters that both parties are watching very closely, and earlier, there was a report out by the nevada independent late last night with senator dean heller who is the most vulnerable senate republican on the ballot this november appearing to refer to the assault allegations against judge kavanaugh as a, quote, hic hiccup. i've heard privately from those who are not too pleased with that remark and how senator heller used that phrase. so clearly there's a political risk for republicans. i also want to point out another interesting news development today. the governor of alaska, he's an independent, bill walker, and

the lunieutenant governor, issu a statement saying they oppose judge kavanaugh's nomination. they are not republicans. they are independents, but they are pointing to his health care -- or kavanaugh's health care record and labor record as a reason he should be voted down. and remember one of the key swing republican votes that still remain up in the air, lisa murkowski of alaska. >> that's all very interesting. and it also sort of -- this political layer can't be ignored. there's no one on capitol hill operating from a place of principle anymore. it's fair to assert that. let me read some reporting from axios. mike allen reports if brett kavanaugh's nomination sinks, democrats would turn the midterms into a referendum not just on president trump but also on women's rights abortion and the future of the supreme court. they always do that, to be fair, but this would give them a fresh example. >> that's right. and everybody in both parties is looking at this through a political lens. they can talk about the supreme court and justice and values and

all of that, but the democrats are thinking about the november elections which are only seven weeks away. if they can derail kavanaugh, i know democrats think they have a chance to really further energize their base. it may not even change, frankly, who sits on the supreme court because president trump is going to turn around the next day and nominate an equally conservative judge if not a more conservative judge. >> i'm told he'll do the latter out of spite. that out of spite if they sink the kavanaugh nomination, he'll pick someone more conservative to spite them. that's who we've got as president. let me read something said in the post. ford has a powerful story to tell in trying to jam her into their abbreviated one-sided process. senate republicans open the door to far more dangerous options where the american people get to judge for themselves whether she's credible. as kavanaugh's approval rating slides, republicans need to consider whether it's worth unleashing a firestorm to defend a nominee who may be a further drag on their midterm races.

now this is unlike the last one, this is the political analysis republicans can make. most people share your assessment this is a man standing by his innocence, but the political considerations do represent some risk for republicans. >> and i think that we've seen where this nomination fight, this conformation battle has moved so far beyond even who is brett kavanaugh and it's just pure brutal partisan warfare. you look at his approval rating throughout this entire process and they've been historically lower than other nominees who should have actually been more controversial compared to judge kavanaugh. and it's a window into the times and into how divided and tribal and partisan we really are. >> it's an interesting point. i read somewhere that he -- probably in "the post" that he votes with merrick garland close to 90% of the time. but the other side of that is supreme court nominations are always partisan. >> they are. i was in the bush white house

for the thomas nomination. got that through with democratic votes. a democratic senate. the two nevada senators who were democrats. a couple other southern democrats. moderate conservative democrats before him. quite a lot of support in the african-american community which helped. it's a political vote. and it's going to be a partisan vote anyway just on sort of judicial philosophy. it would be nice. this is a case. this would be a case where if senator grassley and feinstein can stitt doit down and work ou judge kavanaugh and professor ford or her attorney a dignified and appropriate way to do this so it doesn't become a total circus. it's perfectly fair she have a hearing and judge kavanaugh be able to make his case. you'd think the senate could find a way to make this not an embarrassing moment for the country. >> i'm going to start eating for lunch what you had. all this optimism is freaking me

out. >> it lasts for about 12 minutes a day. >> cocktail hour. i love it. so mike murphy, old campaign hand in republican circles said the perception of this, regard fls wh regardless of what the truth is could be yet another political problem for republicans. we're living in the woke era and supreme court nominations have become tv shows. and if your cast is mostly older, white republican male senators, you'll have issues in that environment. it's the same thing we've been talking about. but the optics couldn't be worse for republicans. the me too movement collide with right wing politics. >> a president who has been accused by multiple women of sexual abuse and harassment has put forward for the court a man who has been accused by one woman of sexual abuse, sexual assault or attempted sexual assault, i should say. and he is poised likely to strike down apportion rights. so of course the optics are terrible. everything the president is connected to takes on some of his liabilities. and judge kavanaugh has taken on

the president's liabilities unfort nunately for him. it's why his rating is so low compared to other nominees. >> what's one irony. what helped elect donald trump in 2016? among some swing voters it was the supreme court. mitch mcconnell kept that seat open. a lot people didn't like trump. it was a rationalization. >> no doubt. >> irony if two years later the supreme court becomes again a huge issue in the midyear election and maybe cuts the other way. >> elise? >> republican men who are endorsed by donald trump and who are attached to the apparatus that is the modern day republican party of donald trump, they do not get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to women these days. and that's the byproduct of trump's atrocious behavior and language and own record and history of over a dozen allegations. >> the republican national

committee and trump supported. >> seung min kim, come back if you hear anything from anybody up there. the attorney for christine blasey ford will appear with rachel maddow tonight at 9:00. don't miss that. when we come back, more breaking news that will likely have some in the west wing even more rattled. michael cohen sitting down with robert mueller's team for multiple sessions lasting over many hours. plus amid new reporting in "the washington post" painting a vivid picture of a president about to blow under crushing pressure. one of the reporters who wrote that story is sitting right here. and russia's hijacking of an american election in more detall than ever before. brand new reporting in "the new york times" that paints the fullest picture yet of what happened in the 2016 election. stay with us. how can we say when you book direct at choicehotels.com

you always get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed? let's say it in a really low voice. carl? lowest price, guaranteed. just stick with badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com billions of problems. morning breath? garlic breath? stinky breath? there's a therabreath for you. therabreath fresh breath oral rinse instantly fights all types of bad breath and works for 24 hours. so you can... breathe easy. there's therabreath at walmart.

are you worried that michael cohen might flip? >> look, i did nothing wrong. you have to understand, this stuff would have come out a long time ago. i did nothing wrong. >> is michael cohen still your friend? >> news breaking just in the last hour from abc news that michael cohen has participated in hours of interviews with robert mueller's team over the last month. from that report, quote, the special counsel's questioning of cohen, one of the president's closest associates over the past decade has focused on trump's dealings with russia including financial and business dealings and the investigation into alleged collusion with russia by the trump campaign and its surrogates to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. sources familiar with the matter tell abc news.

investigators were also interested in knowing the sources say whether trump or any of his associates discussed the possibility of a pardon with cohen. joining the conversation is former u.s. attorney and former deputy assistant attorney general harry litman. what do you make of the fact that now that michael cohen is availing himself to the mueller probe to the southern district of new york that there is basically an open floodgate of all of donald trump's business dealings and all and anything that michael cohen may have witnessed on the campaign when it comes to intersections or efforts to coordinate with russia. >> it's very significant, though i wouldn't say surprising. there had been some speculation maybe mueller isn't interested in talking to cohen. but he, obviously, has this wealth of information on russia. also on the financial side where abc also reports that he's cooperating with the new york attorney general. it's pretty huge.

and also as with manafort, mueller has -- holds all the cards. right now he's made no promises about whether he'll give him any credit for cooperating. same as with manafort and both men have to give it all up and hope for the best. and in cohen's case, that is really a wealth of things in russia. he's in the steele dossier, he's in the attempt to form a trump tower in moscow and also dating back ten more years on the financial side. >> and it would seem this is the first i've seen that mueller's team is interested in talking to michael cohen about pardons. that seems to me that maybe they're looking at cohen as a potential witness in the obstruction of justice. >> i think and more generally, they endorse the proposition that holding out the hope of a pardon or dangling the pardon is a potential obstruction of

justice. that's a theory that applies to multiple witnesses starting with steele and moving forward, including manafort. if they've endorsed that theory, that's going to get a lot of play probably in the report. >> nick confisore, what do you think of this abc news report. it's important to go back to trump tells. and we know from donald trump that the original raid on cohen's offices was perhaps the gravest injustice that he's perceived so far. he called it an attack on the nation the day his lawyer and fixer's offices and homes were raided. >> they've got to be sweating over there. 12 hours is a long time. a lot of testimony. i was thinking about the prague meeting that cohen denied having but which there's some reason to think he might have had. it's certainly possible to kind of evade passport stamping. but, look, what's fascinating is the president is being undone by his own lack of loyalty to

cohen. and the question of pardoning him is beside the point. cohen is on team america on this. if you'd just given him some cheesy white house job and made him happy. instead, he's turned. he's not being pressured anymore. he is ready to cooperate. he is going for it. and that's got to be terrifying to the white house. >> that's an interesting point, elise. he has now availed himself through media reports and through an attorney as has been reported to try to help bring down the president if he has participated in a conspiracy with russia to affect the election and help them make their obstruction of justice case. >> i agree with nick that a man who is rejected like michael cohen is far more dangerous than one who feels like he still has something to gain from this situation. he saw nothing left to gain from donald trump and just the totality of the terrible treatment that trump had heaped

upon him and also just, why couldn't donald trump pay his legal bills? why couldn't he as a trump inc employee pay the legal bills? >> let me push back on you. isn't bob mueller showing he's the great equalizer. manafort was willing to stay loyal. here's the deal. if you have any evidence about trump committing crimes, mueller is coming for you whether you're loyal or not. >> i'm not even as interested in michael cohen as i am michael flynn. his sentencing date was set for december 18th. some are speculating that his period of cooperation is over and the mueller investigation has elicited information they need from michael flynn. what did michael flynn do and what went down that he observed during the transition and during those, i think, 23 days he was national security adviser. >> let me bring harry back in. two questions for you. is mueller simply trading up? he's now got cohen and manafort and is done with flynn. is that why he's ready for sentencing? and pick up the thread on this

question. it seems like whether you're loyal or not. if you have testimony mueller wants, he's going to get it. >> he is going to get it. it's not simply the disloyalty, though that's really been vivid, but cohen is going to be sentenced december 12th. he has series charges hanging over him. on flynn, it does indicate he's done with him. usually you'd keep him around if he might need to testify. but in all of these, we're find with manafort, cohen, et cetera, mueller has belt and suspendered everything. we have the testimony from weisselberg and pecker on what cohen has to say in general. you have a really comprehensive and duplicative investigation by mueller. so i think he thinks he can let flynn go. >> i cut you off. >> if you step back and look at the forest end of the trees which is hard in a trump

presidency. mueller has had cooperation from manafort, cohen and flynn. think about that. so he knows everything. he may or may not have discovered things that would be legitimate grounds for impeachment, either on collusion or obstruction. i think he's probably discovered enough he'd feel he'd have to let congress know what he's discovered. so one way or another, i think we're looking at presumably, fairly soon after the election, the next two or three months after, a mueller report one way or another. if trump fires sessions, how does it affect him. i think mueller will make sure the congress of the united states knows what happened, and i suspect that what happened will at least raise enough questions that the house will go ahead with impeachment hearings. so we'll have an early 2019 -- >> if the democrats win the house. >> you know, even if the republicans held the house, if mueller says there's grounds, i guess -- you're looking at me skeptical. i guess you're right. i take it back. the republicans' capability of totally ignoring everything -- i

take it back. >> i crushed your hopes and dreams and killed your optimism. we're going to hear from james comey. >> i think there's an argument to be made that the conviction, the plea and cooperation by paul manafort may represent that we're in the fourth quarter because the way you normally do investigations is you work from the bottom up. and so they are getting pretty high. >> getting pretty high. is that why your reporting today we'll talk about in the next segment, the president is about to blow. that seems to be in line with what ousted fbi director judge comey is describing. >> we don't really know what quarter mueller is in. but people around trump assume we're at that latter stage. that there's a report being developed that, if trump does some sort of interview or answers some question, that will answer at some time this fall probably and that this investigation, according to people close to the president, they don't think it's going to go too much into the new year and they're hopeful it ends very

soon. >> let's put up what might be leading to their anxiety. here are all of mueller's cooperating witnesses. mike flynn, george papadopoulos, paul manafort, michael cohen. they know everything. not just about the president. if you were to put up the white house employees, don mcgahn, at least 30 hours of testimony from the sitting white house counsel who was in the room when the decision to fire comey was made. in the room when sessions was asked to unrecuse himself. who was in the room and laid his body on the tracks when the president wanted to fire robert mueller. mueller knows everything. >> he knows a lot we don't know. i want to emphasize that so many times. he has access to financial information, tax returns, bank records. >> you think he has trump's tax returns? >> he has to, right? i can't say for sure, but -- >> i ascribe him superhuman powers. >> i would assume he'd ask for them and get them and be entitled. >> e-mails, phone records. >> every time he's unveiled an indictment we've learned a great deal of things that we did not

know. even with several great newspapers breaking a lot of stories. we knows a lot. >> the incredible thing about this stage of the mueller investigation is for all of the president's talk about loyalty and his demands that the people who work for him or around him are completely 100% loyal. he does not return it in kind. i don't think we can point to a single person who is loyal to him over mueller right now. >> that we know. >> harry litman, do you agree with that assessment? everyone chooses mueller? >> besides the big four cooperators, there's so many other sources of information. weisselberg and pecker and sessions and comey. he's really sort of from the start completely covered the waterfront. and i think he does. number one principle is, we just don't know a fraction of what mueller knows. >> that's a great point to end on. we know he's also spoken to

every member of the national security team and donald trump had asked them to be fact witnesses for him saying he hadn't colluded with russia. mueller has access to all those people. harry, thank you. up next -- a president about to blow as we've been discussing. new reporting describes the situation inside the west wing as the walls close in on multiple fronts this afternoon. that's next. ...and built a career in construction. but i couldn't bear my diabetic nerve pain any longer. so i talked to my doctor and he prescribed lyrica. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worsening depression, unusual changes in mood or behavior, swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling or blurry vision. common side effects: dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain and swelling of hands, legs, and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who have had a drug or alcohol problem may be

more likely to misuse lyrica. now i have less diabetic nerve pain. ask your doctor about lyrica. today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advisor to help you sort through your options and find a perfect place. a place for mom. you know your family we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice.

♪ one look at you and i can't disguise ♪ ♪ i've got hungry eyes applebee's new 3-course meal starting at $11.99. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. today, life-changing technology from abbott is helping hunt them down at their source. because the faster we can identify new viruses, the faster we can get to stopping them. the most personal technology, is technology with the power to change your life. life. to the fullest.

for president trump, the developments unfolding just this afternoon in both the battle for brett kavanaugh's supreme court confirmation and robert mueller's russia probe are helping to paint a picture of a president under siege on multiple fronts. the latest reporting suggests the situation is dire. from "the washington post" today, behind the scenes, trump is confronting broad sides from every direction, legal, political and personal. the russia investigation steamrolling ahead and anonymous administration officials seeking to undermine him and the specter

of impeachment proceedings should the democrats retake the house on november 6th. the president's vulnerability may be the greatest of his presidency so far raising questions about when and how the pressure might cause him to burst. the panel still here. phil rucker, you wrote that story with ashley parker. i feel like he burst in the hill tv interview where he said we don't have an attorney general and i'm going to cure the cancer that is the modern fbi. >> ashley and i were both struck by that and considered it a real cry from him because he feels unprotected. that's the key word right now. unprotected at the justice department because he doesn't have an attorney general who he thinks is sufficiently loyal to him personally. but also in all these other realms. and you have to look around the corner what's coming. the midterm elections. stormy daniels has her book coming out. other books coming out later at the end of the year and he's deal with the prospect of all of these investigations and

impeachment and probes by congressional democrats if they take back the house. it could be very troubling for them. >> let me ask a broader question. unprotected from what? >> he has a different view of what the presidency should be. he thinks all these people should be there to protect him. >> from the crimes he committed? from prosecution? from impeachment? if you've done nothing wrong, what do you have to fear from your own justice department? >> he fears all the time. he's conspiratorial. even in that same einterview he said i'm not a conspiratorial. he always fears a hidden hand. always thinks somebody is out to get him. people are conspiring against him. his enemies are within. he's very mindful of that and just doesn't trust many of the people in his government. >> so increasingly the stories about the justice department seem to need to be dovetailed with stories about his fitness to serve. there are serious questions that there were serious conversations among the cabinet about the 25th amendment. and what you just described is

paranoia that makes richard nixon look stable and placid in the weeks before he resigned. this is a mind-set that's terrifying. >> one problem with that op-ed was that it was a sole source anonymous description of a vague description of invoking the 25th amendment. i would have liked to have better sourcing on something of that importance personally as a reporter. >> sounds like a personal problem. >> i'm saying it's hard to rely on it. hard for all of us to rely on it. but there's no -- >> is that just different standards the op-ed page and -- >> it's not a news organization or it's not part of the news section. i feel confident that we would probably not have run a news story saying that in the same way. but the fact is that his temperament is on the table. people are discussing it. bob woodward's book has similar types of material suggesting that people around the president believe he does not have the fitness to be in office. and that is kind of scary. >> not just his temperament that

he's fuming at all these things. it's what he's done. forced mcmaster out. mcgann hn is leaving. mcgahn has been pretty compliant in things and still has said no several times. sessions, obviously, rosenstein, the entire justice department he's not speaking to. it's not just that he's unhappy or psychologically challenged. it's a crazy administration. he's running an administration where he's getting -- i think there are fewer guardrails now than a year ago. and he seems more contemptuous the notion that anyone should ever tell him maybe you shouldn't do this, sir, and less tolerant of that. so i think 2019 is going to make 2018 look relatively placid. >> he seems to be lighting fire to all the guardrails that exist. if you look at the call this tweak declassify the fisa application. >> which he admitted he hadn't read. commentators he respected asked him to. >> and the commentators he

respects, let's get that list. i believe it was sean hannity, the great lou dobbs is what he said. jeannine piro. that's who he's listening to instead of dan coats, secretary mattis and the national security establishment. >> donald trump has been very blatant about his fear of impeachment. and his last couple of rallies he has said he will get impeached if you don't come out and vote for me. so tonight is another rally in nevada and that will probably be the message. i don't know if that's an inspiring win that makes you want to support donald trump. keep me out of trouble because this deep state conspiracy is taking me down. i don't know if that's enough to really -- perhaps it drives your base but i don't think it drives the people who voted for you initially because they didn't like hillary clinton that much. >> at those rallies it's telling because his argument about why he can't be impeached is not i've done nothing wrong. it's i shouldn't be impeached

because i'm doing such a great job. impeachment is nothing to do with whether there's approve alf your job performance. it's whether you committed some sort of crime or done something wrong in office. >> you and ashley go into great detail about all of the things leading to this moment. what do you sense of his advisers is the greatest fear all of these external factors. is it the mueller probe? the investigation out of sdny. is it his growing rage and he really can't fire him until mueller is gone. what are they most afraid of when they turn on cable news or open your paper or yours? >> for a while they'd been very concerned about the michael cohen situation. there's a little less concern about the mueller russia probe because there's a belief inside the white house that there is no collusion. that the president can't be found to have done anything wrong in terms of conspiring with russians during the 2016 campaign. they just don't think there's

any there, there. there's no control over what he tweets in the morning. he can start news cycles that they're powerless to. sarah sanders can wake up in the morning and her phone will buzz and she just has to deal with it for the day. she doesn't know it's coming. that's a concern. it's what trump can do and create that can be a problem to throw them off track when trying to govern. >> the idea they have any sort of calmness about the mueller probe seems misguided in that every indication i've heard is that it's still a known unknown whether don junior has some expose tlur. whether jared has been given an all clear. and whether the president himself is out of the woods in the obstruction or the conspiracy investigation. >> look, there are certain costs this investigation can still impose on the president and the white house. i think they made the calculation that ultimately it will come down to a political question to impeachment. and -- >> that's just for the president, though. >> right. i'm just saying that i think they are not wrong in thinking

that that is a fight they can win in the long term. i think if the president is impeached by a democratic party line vote, it bounces back and hurts democrats and strengthens him for the remainder of his term. >> for re-election. >> it shows how important the senate is. everyone is focused on winning the house, which is quite likely. it will be important and they'll win some government governorships but those -- but this is why the president is going to every red state with a democratic senator to try to save them. those are states trump carried. he thinks if he makes it a referendum on himself and they want to unjustly impeach me and they just hate me that he can rally enough voters to knock off a couple of democrats and hold the senate. the world looks very different in the republicans hold the senator they don't. >> i heard that the whole impeachment strategy from the president's outside legal team was not to avoid impeachment because it's as you said.

they looked at clinton's appr e approval ratings. it was to avoid conviction in the senate. that explains the travel schedule. after the break -- new reporting in "the new york times" about how russia's influence campaign reached deep into donald trump's inner circle. that story. that reporting up next. (man) managing my type 2 diabetes wasn't my top priority. until i held her. i found my tresiba® reason. now i'm doing more to lower my a1c. i take tresiba® once a day. tresiba® controls blood sugar for 24 hours

for powerful a1c reduction. (woman) we'd been counting down to his retirement. it was our tresiba® reason. he needs insulin to control his high blood sugar and, at his age, he's at greater risk for low blood sugar. tresiba® releases slow and steady and works all day and night like the body's insulin. (vo) tresiba® is a long-acting insulin used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. don't use tresiba® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. don't share needles or insulin pens. don't reuse needles. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause dizziness, sweating, confusion, and headache. check your blood sugar. low blood sugar can be serious and may be life-threatening. injection site reactions may occur. tell your prescriber about all medicines you take and all your medical conditions. taking tzds with insulins like tresiba® may cause serious side effects like heart failure. your insulin dose shouldn't be changed without asking your prescriber. get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing, fast heartbeat, extreme drowsiness, swelling of your face, tongue or throat,

dizziness or confusion. (man) i found my tresiba® reason. find yours. (vo) ask your health care provider about tresiba®. covered by most commercial health insurance and medicare part d plans. so let's promote our falle a homecomingtravel dealame, on choicehotels.com like this. touchdown. earn a free night when you stay just twice this fall. or, badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com

and by the way, folks, just in case you're curious, no, russia did not help me, okay? russia. i call it the russian hoax. one of the great hoaxes. now we're being hindered by the russian hoax. it's a hoax, okay? you know it is pretty amazing, point after point, guilty, guilty, guilty. oh, she's okay. and then they go after us for a russian hoax. it's a witch hunt hoax. it's -- isn't it incredible? >> it's a democrat hoax that was brought up as an excuse for losing an election. >> the debasement of the east

room. a hoax it is not. a comprehensive new report from "the new york times" that layed bare the incredible scope of russia's campaign to interfere in u.s. politics. the times writes, there is a plausible case that mr. putin succeeded in delivering the presidency to his admirer, mr. trump, though it cannot be proved or disproved. the report goes on, the russians carried out a landmark intervention that will be examined for decades to come. well-connected russians worked aggressively to recruit or influence people inside the trump campaign. russians are suspected russian agents, including oligarchs, diplomats, former military officers and shadowy intermediaries had dozens of contacts during the campaign with mr. trump's associates. here's the gut punch. a former cia station chief in moscow tells the times the russians aren't reckless and i don't see them going through with this effort without thinking they had a willing partner in the dance. joining us now, former u.s. ambassador to russia, michael

mcfall. i read this this morning and thought of you. eager for your thoughts and reaction. >> well, it was a fantastic piece. i applaud mark and scott shane for doing it. you know, for me, to be honest, i read it and there was nothing new for me. i've been following this story for a long time. but what they did is they separated the trees from the forest and reminded us of the forest. i think sometimes in the day-to-day, the drip, drip, drip that we have on the russia investigation. the overfocus on the word collusion. whoever did that needs to pay a price for that. there are a lot of other words we can use. and what they did is they just went through bit by bit and put it back together to show that this was a dramatic violation of american sovereignty designed to influence the outcome of the election. and maybe in the margins they played a pivotal role. >> i agree with you on the piece. and i also want to have you pull

out -- because i think that one place where trump has been successful is casting -- at least questions around whether the russians preferred trump. there's no doubt the russians wanted trump. if you are the guy that vladimir putin you're the guy that vladimir putin wanted, it really draws into question why you're to be trusted with our national security. let me read you something on this question and have you just flesh out a little more what they report in the why trump. so they write of the more than 20 major candidates running for the american presidency only mr. trump had repeatedly expressed admiration for mr. putin as a strong leader and brushed off criticism of russia. only he had little interest in the traditional american preoccupation with democracy and human rights repeatedly pursuing a trump tower project in moskow and bringing his beauty badge want there in 2013. and only he tweeted this,

michael mcfall. do you think putin will be going to the miss universe pageant in november. i mean that guy became president. >> i would add to it he was also the only presidential candidate who would look into recognizing crimea as part of russia, a territory that russia annexed in 2014, stole from ukraine. and he would look into lifting sanctions. and remember the candidate he was running against, secretary clinton said exactly the opposite on all those things. but you don't have to believe me. just go back and look at the tape when putin himself said in helsinki that he preferred candidate trump and for a very rational set of reasons. he was the most pro-kremlin candidate in the 2016 presidential election. >> in american history he was the most pro-kremlin putin

candidate. let me press you to explain to our viewers why. >> well, that's -- we need mr. mueller to help with that. >> do we really? are we too timid to say it? why would an american be so pro-putin. i mean he threatens all of our traditional alliances, the sovereignty and security of all of our allies and all of their neighbors. i mean, why would an american president hold those positions? >> well, i actually do think there are two different hypotheses. forgive me for speaking like a political science professor now. but one, is donald trump has a very unique, i'm putting it diplomatic theory of relations. and he as well as mr. kim jong-un as well as mr. putin suggests that is something unique to donald trump, president trump. he things these tough guys with

people he can deal with, and by befriending them he's going to move in a way that's going to move relations. that's hypothesis number one. hypothesis number two, there's leverage, things in his past that makes him beholden to vladimir putin. and on that hypothesis i think there's a lot of circumstance substantial evidence, but i want to know more particularly about money. it was in the story today, so i'm glad they pointed it out, but particularly about money that came from russia into the trump organization, that's the part we need to have more details about. >> let me give both of those to t tim. >> there's always been views like that on parts of the right and parts of the left. pat bucanyon is kind of

pro-putin, anti--human rights. it's a tough world out there. if dictators run their country in a tough way, who are we to decide -- trump, that is how he looks at the world. but it's possible both views, both hipoypothesis are correct. >> the evidence so far for both hypothesis too is minimal but pretty interesting. we know after he blew most of his family's money on the first stabling of his career and had gone bankrupt and moving towards tv, a lot of their money came from russia, russian interests. these were his customers and deal partners for the second phase of his phase at a real estate developer and he depended on them. i think we have to know a lot more about the sources of that money, the uses of that money

and transactions for real estate over the years. >> everyone in washington knew paul manafort had worked for the worst russian oligarchs and anti anti-ukrainians who were part russian stooges and so forth, and it was such a mind-boggling appointment that he thought he could get out of that. but in particular the close relations to a lot of the same oligarchs who sort of funded directly or indirectly trump. for me manafort is big tell. you can say he didn't have some of the normal guards, but he also felt a kind of kinship with manafort. >> let me ask you to weigh in on that. i haven't seen you since manafort became a cooperator. but what do you think he'd want to know from paul manafort?

>> well, i agree. that was out of the blue. i mean, i've known about paul manafort's operations like bill was talking about for a long time. very strange choice, and most certainly there is an overlap with the kinds of people that he was involved with in ukraine and in russia and allegedly that had been funneling money into our country through organizations like trump. and i want to be clear. i don't know what the outcome of that is. i don't know the evidence. i want to see it, but i do know that that is a method that putin uses to create influence and leverage within russia and other countries in europe. it is a very standard, you know, giving money away and saying we'll deal with this later. we'll figure this out. we're going to be in business for a long time. that's standard operating procedure for putin generally, and maybe it was true here as well. >> let me just echo your

comments about the piece. it's excellent. ambassador mcfall, thank you so mup. we have to sneak in our last break. we'll be right back. n our last break. we'll be right back. don't forget that the past can speak to the future. ♪ ♪ i'm going to be your substitute teacher. don't assume the substitute teacher has nothing to offer... same goes for a neighborhood. don't forget that friendships last longer than any broadway run. mr. president. (laughing) don't settle for your first draft. or your 10th draft. ♪ ♪ you get to create the room where it happens. ♪ ♪ just don't think you have to do it alone. ♪ ♪

the powerful backing of american express. don't live life without it. but allstate helps you. with drivewise. feedback that helps you drive safer. and that can lower your cost now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? 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. with its historical records... ancestry's dna test ...you could learn you're from ireland... ...donegal, ireland... ...and your ancestor was a fisherman. with blue eyes. just like you. begin your journey at ancestry.com.

my thanks to phil rucker. we love having you here in new york. thanks for joining us at the table. that does for your hour. and mtp daily starts right now. hi, chuck. no sighing. >> what's that? >> no sighing. >> okay, no sighing. it's no sighs for you. if it's thursday, we've got some brand new poll numbers. they don't look so good for judge kavanaugh. good evening, i'm chuck todd here in washington. welcome to mtp daily, and we've got some late breaking developments in the negotiations to have brett kavanaugh accuser publicly testify next week. but we begin tonight with news that is breaking right now, and it could have some republicans