of the report is what is not in it. it is the product of an incomplete investigation that was limited and perhaps by the white house, i don't know. >> i am not allowed to discuss it and the public can't see it. it is a complete sham. >> and none of the last-minute allegations have been corroborated. as is confirm ed by the seventh and latest fbi investigation. >> i am confident that the fbi did a good job. >> hack attack, and the global crackdown on the russian intelligence officers for cyber attacks from the skripal chemical attack, and some indicted right here in the u.s. >> this is nothing to do with the election, but it is a coordinated effort of the u.s., and the u.k. and canada to name and shame russian operatives.

and deep impact a week after the emotional appearances of dr. ford and mr. kavanaugh. a and savannah guthrie speaks to ellen degeneres. >> you don't remember where you were or what you saw, but how you felt. everybody who is watching this is so angry because how dare you not believe us. good day. i'm andrea mitchell in new york, and republican and democratic senators sharply divided over the results of the five-day supplemental background check into brett kavanaugh with the democrats complaining bitterly that the white house did not let the fbi do their job even as

mitch mcconnell has scheduled the first critical vote tomorrow. and the democrats are hoping to peel off two or three of the undecided republicans, lisa murkowski, jeff flake or susan collins now seems bleak. senator collins moments ago call calling the investigation thorough, and senator flake saying that he found no additional corroborating information. a source briefed on the fbi probe says that nine people were interviewed and not including kavanaugh or ford, and nor did they interview 40 others who tried to con kocontact the fbi relevant information. and president trump briefed by the fbi is calling all of the allegations against the judge kavanaugh uncorroborated. joining me is kasie hunt and peter alexander and msnbc justice and security analyst matt miller and former spokesman to attorney general eric holder, and daniel goldman, a former

u.s. attorney in the southern district of new york. and kasie, first to you on the hill, and sharply divided senate where they have both had their hour or so with these highly, you know, closely guarded reports, and at this stage, the democrats are universally saying not good enough, and the republic republicans are saying satisfying and it seems that mitch mcconnell has the vote s to proceed tomorrow. >> andrea, that is sort of the way that this is trending right now. we still do need more information and clarity from those three key senators in the middle, because you are absolutely right that whatever they are seeing behind closed doors in the report has caused both sides to dig in deeper. the republicans have come out saying that there is no corroboration of these allegations, and that they are eager to move forward to a vote. the democrats are saying on the other hand that the investigation was a sham, and the fbi was too limited and it did not go far enough and they did not talk to kavanaugh or dr. ford. and so everyone is sort of hu

hunk erring and bunkering down, if you will, and we we still need to get some final answers from the people we have been watching all week -- jeff flake, susan collins and lisa murkowski. and we did speak to senator kol lin, and she said that she wanted to read the interviews again, and that was a telling comment and she had been looking for way to vote yes, so if she is going to go mitch mcconnell's way, it is easier, but you need answ answers from senator flake, and he also told the reporters that he did not see any corroborating evidence in the fbi investigation, and senator lisa murkowski was look g fing for a

to vote no, and that is seeming to be the case, but we have not had a chance to catch up with her in the wake of the report coming up here on capitol hill. >> and kasie, from what you have heard from those who have read the report the key is mark judge, because they did not go to debra ramirez' possible witnesses, and other witness, more than 40 not contacted by the fbi and tried to contact the fbi, but the key is from what we have heard, mark judge in his interview who had not been interviewed before could not kr corroborate the allegations. >> right. that is right, andrea, and it is raising questions, because the senators are talking about him interviewed for three hours by the fbi. so there have been some questions raised about, how, okay, if he does not remember any of the events in question, how could he have had three hour hours of comments for the federal bureau of investigation investigations, and that is something else that we are looking for, but we should underscore for the viewers that the senators are coming out of here not allowed to talk the at all about what they see sh, and

that is traditionally how these reports are handled and usually out of consideration for the privacy of the nominee, but of course, there are concerns about the selective leaking, and so far, we have not gotten a lot of that as of yet, but there is a push from both parties to release some public summary of what they have, and so far, that has not happened, andrea. >> there is a lot of confidence projected by the white house at this hour. >> i think that you are right. and in my conversations with the white house officials in the course of the last 24 hours and certainly in course of the morning hours they are appearing increasingly confident that it will help to get brett kavanaugh confirm ed confirmed as the next supreme court juses tis here. and the white house putting out a statement saying that they are fully confident he is going to be confirm and the president has not seen the report, but hayes been briefed on it by another official here. the white house is working the phones in the recent days, and perh perhaps not as much the president, but the aides trying to speak to the senators to make sure they are comfortable with

all of this, and based on the frustrations and dissatisfaction of debra ramirez and dr. ford's team, we asked if they could specifically tell the americans that it was a thorough job relating to the job that dr. ford herself was never interview and sanders said a short time ago that the anybody who believes that ford was not given ample opportunity to say what she had to say must be living in a cave. and as evidenced by the president's tweets, these are totally uncorroborated allegations in his words, and the white house feels very good about this right now, andrea, and one thing that is important about the conversations with the sources is that in terms of the individuals who have not been spoken to, the thing that the white house is pointing to is that these are not witness, but stories on the side, and not someone in the room who can say anything declaratively other than the people they have spoken to, and the stories along the side have not done anything to kr

corroborate it, and if they could, they would not be able to corroborate it, because they were not in the room, and absent of the allegations of mark judge as kasie was talking about. >> and daniel, when we talk about, what is left out is what dianne feinstein was saying, and first of all complained that the five-minute increments of the questions is not the same as a more extensive a ability to interview and question dr. ford, that they didn't have follow-up opportunity, and that an fbi investigator and fbi agent could follow up and get more information out of both judge kavanaugh and dr. ford and neither were approached. and the other piece is that other things were not considered, drink iing, excessi drinking, and not telling the truth to senators, and his belligerent attitude and those are the questions that the democratic critics are saying that were closed off of the follow-up investigation. >> we were left after that hearing with two separate issues. one is the sexual allegations,

and the al allegations of the sexual misconduct, and the other was some very suspect and potentially false testimony from brett kavanaugh. i do tend to agree that you probably wouldn't get much more of a story from dr. ford, given that she had a lengthy opening statement, and she did have a lot of opportunity to say it, but a true investigation wouldle help to jog her memory with places, and location, and dates and that is how, you know, the fbi are very expertly can go through a story with someone and jog their memory, and the real issue though is what brett kavanaugh did in the five-minute increme increments where he evaded the questions and filibusters and the democrats could not get him firmly on the record with the answers is very different than a fbi interview. if the fbi sat him down, no time limit and he could not answer the question with questions, and so that is the sexual allegations end of things and

the corroborating thing, and i don't think that mark judge would say, yeah, my best friend did that and he is the only one in the room. what is interesting to me is that did they ask mark judge and chris garrett and tim gaudet his high school friends what the definition of the terms were in the yearbook were, because they seem to be quite obviously and plainly wrong and incorrect. and if jeff flake is going to say that if he lied under oath that is disqualifying, and that is a more interesting angle frankly from the fbi investigation, and we don't know whether they asked those questions, and the white house has been trying to separate those issues from the allegations, but given how those statements of judge kavanaugh went directly to his defense to the allegations, there's certain ly thaw were intertwine and if fbi had carte blanche, we would have gotten the answers to those questions. >> and the indication that we have been given is that those were walled off and not part of

the investigation of the supplemental background check. and matt miller, assuming that they did not ask him about the false statements and he was not interviewed, but others of his friends about the clear false statements that were made during his thursday testimony last week, this very narrow scope was clearly going to support his candidacy, and it is looking as as though it is giving political cover let's say to those wavering republicans and perhaps some democrats even who were looking for some sort of excuse to vote no. >> yes, this is an incredibly braisen exercise of the white house and the republican senate majority to ram him through on the backs of the fbi investigation when they have not been allowed to conduct a full investigation. and it is more braisen when the white house has been telling the

public not the trust the fbi. and now, the make the argument as suzanne collins did when she said that it appears to be a thorough investigation, and it is not true. as you pointed out more than 40 witnesses that they did not talk to, and deborah ramirez' attorney delivered a statement from a college classmate of hers to corroborate her accounted, and they refused to follow-up with that witness. any way you look at the investigation, it was not thorough, and appears to be designed, you know, carefully to give susan collins and jeff flake an excuse to vote yes for the nominee. the one thing that we keep missing is about no corroboration, and no corroboration is that it does is set up a false choice here. the testimony from christine blasey ford was evidence. it may not be corroborated by other witnesses in the room, but

it was evidence, and the republican senators whether they have corroboration or not, they have to be faced with with a choice of whether they believe her or not, and so they don't want to answer that question, so they have come up with a new dynamic and investigation that does not ask the right questions and to get the right answers, and so it is an extremely cynical act by everyone involved. >> the fbi investigation that was a one-week extension may have helped judge kavanaugh more than anything else, because it is the white house the excuse that they had an extensive investigation considered thorough by senator kol lins so far until she has read the actual interviews. thank you, daniel miller and peter alexander and daniel goldman and kasie hunt. and senator richard blumenthal has just seen that report, and he is going to join me next on "andrea mitchell reports" on

msnbc. whales. oop. you hear that? (vo) our subaru outback lets us see the world. sometimes in ways we never imagined. 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

the sun goes down. you did a million things for your family today. but speaking to pnc to help handle all your investments was a very important million and one. pnc. make today the day.

nobody is supposed to be guilty until proven innocent in the united states of america. the senate should not sett a fundamentally un-american precedent here. judge kavanaugh's right to basic fairness does not disappear just because some disagree with the

judicial philosophy. >> majority leader mitch mcconnell is pushing ahead with a critical test vote tomorrow on judge kavanaugh's nomination, and setting the stage for what could be confirmation for the judge as a justice of the supre supreme court as soon as this weekend. democratic democratic senator has read the report, senator richard blumenthal, and i know that you will take more time later, and what are your impressions? >> i have seen it and i want to re-read some of it, and my emphatic opinion is that this set of interviews is most chari charity incomplete. and it is a whitewash, and there so many contacts and witnesses that have not been interviewed

and of the witnesses that i told the fbi and the white house that were necessary and my colleagues on the judiciary committee on the democratic side joined me on the letter and only a fraction have been contacted. they have not interviewed again dr. blasey ford and judge kavanaugh and others and even some of the eyewitnesses who saw what happened to deborah ramirez have never been contacted. >> what do you say to those who say, well, dr. ford and judge kavanaugh had hours and hours of testimony, and so, there is no point in reinterviewing them. >> dr. blasey ford wanted to be interviewed again so that presumably she could respond to some of the claims that judge kavanaugh made after she testified, but put them the aside. the idea that a survivor of sexual assault deborah ramirez told the fbi in her interview about what happened to her and

we oknow that from what she said p publicly, and then none of the potential eyewitnesses or corroborating witnesses who would substantiate her story and at least some of them were never contacted strikes me as a really negligent of the fbi's duty, but, the fbi is not responsible. i think that the blame lies with white house that straitjacketed this investigation. >> i am inferring what several of your colleagues have said and what the people interviewed and not interviewed more importantly, that they did not look into all of issues as to whether or not he charitably, to put it charitably misspoke in some of the follow-up questions about the drinking and about the definitions in the yearbook, and about what happened when he was in high school and in college, and his social relationships. >> we are limited as to what we can say. we are barred from talking about the content of the interviews,

although, the chairman of the committee has said that there is no hint of misconduct. in my view, that is wrong. base odd on what i have seen, but we are limited to what we have seen. >> and senator booker has said that he has seen hints of misconduct. >> certainly some misconduct that should have been pursued, andrea, no question that this report is blatantly and incomplete and in pursuing some of the very credible allegations that have been made. it is really the story of unfollowed leads, unanswered questions and uninterviewed witnesses. it raises more questions than it answers. >> if this does proceed with confirmation, do you feel that the judge who sat in front of you and said what goes around comes around referring to what

he described as left wing conspiracies to try to derail his confirmation, and when he said what goes around and comes around, and do you believe he can be impartial and judicious sitting on the bench? >> that is key question, and for me, it ist the key question, temperament. temperament and trustworthiness. temperament with a lack indicated of his coming before the committee and threatening, and in effect trying to bully us with rage and acrimony and arrogance and the kind of demeanor that he exhibited, but most important blaming it on a partisan motive when these survivors of sexual assault came forward on their own initiative, and it belittles and demeans them, and the entire survivor commu community, but the temperament or the lack of it that he exhibited are a key point here, and of course, just to be

absolutely clear, i said that i was a no on this nominee because of his extreme, out of the mainstream ideological views on issues like health care where he would deprive millions of americans of protections against the pre-existing conditions or the imperial presidency and exaggerated view of the presidential power and the constraints he would impose on a woman's right to have children or the person's right of whom he or she wants to marry and those substantive positions are the reasons for my opposing the nomination, but temperament is clearly an issue here. >> what about senator mcconnell saying today that of course he was passionate and of course he was ainngry, because if you wer unfairly accused and you were defending your reputation and family, you would be angry and passionate. >> i have spent just about my

whole career as a litigator in federal and state courts, and i have argued four cases before the united states supreme court and i clerk ed for a supreme court justice, and i know that the judges are sometimes angry, but the issue of the temperament goes to self-discipline and sel self-control and a sense of impartiality and objectivity, and the judges are supposed to maintain that sense of fundamental fairness, and this report only deepened my doubts about temperament and trustworthiness and his demeanor when he came before us certainly created the very serious doubt among many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. >> and what do you say to senator collins who said that after reading the ro report she thought that it was thorough. >> i would love to talk to senator kol lin, acollins, and had an opportunity to do so yet, but this is what i would say, here are the witnesses who should have been interview and perhaps take another pause and

ask the fbi to go back and do it right. and again, i want to emphasize that the fbi i am quite certain wanted to do it right. it is the white house that imposed the straitjacket. >> senator blumenthal, thank you, on a very busy day, thank you for taking the time. >> thank you. and calling out china, and why vice president mike pence says that beijing is a bigger threat to the election thans kremlin. you are watching "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc. ea mitchell reports" on msnbc. ♪ ignition sequence starts. 10... 9... guidance is internal. 6... 5... 4... 3... 2... 1...

♪ discover.o. i like your card, but i'm absolutely not paying an annual fee. discover has no annual fees. really? yeah. we just don't believe in them. oh nice. you would not believe how long i've been rehearsing that. no annual fee on any card. only from discover.

but one blows them all out of the water.

hydro boost from neutrogena®. with hyaluronic acid to plump skin cells so it bounces back. neutrogena®

doing across this country. >> well, tough talk today from vice president mike pence on china as the white house now claims that china is the worst bad actor in election meddling than russia. and joining me is the president of the council of foreign relations, and richard, this is

really escalating very fast, and the difference of russia and china is that china is, you know, the second biggest economy, and the holder of so much debt, and the trade war is expanding, and we have chinese warship going close, 45 yards to where the u.s. destroyer and canceling a trip for the defense secretary. >> until recently when the people used the phrase new cold war and talking about the united states and china, i always said that you are exaggerating and for the first time unfortunately, i think that it is bad for the united states and it is bad for china, and i they language now is not that far from reality, and you are right. china matters so much more, and china has 10 times the population, and they have a economy in the range of ours, and china has to be one of the two most important countries of the 21st century, and if china and the united states can't get a working deal with how the deal

with north korea, and the ruls s of cyber or climate change or whether to keep piece and securi -- to keep peace and security in asia, it is a flaw ed policy. >> and not to say that china is not a bad actor in terms of the trade particularly, but "the new york times" had an alarming graphic today that i want to show the viewers which showed where china goes after u.s. trade and compare that to the where donald trump won congressional district s s in t red state america, and this is totally targeted. >> and it is because the united states has said to china, we won't take it anymore, and this is the howard beal approach to trade, and it is china acting in ways that are contrary to the letter and to the spirit of the world trade organization and things have not gone the way they have done it, and the china now is going to pushback as w

well. that is what we are seeing, and that is the mounting trade war. >> and one of the problems is that the chinese are having difficu difficulties with us, because they don't know who to negotiate with. is it steve mnuchin who has a more balanced a approach to the treasury or robert light heiser who is the more steve bannon-esque negotiator or wilbur ross? >> well, the chinese have said that they don't believe that the administration wants to deal. they have said they want to reduce the trade deficit by roughly $100 billion and the administration came back with an answer and no, we have changed our mind $200 billion, and now the chinese are believing that we don't want to find a solution and we want to fundamentally damage them, and what is adding to that is the pence speech that you began w and the fact that we have sanctioned china over buying arms from russia of all place, and the criticism of them taking out ads and doing other things in the american newspapers and they are beginning to think that we are looking rather than to calm

thi things down to basically broaden the fight that we are trying to put tremendous pressure on them to change their behavior across the booard they bargained for. >> and a story in bloomberg that we have not independently ver y verified that the chinese have inserted tiny chips into apple products and other products. >> and the servers, and if this is true, it is a big deal, because china is a fundamental intimate part of the supply chain, and dozens and dozens of the major companies in the world use china at some point in the process. if it turns out that we can't trust china to act commercially and instead, looking at ways to steal intellectual property or or to promote the interests of the chinese government, that means that we have to rethink the entire economic relationship and if this bloomberg story turns out to be true, and to say it is big is an understatement. >> and one thing that is coming to mind as someone who lived through the wmd iraq nightmare

and the intelligence missed or whether the intelligence was wrong or misinterpreted or we were told incorrectly what is going on and when mike pence says that the new intelligence says that the chinese are worst than the russian, and this is the same white house who does not believe that 18 russians hacked the elections, i don't know what to believe. >> and a lot of this is more political coloring of the int intelligence, but it fits a piece, andrea. because from day one, this administration has soft pedalled the russian threat and seen china as much bigger threat just initially in the trade and the economic realm, but they had bipartisan support, and now it is broadening and it seems as if the administration wants to have something of a cold war with china, which is odd since one of the big foreign policy priorities is to get a deal with north korea, and we can't get a deal unless china is a partner in the process, so i don't

understand what the priorities are, and this is why you are supposed to have a national security council process to sort it out and bring it together. i am not seeing it. >> on the eve of the mike pompeo, the secretary of state going to south korea, japan, china and of course, pyongyang to see kim jong-un. >> it is going to be an interesting trip in the backdrop. >> and i think richard haass that "the world is in disa ar y array" and somebody wrotet a book with that title. and now, coming up, pictures of protesters before they rally at the u.s. supreme district court in washington, d.c., and elizabeth warren is among the protesters. stay with us. ay with us.

there lots of people who are confused about which medicare plan is right for them. hey, that's me. i barely know where to start. well, start here with me, karen. i'm a licensed humana sales agent. well, it's nice to meet you, karen. i'm john smith. hi, john. at humana, we know you're unique. so you have different needs from other john smiths. yah, i've always thought so. and together, we can find a plan that's right for you. great! i go to the doctor a couple of times a year. and i have some prescriptions. but i'm never fully sure of what's covered and what's not. with

humana's all-in-one medicare advantage plans, you get coverage for hospital stays, doctor visits, and part d prescription drug benefits. all for an affordable, and sometimes, no monthly plan premium. do you have any more information? sure. i'll get a decision guide in the mail to you today. they're free. finally. someone who understands the real me. your health and happiness is important to us. call or go online now to get your free decision guide. call a licensed humana sales agent today. today is the day you're going to get motivated...

get stronger... get closer. start listening today to the world's largest selection of audiobooks on audible. and now, get more. for just $14.95 a month, you'll get a credit a month good for any audiobook, plus two audible originals exclusive titles you can't find anywhere else. if you don't like a book, you can exchange it any time, no questions asked. automatically roll your credits over to the next month if you don't use them. with the free audible app, you can listen anytime, and anywhere. plus for the first time ever, you'll get access to exclusive fitness programs a $95 value free with membership. start a 30-day trial today and your first audiobook is free. cancel anytime and your books are yours to keep forever. audible. the most inspiring minds. the most compelling stories. text "listen27" to 500500 to start your free trial today.

and we have this breaking news, christine blasey ford attorneys have sent a letter directly to christopher wray, the head of the fbi listing the people they declined to interview as a result of dr. ford's accusations. joining us is susan page from the washington post bureau page, and ann guerrier. and so now, susan, we have a huge bitter argument on the floor of the senate with mitch mcconnell and now this letter from dr. ford's attorney saying

that what about all of these other people, and we have 1,000 law professors who signed a letter opposing the confirmation, but it is seeming that they are set, and the white house has great confidence they that are set to win this test vote tomorrow. >> and you know, there is an audience of three, the three republican senators and two of them we heard from today saying that the investigation is thorough, and from senator flake and collins, and that is surely a sign that they can be counted on to vote for him. and the purpose of the additional investigation from the republican point of view is to convince those handful of republican senators that it is okay to vote for judge kavanaugh, and that seemed to have worked. a and senator mur cow sdi ski, we have not heard from, but they could lose senator murkowski and still win the nomination of judge kavanaugh. >> and especially holding joe manchin and heidi height ctcamp

it sortly anne guerin gives them the political cover to vote for the nomination. >> yes, susan put her finger on the fact that the two senators who have spoken, republican senators who have spoken, flake and collins, are enough to give republicans the vote, and that, and to your point that by extension means that manchin and heidi heitcamp could join them despite the complaints of the senate leader schumer and that the hinge here is that it was not a full fbi investigation or really done in good faith. you heard schumer again today allude to his claim that there

is this is not the first time that there have been concerns raised about some aspect of judge kavanaugh's background that,that there are whiffs of something else in the other background investigations that had been done before now. but not give any further details. which leaves the democratic complaints exactly where they were before the report was transmitted which is that they say that this is not a full fair and good faith investigation, but it does not matter, because the republicans have the votes. >> and when, when people, and women who are survivors talk about this, through their lenses, and the men who understand where they are coming from, they say that you don't need corroborating evidence and it is a he said/she said you decide based on whether you have confidence in the credibility of one or the other. i wanted to share something that the washington post published

yesterday which was connie chung, and of course, the long time journalist and anchor woman detailing her own story of abuse that she has not in 50 years told, but she was motivated to the tell because of dr. ford's testimony. let e let's listen. >> christine, i, too, am terrified as i reveal this publicly. i can't sleep. i can't eat. can you? if you can't, i understand. i'm really, i'm really scared. i'm frightened. i can't even cry. i don't want to tell the truth. i must tell the truth. as a reporter, the truth has ruled my life, my thinking. i'm writing to you sh, christin because i know that exact dats,s and exact years are insignificant. we remember exactly what happened to us and who did it to us. we remember the truth forever. >> you know, this is really

firing up both bases, and what we are finding in an npr and pbs and maris poll is that the gap between the democratic and the republican enthusiasm has narrowed since it exploded on the scene and really indistinguishable and both looking towards the midterm thes are fired up, susan? >> and the republican officials tell me that once judge kavanaugh came into the hearing and he was so defiant and angry, it reunited the republican voters and ginned them up in a way that they had not been, and that there are short term political gains for the republicans from this, but i have to to say that there are also long term republican risks, because you can see that the idea of women who have survived sexual assault, and that is not a partisan issue, but it affects the republican women as well as democratic women, and some of the concerns is over the long term, they will lose support

from women, especially the better educated women, and that it it is going to take a long time to win them back when this fight is over. >> susan parn, and anne guerin, we will have to leave it there. and thank you for coming in today. the cyber attack, and seven russian intelligence officers have been charged with hacking anti-doping agencies and others around the world. an old friend. a new beginning. some welcome relief... or a cause for celebration. ♪ what's inside? ♪ [laughter] possibilities. what we deliver by delivering.

their medicare options...e people go to learn about before they're on medicare. come on in. you're turning 65 soon? yep. and you're retiring at 67? that's the plan! well, you've come to the right place. it's also a great time to learn about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company.

here's why... medicare part b doesn't pay for everything. only about 80% of your medical costs. this part is up to you... yeah, everyone's a little surprised to learn that one. a medicare supplement plan helps pay for some of what medicare doesn't. that could help cut down on those out-of-your-pocket medical costs. call unitedhealthcare insurance company today to request this free, and very helpful, decision guide. and learn about the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. selected for meeting their high standards of quality and service. this type of plan lets you say "yes" to any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. there are no networks or referrals to worry about. do you accept medicare patients? i sure do! see? you're able to stick with him. like to travel? this kind of plan goes with you anywhere you travel in the country.

so go ahead, spend winter somewhere warm. if you're turning 65 soon or over 65 and planning to retire, find out more about the plans that live up to their name. thumbs up to that! remember, the time to prepare is before you go on medicare! don't wait. get started today. call unitedhealthcare and ask for your free decision guide. learn more about aarp medicare supplement plan options and rates to fit your needs. oh, and happy birthday... or retirement... in advance. with my bladder leakage, the products i've tried just didn't fit right. they were too loose. it's getting in the way of our camping trips. but with a range of sizes, depend fit-flex is made for me. with a range of sizes for all body types, depend fit-flex underwear is guaranteed to be your best fit.

the justice department has announced the indictment of seven russian military officers who have allegedly hacked into the personal files including people of olympic athletes serena and venus williams and simone biles as a part to undermine russian doping. this has officials in the hague today of accusing russia of trying to hack into the investigation agency in the u.k. investigating the scrip pal p poisoning. and this is not part of the mueller probe, but it is an

indictment all of the way back to 2016 as i understand it. >> it is a separate indictment, and absolutely right, but it turns out that 3 of the 7 officers were indicted separately by robert mooul meddling. so they've been up to a lot according to u.s. authorities. the claim here is that after russia was accused of a state-sponsored program to give its athletes banned performance enhancing drugs, which kept russia out of the 2016 olympic games in rio, the russians then tried to retaliate. they got caught. they cheated. and what the prosecutor said is that they broke into the anti-doping agency in colorado springs, stole the files of about 250 athletes, published them and, in many cases, incorrectly claimed that these athletes, including some from the u.s., were using banned substances which wasn't true. now, the charges overseas are even more interesting, andrea, in one sense. because what they say is four of these operatives actually went to the netherlands, to the

chemical warfare office that was looking into the nerve agent attack in russia, and began trying to hack into it. the dutch authorities caught them in the act. caught them with a rented car stuffed full of electronic gablths to do the hacking. those four were not arrested. they were expelled from the country. so none of these seven in the u.s. or the ones charged overseas have been arrested. but what the authorities say is -- one of the things they revealed is while a lot of this hacking has been done remotely from russia, from moscow, from this gru unit, the military intelligence unit, in some case, they were traveling around the world. they found laptops with pictures of foreign travel and so they say these charges now will make it much harder for these intelligence operatives to travel. >> wow. it's pretty brazen, isn't it, pete? >> it is very brazen. one of the things the dutch said

today is these four that came to the netherlands did so on travel on diplomatic passports. what they're hoping is these charges will put a stop to that. >> pete williams, fascinating case. sounds like the cold war all over again. and joining me now is greg miller, national security reporter for "the washington post." he was part of the post's team that won the pulitzer prize for its reporting on russia's interference in the 2016 election. his new book is "the apprentice, trump russia and the subversion of american democracy." the timing couldn't be better. you reported on 2016. pete is reporting on the investigation into other aspects of russian intelligence, military intelligence, hacking. >> the playbook sounds remarkably similar, doesn't it, andrea? you guys were just using the word brazen. it just really -- that is the perfect word for what we're seeing from russia over the past several years. it borders on reckless in some ways, right? their deployment of russian

intelligence operatives into european, elsewhere, into carry out assassination attempts, and these photos of this rented car stuffed with hacking gear in the netherlands. it's just astonishing. we also know from robert mueller that the internet research agency, putin's propaganda arm online, sent operatives into the united states to tour through the country and sort of take the political measure of various parts of the country before they started pumping disinformation at social media sites like facebook. >> from your reporting in "the apprentice," first of all, why did you title it "the apprentice"? i think i know. >> i think that title works on multiple levels. obviously as the name of the reality tv show that propelled trump to great fame. he arrived in office as something of an apprentice. untrained, unschooled in government service in government at all. and needed -- and it's been just

a very steep education curve for him on the job. and of course then there's this other aspect of the word "apprentice" which sort of hints at civility. i'm trying to hint at his relationship with vladimir putin which seems, you know, inexplicably subservient at times. >> from our perspective, watching that extraordinary news conference, it still continued to that stage. i want to ask you about your own efforts to chase down the russian ambassadorer is have a ki kiss kisslyiak. the whole issue is, you know, what did he actually deliver to them and how did you find kislyak? >> in the book "the apprentice," there are moments where i write about things that happened inside "the washington post" as we were reporting and breaking some of these stories about russian interference, and one of them focused, one of the big

ones obviously was mike flynn. it was really just a gamble on my part. i saw a listing that sergei kislyak, the russian ambassador, who's actually a trained physicist, that's his background, was going to be speaking at a conference of ph.d.s in science in washington, and i thought it's worth a shot. so i just showed up for his speech, settled down in the chair right in front of him, and then to my astonishment, he came down from his speech and sat next to me. he obviously didn't know who i was but i had grabbed a seat next to his. i started asking him questions about flynn. he wouldn't tell me what they talked about. wouldn't confirm they had discussed sanctions. but he confirmed he had known flynn for quite a long time and they had many, many conversations dating back several years, and that was valuable for us at the time as we were just scraping to pull together information about what was happening between the fledgling trump administration and russia. >> well, it's a great piece of work, and all of your work.

congratulations on the pulitzer, you just keep going. greg miller, "the apprentice" is the book. tice" is the book 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. ♪ 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. it was always our singular focus, a distinct determination. 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. specialists focused on treating cancer. using advanced technologies. and more precise treatments than before. working as hard as we can- doing all that we can- for everyone who walks through our doors. this is cancer treatment centers of america.

and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. treating cancer isn't one thing we do. it's the only thing we do. expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. but one blows them all out of the water. hydro boost from neutrogena®. with hyaluronic acid to plump skin cells so it bounces back. neutrogena®

>> good afternoon, everyone, it's thursday, october the 4th. let's get smarter. >> a source briefed on the findings this morning tells me the fbi contacted a total of ten people and interviewed nine of them. >> there's one copy of this report. it's going to be held in a safe, in a secure location. and only senators and a handful of committee staff are going to be allowed to access it. >> it will not be made public, even though many senators say it probably should be. >> dr. ford's team says those directing the fbi investigation were not interested in seeking the truth. was the white house interested in seeking the truth? >> of course we were, of course we had been. >> we are fully confident after reviewing this information senators are going to be comfortable voting yes. >> anybody who pushes back on the fact that dr. ford wasn't given the opportunity to state her case has been