me and that brings this hour to a close for me. thank you so much for watching. "deadline white house" with nicolle wallace starts right now. >> hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. democrats hone their midterm message this weekend fighting to keep their enthusiasm advantage over republicans who are desperate to spin the ugly supreme court battle over alleged sexual assault in their favor. democrats clap back by urging their voters to take up their anger at the polls. >> what we saw was an exercise of raw power. raw power. which was used and had the effect of demeaning and diminishing and belittling people. well, here's the thing. if we want to correct the course, what do we need to do? we need to take the power. >> this has cemented the democratic women or the independent women who didn't think their vote mattered.

but i am -- and i think we will take the house. and that's the first time i've said that. >> we have the power to take the gavels away from these people. the power to take the jobs away from these people. and we have that power in four weeks. so don't get mad. get to the polls. we can do something about this. >> we're 29 days to go before voters go to the polls in the midterm elections. both parties are fighting for their swath of what is typically a smaller and more partisan slice of the electorate than in presidential years. polls show that it's democrats who still hold a clear advantage while republicans cheer and swoon over their prospects being slightly less bleak than they were several weeks ago. here's the president's spin. >> i think a lot of democrats are going to vote republican. because i have many friends that are democrats. the main base of the democrats have shifted so far left that we'll end up being venezuela. this country would end up being venezuela. i think a lot of democrats are going to be voting republican on

november 6th. >> 500 bucks to the first candidate who puts that in an ad. the first question, is this a conservative media-fueled high or durable shift in voter moods and trends? if republicans are in such great shape, why, according to axios, did the white house form a working group to figure out how to deal with investigations that a democratic-run house may launch after the midterms. here to sift through the developments, some of our favorite reporters and friends. "washington post's" phil rucker from orlando where the president spoke earlier. bill kristol, founder and editor at large. former chief spokesman for the justice department and jim ruttenberg, truly one of my favorites, media writer for "the new york times." phil rucker, let me start with you. >> you should start with jim. he's so outvanced the rest of us. >> i'm gobsmacked by how the

republicans, sort of the audacit of spin and having been a flack, like when they fall for the most outlandish spin you high-five each other. i feel like everyone has fallen for the notion that republicans are less screwed because they've tapped into some sort of backlash against me too over the kavanaugh nomination. how gleeful is the white house that they're actually having some success at selling what i think is a completely bogus message? >> nicolle, pretty gleeful. the president has been on a multiday victory lap, and i think it's going to continue straight through all this week. he's got rallies almost every day. and what they're trying to do is create a common enemy ahead of the midterms. and that's the angry mob as mitch mcconnell put it over the weekend. the feeling they've gone up against what the president today has dismissed as a hoax. a sexual assault allegations against brett kavanaugh and prevailed and won. and he's going to be formally,

officially sworn in this evening in primetime over at the white house. and i think the president, you can expect him to continue crowing about it. he was here in orlando a couple hours ago for what was an official speech to thousands of law enforcement officers, police chiefs from around the country. this is not a political crowd. and yet he gave an overtly political speech where he, you know, harped on democrats and talked about the kavanaugh thing and law enforcement officers stood up in the crowd to applaud him. and so i think they're hoping this becomes a galvanizing, unifying them for republicans who are very much the underdog in the battle to take control of the house of representatives. >> matt miller, i understand the accomplishment of naming a second supreme court justice. that is a message, not just to take to the midterms but to take to the general. i interviewed women before the presidential election who were appalled, disgusted, galled by donald trump's personal conduct but cared so much about the supreme court they were going to hold their nose and vote for him

anyway. i get the supreme court. i don't get calling alleged victims of sexual assault, people carrying out a hoax. >> you know, what it is, the most powerful, unifying force in politics right now is anger at the other side. that was true in the last three midterm elections going back to the bush presidency and both obama midterms. all the enthusiasm has been on the democratic side. the thing republicans were able to do in the kavanaugh confirmation is rally their base and republican senators around the idea that democrats were treating brett kavanaugh unfairly. that allowed them to avoid this question that you just brought up which was, were all of the accusers that made these allegations against brett kavanaugh telling the truth or not? they didn't really have to deal with that question because they just had to unify senate republicans around anger at the other side. what they're trying to do now is take that anger and translate is to an electoral battlefield. whether they're able to do that with a month to go before the election, which is a lifetime in politics. it's a cliche. it's ten lifetimes in donald trump's america.

i think it's an entirely different question. >> republicans -- it used to be democrats, but republicans have become terrible whip einners. i've never seen a worse winner than donald trump after he won in 2016 and when john cornyn tweeted this weekend about not quite beers for brett but bubbly for brett instead. like if you wanted to be more tacky than that, i'm not sure what you'd tweet. >> it's appalling. the trumpification of the republican party which i keep trying to resist and hope is not going to be going forever and can be fought back against. john cornyn, a decent person if you ever dealt with him. courtly almost. former judge in texas, right? just taking this kind of -- >> let's pause on that. a former judge tweeted bubbly

for brett. >> on the whole, nothing was proven and it's right to confirm him but that's a different tone than this. >> leave that up there. this says nothing about, i, john cornyn, believe in conservative judicial philosophy so i am happy today that another conservative judge is on the supreme court in the seat of justice kennedy. that's not what that tweet says. it's a glass of alcohol, and we should have -- we could have had a serious conversation about over -- underage drinking. we could have had a serious question about, you know, how to treat serious issues but a united states senator, former judge, tweeted a picture of alcohol. >> it's bad. having said that, i was just on the phone with a pollster seeing a lot of recent democratic polls. they are a little worried. it is tightening a little bit. there's been some republican enthusiasm. that may fade over four weeks. it really peaked the weekend after the testimony and by early last week was fading already a little bit. four weeks will -- by the time people vote it will be four

weeks ago kavanaugh was put on the court. i think democrats shouldn't fall for the bait. if it's a culture war, democrats might win that marginally in the country. trump got a minority of the vote but they don't win it overwhelmingly and it's difrential in different states and districts. if we have a referendum on health care on the tax bill on immigration, separation of families, that's a good election for democrats. it's hard for them and easy for me to say it but it's hard for them to curb their anger and outrage and try to pivot back after a day or two, or more maybe, but i think that's their better bet. you get more of a status quo election if it's a culture war. >> i heard in the three sound bites we played a real toefrts do what is really hard to do in midterms which is -- the people that vote in midterms, it's a tiny slice of the electorate. that's why republicans tend to do well. they have more older voters, more regular voters. i heard them -- and i think this might bear out in the taylor

swift tweet about getting involved in the midterms. democrats are trying to really make this anger translate into behaviors that democrats don't usually engage in in midterms and that's voting. >> that's right. this is part of the reason that many democrats think that there was a bit too much hype going into the midterms over the last couple months. that the polls were being perhaps mischaracterized or misused to create a feeling of confidence or comfort. where it might not necessarily have been warranted. polls don't mean anything until october. those numbers just are not particularly helpful, are not particularly useful for assessing what's going to happen in the future. and that's why you're seeing democrats really try to capitalize on the furor that's followed the kavanaugh confirmation. at the same time, republicans are doing exactly the same thing because that's how this work. one thing we hear more and more of from republicans, including people in trump's inner circle, is this idea that brett kavanaugh could be impeached from the supreme court and then from the d.c. circuit court. that's not going to happen.

at least any time in the remotely near future. the senate is, by all accounts, probably not going to flip. but you have republicans pushing this message of, oh, kavanaugh is still somehow in jeopardy. it's not a message connected to any immediate reality but still one politically useful for republicans. >> i want to play you something the president said this weekend about what women want and how happy they are. how happy they are about kavanaugh's confirmation. >> were outraged at what happened to brett kavanaugh. outraged. so you have a lot of women that are extremely happy. a tremendous number of women because they're thinking of their sons. they're thinking of their husbands and their brothers and their uncles and others. >> tim? >> i think he's probably hearing from a lot of women who feel that way, but jennine piro is not going to be the voter who might drive this election. and i think what we're all

forgetting here because we always get caught up in the fight at the moment is there are two years of anger among women in this country. not just on the left but also on the kind of center left and maybe the center right. and so -- >> good point. >> one episodic fight may have put wind in their sails. >> i think it was already was huge three weeks ago. it's going to stage huge. i think getting young voters out is the key. i'm not sure this -- maybe this culture war type issue is good for them. i'm not so sure, though. i think they need to focus on this and make it a -- an argument going forward why you want to have a democratic congress to prevent trump from doing certain things. and maybe to help you out a little economically, help you out on student loans and middle class jobs. i think, you know -- >> i think that's a good point. i want to bring you in on this phil rucker. jim rutenberg's comment. you go back to your point in the

paper about the president's rage that the size of the women's protest the day after the inauguration was bigger than his inauguration crowds. at the root of some of his more inappropriate comments about the size of his crowds was the argument that the women's crowds were bigger than his. what's the pent-up frustration about this clap back from women, women who are outraged at someone who said the things he said on the "access hollywood" tape, was elected. women who organized and have helped put over some of the candidates in special elections in virginia and even in the deep south? what is sort of the response? they seem to be speaking very confidently about all women when i think they're really talking about, as jim said, women in their own hard-core base. >> yeah, i think that's right. when trump is at these rallies, he's thinking about the women that he sees in the crowd there. but that is not representative of the women across america who are going to decide a lot of these house races in key districts. and there's been two years of organic activism.

it's not just about the brett kavanaugh situation, but it's in response to what the president had to say about the deadly white supremacist rally in charlottesville, virginia, last summer. in response to some of the actions the president has taken. it's in response to his behavior, his comportment in office. remember that boy scout rally in west virginia a year ago when he gave a very political speech to a bunch of young boys. women were appalled by that. and we've seen this bubbling up in the reporting around the country in some of these districts. that's why in a lot of the suburban house districts, republicans feel very endangered. we may not see it translate in the senate races because of the geographical map and how so many key senate races are in states that trump carried and where he remains popular, but it's a very potent threat for the republican majority in the house. and it's why it's in jeopardy. >> it's such a good point. it's about women who want to get there, who are in the middle and

want to be centrist and want to look at both sides but they're teaching their children tolerance and don't know how to explain to their children a president who calls african nation s bleep hole countries. it's the misogyny and his misconduct in off, not to mention putting babies in jails. at a policy level, at a character level, at a personal conduct level he's done nothing but repel moderate, centrist women. >> that's exactly right. especially upper working class, or upper middle class suburban women who historically have been republican or swing voters. if you look at polls right now, those voters are dramatically moving toward the democratic party. trump, when he speaks, and it's not just that interview where he talks about women and thinking about republican women. it's the modus operandi of his entire presidency. he's always thinking about only his base, not about the broader country. when you look at their strategy, it's all about talking to republicans. men and women who are hard core

republicans who have nothing to be fired up about and trying to get them to come out to match what we know on the other side is overwhelming democratic enthusiasm. i don't know they get that just because of a brett kavanaugh hearing that will be one month removed and finally -- >> and the substance of the kavanaugh confirmation is also perhaps, some of the women who come out and vote for the president who are in the center who may have given him a chance because they want a change in washington may not be the culture conser culturative culture conservatives who necessarily want the court to shift. >> i will not presume to speak for women -- >> we thank you, i think. >> but when i talk to my mother and my wife and my sister, they are not worried about sons and daughters. that's not what they've been worried about in this conversation. they're worried about little girls, women. they're worried about the victims in this case. >> and to be fair to men, most men are, too. most men don't come down on the other side of this debate. i want to talk about taylor

swift. having been fired from "the view" i thought i wouldn't care about it, but taylor swift is her generation's oprah in that, that which she lays her hands on because she's so reluctant to do usually makes a difference among her peers. this requires young people to go out and do something they don't often do. vote. what do you think of the taylor swift, not just getting involved but the decision to forgo -- it's a risky move for an entertainer to step into politics at her age, at her stage in her career. >> it's incredibly impactful. she did it on instagram. she's got a huge built-in audience and also she'd become in certain parts of the right web, the -- an icon for kind of what they thought were their values. so here she goes getting behind democrats. and -- >> let's read it. i thought we put it up there. this is taylor swift. in the past, i've been reluctant to publicly voice my political opinions. but due to several events in my life and the world in the past two years, i feel very differently about that now. i cannot vote for someone who

will not be willing to fight for dignity for all americans no matter their skin color, gender or who they love. i cannot support marsha blackburn. her voting record in congress apals and terrifies me. >> and by the way, she's getting involved in a race that isn't one of the big hot races that young people are paying attention to. it isn't beto. it's like this is more -- >> he's the former governor of tennessee who did not come out against kavanaugh which for me means if the democrats want to win, it's great. they'll win a lot of congressional seats in the northeast and in california and in places like northern virginia. if they want to win additional congressional seats in places like tennessee and iowa, where they have real shots, if they want to win a senate seat in tennessee, they need some votes of men as well as women and some votes based on men who, frankly, don't care as much as they should about these kinds of issues. but who are reachable on health care, on economics, on, i think,

some of the immigration issues. on the sense that we need someone to check trump in the white house. i just think a more traditional democratic message actually needs to be part of it. can't just be ang ber about kavanaugh. >> t. swift endorsing is important in part because he didn't get on the anti-kavanaugh bandwagon. that's something that could have alienated some of these young female voters who taylor swift has the most influence over. the fact she came out in support of a man who had an opinion on the biggest issue of the month and an opinion that differed from where the vast majority of the democratic party is, is significant. another part that's significant is republicans for years have thought that taylor swift was a crypto conservative and she just didn't want to go public. >> they have indeed. i can attest to that. >> she could be. there's a lot of crypto conservative that are voting democratic this november. >> donald trump loves a smackdown with a celebrity. any talk about trying to get him to hold his fire on taylor

swift? >> that's a great question. i don't know. i suspect he's well aware of the instagram post. i can't imagine his advisers at the white house would like for him to weigh in. but as we said earlier, he's got a number of these make america great again campaign rallies this week and we know when he gets in front of those crowds he can go off a script. so i would not be surprised if he were to pop off about her at some point. >> i would bet my last dollar that he is better briefed on taylor swift's endorsement than today's pdb. the white house can expect a lot of incoming subpoenas from congress. axios has brand-new reporting about how the white house is preparing for its new reality. also deputy attorney general rod rosenstein who reportedly offered to wear a wire to record the president and who discussed invoking the 25th amendment, he took a ride on air force one today with donald trump. how did that go down? and donald trump's biggest lie. the paper that busted the biggest trump myth of all, the

notion that he's self-made, took its reporting to the small screen last night. we'll show you.

if democrats take over control of the house, there's one thing we know will be on their agenda -- investigations. even the white house is resigned to that. axios is reporting according to a source with direct knowledge, chief of staff john kelly formed a small working group to start preparing for the possibility that democrats will soon sick congress's top investigators on trump world. they van offsite weekend retreat scheduled for late october.

the agenda is expected to include an investigation of investigations under a democratic controlled house according to the source. so what types of things could democrats investigate? if they do end up taking the house. how about trump's business dealings? the tax returns? his relationships with russians? the kavanaugh investigation? the comey firing? the travel ban? trump's hurricane response? and the family separation policy at the border. the panel still here. phil rucker, let me read you one more piece of reporting from axios. subpoenas flowing into a white house creates paralysis, said neil eggelton who was obama's white house counsel and associate counsel in the clinton administration. the whole system stops while everyone tries to comply with subpoenas and prepare to testify. the white house doesn't operate optimally and morale suffers and energy is diverted to the crisis at hand. paralysis and morale suffering feels like something i read about in a lot of yours and ashley's columns and stories every week. what would this white house look like paralyzed with low morale?

>> well, it might look even more chaotic than it does now. that's a long list of issues that democrats are going to start investigating. and the challenge for the white house is that president trump's inclination is to deal with these issues as if they were public relations crises. he lixs to sort of spin to tweet to do rallies to sort of launch a pr campaign to dig himself out of some of these holes. but then the opposition party in this case the democrats has subpoena pourks itwer, it's no just a pr campaign. there's a legal component. you have request for documents to comply with. you'll have people being called up to the hill to testify under oath. and it becomes much more serious and much more perilous for the white house. >> matt, is the white house -- the bush white house, i made a short list of all the things i was asked to turn over e-mails on. enron, the attorneys general scandal in the second term. i'm sure if i thought about -- >> did you turn them over?

>> yes. >> why do you think the trump white house will turn them over? >> that's a good question. >> one thing, one of these discussions assumes the trump white house will act in relative good faith that the bush white house and obama administration acted in. i don't know. they might just say forget it, take us to court. >> take us to the supreme court where we stuck two judges on it. >> the democrats need to think that through. the notion that, hey, investigations, we're going to get all this documents from every agency. well, let's see. >> that's a great point. >> i'm not saying this in a happy way. i'm saying in the real world -- >> why would trump do anything normal. of course my wife turned them over and your administration -- >> if it's normal for presidential candidates to submit their tax returns before the election. >> that's a great point. >> and for the american people to see that and trump decided not to do that. that was breaking a norm there. bill is exactly right. they can break another norm here. >> if emmett flood stays in the counsel office there's an extremely good chance they play hard ball.

flood has a history of taking a pugilistic approach going as far as possible to exert executive privilege. if he's the one running the white house counsel's office. >> and to be fair he was in the bush administration for the attorney general scandal and pat tillman investigation. so there's only so much over which you can exert executive privilege. the requests are usually vast. to be fair, he could narrow them. there's no way you completely obstruct an investigation, i don't think. but you're right. we're in new territory. >> they may try to obstruct when it comes to getting white house records. when you're talking about agency records, you can fight the subpoenas but the rules are pretty clear. you'd get pretty quick rulings from district courts. they'll try. the biggest problem they have, one, the white house counsel's office, the office that runs point on managing oversight for the entire administration has really ossified in the last few months. all the deputy white house counsels except for emmitt flood are gone. don mcgahn is about to be out

the door. they don't have the legal team in place that you'd need to respond to these. that's before you see a postterm exodus which is usually what happens when an administration loses party. the sheer number of scandals. go through the list that you came up with, but i think something that they probably have no idea how to deal with are the number of unexploded bombs lying deep inside each agency. the scandal that you mentioned, of those that became probably the biggest for the bush administration was the u.s. attorney scandal. happened completely inside the justice department. in 20 -- >> and several white house staffers. >> but it came out of oversight of the justice department. no one knew that issue even existed until the judiciary committee started exercising oversight on justice. that same thing could happen across this administration. you look at the caliber of people that are at these agencies, you can only imagine what they've been up to. >> i want to ask you, too, about this intersection of investigative journalism and what we have in there. we haven't had the democrats in power. there haven't been any

government investigations. just thinking about your paper's coverage of scott pruitt. he's gone but no one has gone back and looked at his conduct. tactical pants and a phone booth and what else. where do you see some of the leads opened by investigative journalism going if democrats take over control of the house or senate? >> not only subpoena power again, maybe that's complied with, maybe it isn't, but the thing to look at is how the republicans used it during the obama years. it gave them leverage to drive forward on issues and stories and really gave them something to grab onto. now you'll have investigative journalism, a party that's interested in getting to the bottom of this and scoring political points, and it's going to be a big deal whether the trump white house is going to comply or not. it's going to be something they'll have to contend with every day. >> phil rucker, you brought it to where it will be if this comes to pass and that's the pr. we have an example of what investigations do to this president. they trigger him. he wakes up and goes to bed

tweeting about a rigged witch hunt, the mueller investigation. can you imagine this white house under investigation by a dozen congressional committees? just thinking about you, you guys have described him as a pressure cooker getting ready to blow. >> yeah. >> you shifted my thought to the psychological impact this would have on this president. >> well, it's paralyzing for the staff and for the president himself. especially if these investigations are personal for trump. if they somehow look at his personal conflicts, his business dealings that sort of trump hotel and what's going on there, the emoluments clause. either the legitimacy of his election or the amount of his wealth or the conduct of his business, his family company, that will just get him going and set him off. and i imagine the democrats will try and do some of that. it's part of their tactic to shape the terms of the debate, as jim was laying out. >> phil rucker, thank you very much. just more for you guys to cover. we're keeping you all busy. up next -- deputy attorney general rod rosenstein was

aboard air force one today with the president he once offered to wear a wire and record. was anyone looking for the emergency exits? we'll bring you the latest. o geo and saved hundreds. excuse me... winner! that's a win. but it's not the only reason i switched. hi! geico has licensed agents who i can reach 24/7. great savings and round the clock service? now that's a win-win. winner. winner. yay me! oh, hi! good luck. switch to geico®. it's a win-win.

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. you might or joints.hing for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish,

prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. land of blue jeans. and burgers. and while blue jeans got all skinny on us... i can't feel my legs. ...no way are we giving up on burgers. that's why i created the all-american ribeye burger, made with 100% ribeye beef, ribeye burgers are back, america. minutes can mean the difference between life and death. proposition 11 saves lives by ensuring medical care is not delayed in an emergency. proposition 11 establishes into law the longstanding industry practice of paying emts and paramedics to remain on-call during breaks and requires they receive fema level training and active shooters and natural disasters. vote yes on 11 to ensure 911 emergency care is there when you or your love one need it. try my all-american made with 100% ribeye beef fresh spring mix, and provolone cheese on a potato bun.

it's a burger as american as bald eagles. i get it, i'm bald. fast food's first and only ribeye burgers are back, america. try them today. so it looks like rod rosenstein's job is safe for now. the deputy attorney general spoke with trump on air force one today for a 45-minute conversation that the president called great. not mentioned in the official white house readout of the meeting, "the new york times" details what was most likely a topic of discussion. presumably mr. rosenstein and mr. trump used some of their time to discuss the fact that the deputy attorney general had offered to secretly tape his conversations with mr. trump in the chaotic days after the president fired judge comey. the fbi director in the spring of 2017. at that time, mr. rosenstein also brought up the possibility of invoking the 25th amendment to remove mr. trump from the white house. well, despite all that, the president seemed to have an

optimistic view heading into the meeting. here's what he said to reporters before boarding air force one. >> i actually have a good relationship other than there's been no collusion, folks. no collusion. and -- but i have a very good relationship. we'll see. i didn't know rod before. but i've gotten to know him, and i get along very well with him. >> former u.s. attorney, former u.s. deputy assistant attorney harry litman joins the conversation. when i hear there had been no collusion but i like him fine. i'm hearing you better get me off the hook in this mueller probe. i like him as long as he sees collusion as i see collusion. >> the small talk there may have been a little strained. you know, any other president, of course, would know not to say -- get near the words collusion or investigation and probe. but we already know about the bluntness and crassness of the president here when it comes to it. did he try to exact some kind of

pledge, get some information? it's possible. i think rosenstein understands that his job is probably pretty safe for political reasons, not having anything to do with him for -- until the midterms and pretty imperiled thereafter. so he has bent in the past without breaking. and possibly trump pushed him to do a little bit more of that today or it might have just been all for show because i think trump has decided it would be a bad idea to try to out of him. even though he has some good cause, good arguments for doing it in the next month. >> i know, matt miller, that we're all trying to read into the atmospherics because of the drama around the reporting around wearing a wire and the 25th amendment. in the future, there's some really big deal issues for the justice department. this meeting on thursday with the house intel committee. they've been the agitators in the war against the republican-led justice department. talk about that and the stakes not just for rosenstein and a

president who loves to needle him and talks like a buffoon about collusion which is under serious investigation. there's a serious collision heading down the pipeline in days, not weeks with the house intel committee. >> the stakes are what they have been for months now, which is whether the justice department that we have always known, which is an independent justice department, that exercises its prosecutorial and investigative territory independent from the president and republicans in congress. that's true with relation to this meeting. this meeting and problem with house republicans goes away if democrats win because they no longer have subpoena power. the thing that concerns me about this meeting today, two years ago, everyone that follows american politics, everyone involved in american politics us up in arms about the fact loretta lynched talk to bill clinton on a plane together.

here you have rod rosenstein overseeing the investigation in this meet with donald trump. we don't know if they discussed it, but it's hard to believe trump -- >> there's a picture. we're looking at rod rosenstein and ed o'callahan next to him. >> they've discussed -- >> is that image disturbing to you? >> it is. it is a -- look. it's not just important that the justice department be independent. it's that the american people have faith and confidence that it's independent. there actually wasn't -- >> the president doesn't have faith and confidence in the independence of the justice department. he bashes -- >> he doesn't want it to be independent. >> he bashes its independence. >> he doesn't want it to be independent. the problem with the lynch/bill clinton meeting wasn't the fact it happened. it actually wasn't a violation of any department rule. it was the appearance and the appearance it created and the same appearance problem here. the thing we worry about is jeff sessions being fired or rosenstein being fired and what it means for what trump can do to the investigation. we have to be concerned about what he can do in terms of cowing those officials and getting them to toe his line.

we've seen -- harry mentioned rosenstein bending on a few occasions. he has. he's asked the inspector general to chase down the president's conspiracy theories with no evidence. an appalling thing for the deputy attorney general to do. he's done that because the president has put him under pressure. what i worry about is how he responds to this pressure. >> one important thing to keep in mind for any understanding of rod rosenstein is that while, of course, he's not a politician, he's very politically savvy. he's one of the only people in the last few administrations to serve as a u.s. attorney both under democratic and republican presidents. part of the reason that's rare is because these u.s. attorney jobs are usually so politically valuable. but rod rosenstein was able to win the trust of presidents of both parties. that's not just because he's a competent, talented, successful prosecutor. it's also because he understands the way washington works and has the bill acumen necessary to navigate these fraught waters. rosenstein is using those political skills he's been

developing over the last several decades right now in what is perhaps the most politically interesting relationship in washington. >> go ahead. >> trump has succeeded in defining our expectations. he's probably going to fire sessions and rosenstein after the election. really? what does that look like on november 8th. as long as the investigation -- the mueller investigation doesn't end november 7th. he can do a lot of damage. so i am very worried -- >> are you still running ads about saving mueller and -- >> not right now because it doesn't look like anything is going to happen for a month but it's a real problem the day after the election, especially if republicans pick up a seat. see, not a bad midterm. this whole thing is no collusion and i'm making the changes that the voters in a sense have authorized me to make. what do republican senators think? i have no confidence they'll

stand up to trump. >> harry, can you talk about -- the press takes a lot of heat for normalizing trump and, fair or not fair, that's sort of how the narrative goes in. but the president and fox news have normalized this war on justice, which is totally abnormal and former national security officials have been saying to me for 18 months that it's a political conversation. and it's a media story until someone gets killed. where do you see how the goal posts have shifted that someone who once was so concerned about donald trump's conduct and perhaps character that he talked about wearing a wire and he didn't just talk about the 25th amendment as a notion. he talked about rallying votes. talked about winning jeff sessions' support and john kelly who is now the white house chief of staff, support for the 25th amendment. now on a plane and as matt and betsy are talking about, maybe accommodating some of the president's impulses. how have the goal posts changed in the relationship between the white house and the justice department? >> i think it's crazy. and eight months ago is when this happened and you can

imagine how extreme everything seemed then that this was the topic of conversation whether in jest or not within the highest levels of the justice department. now it seems like it's been completely normalized. as matt has said, we've seen it again and again and again, an all-out assault on the independence of not just the justice department but all the investigative agencies and it's been, i think, terribly corrosive. you never would have thought that the fbi or the department of justice would have to kind of fight for its life just to maintain its core mission. and it's not clear it's even doing it correctly. this is probably the most troubling and irregular aspect of the trump presidency and, look, you know, to bring the kavanaugh confirmation in on this, there was a kind of great alliance formed with the senate and a triumphant play of trump politics to get kavanaugh

confirmed. there's every possibility that that kind of playbook that really keeps things from coming to light might be exercised after the election. if bill is right and there's a couple more seats picked up, it's really terrifying prospect the senate and the white house together could smother the department of justice. we would have never thought it possible. >> betsy? >> it's been reported matt whitaker, sessions chief of staff is next in line to take rosenstein's job , if and when e steps down. he's a weaponized political tool for the white house. >> a political stooge is what i've heard. >> it would be a disaster. an absolute disaster. >> in terms of today and in terms of the normalization, here you have the president on the plane with rosenstein. the obstruction case we're looking at right now is about what happened behind closed doors with trump and comey. there's precedent here for inappropriate or allegedly inappropriate things being said behind doors and yet it's --

>> he's so inappropriate on twitter that we forget that mueller knows everything that happened in private, too. harry litman, thank you. how does the newspaper of record drop a 38-page investigative report that proves donald trump committed tax fraud and lied about being a self-made millionaire in the middle of a week that some pundits describe as a win for trump? we'll go inside the investigation that dismantled the central pillar of trump's brand. l pillar of trump's brand.

woman: where are we taking him? i have no clue. we're just tv doctors. if this was a real emergency, i'd be freaking out. we are the tv doctors of america. together with cigna reminding you to go, know, and take control of your health. schedule your annual check-up today.

to go, know, and take control of your health. don't you get the one of those travel sites? they tell you that, but when you book at hilton.com, you get the price match guarantee.

so if you find your room at a lower rate, hilton is like... we're gonna match that rate and give you an extra 25% off. what would travel sites do if you found a better price? that's not my problem, it's your problem. get outta here! whoa, i really felt that performance. it's just acting, i'm really good at it. book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee. if you find a lower rate, we match it and give you 25% off that stay. it was just this alice in wonderland moment where we got these documents. we didn't want anyone to see this stuff. so we had them set up a room, and only the three of us had access to the room. fred trump's estate tax return is in the building right now. it's incredible we have that. that opened a door to understanding a huge transfer of wealth that happened and gave us so much more information to be able to understand the tax games that were played.

and then once you sort of pull the string, the whole thing unraveled. >> that was a clip from showtime's latest documentary which aired last night. "the family business -- trump and taxes." a behind the scenes look at extensive reporting done by "the new york times" over the last year. the piece published not even a week ago exposed donald trump's alleged past of tax fraud and money laundering. a reminder of what we learned. mr. trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father's real estate empire. starting when he was a toddler and continuing to this day. much of this money came to mr. trump because he helped his parents dodge taxes. he and his siblings set up a sham corporation to disguise millions of dollars in gifts from their parents' records and interviews show. when asked today about that report, trump said the money he received from his father has, quote, been very well documented. joining us now is ross buetner, one of the reporters who worked on that story and is featured in the showtime documentary last

night. take me through how this story, this unbelievable body of reporting. matt miller and i were on set. how did that drop in the middle of the kavanaugh inferno? it seemed like the story that could have fueled a week-long conversation about how one of the central pillars of donald trump's identity was a big, fat lie. >> you mean why didn't we try to wait for the perfect news day to publish this story? >> i understand when something is ready, you know, there are editorial decisions and judgments made in holding it. certainly last week was an extraordinary week in american politics. >> it did feel like an extraordinary week. we'd been close to finishing this up for several weeks. we thought we were about ready before the hurricane struck. you may remember that. >> yeah. >> but we hadn't quite closed the loop with the trumps yet. we thought we were about ready as the kavanaugh hearings appeared to be wrapping up, before jeff flake kind of

dropped a bomb and moved that on. and then it seemed like we had a quiet time and, as you know, it's really hard to susout when there's going to be a relatively quiet period of a few days. we didn't really know where the kavanaugh process was going day. we didn't know where the kavanaugh process was going to go. looked like the best day we could find. >> i understand once you've gone to all the sources, people you're covering for comment, there is always the risk they'll try to blow it up on fox news. fair enough. i want to show you something from the documentary that brought to life what was hard for i think people that aren't expert in taxes to understand from the piece. let me play it and i'll ask you about it on the other side. >> in august 1992, they set up a company called all county. >> all county was this company owned by the trump children including donald. and the stated purpose was it was going to be like this central purchasing agent for all the stuff that fred needed to do to fix up his buildings. so, if they needed a new boiler,

right, all county would go out, take advantage of the economies of scale. fred trump would benefit because he'd get a lower price. but then we realized that all county owned by the trump children was paying for boilers. and then they were charging fred for the very same boilers this big mark-up. they were padding the invoices. they would buy a boiler for 10,000, they'd turn around and sell it to fred for 15,000, and that's when you start realizing, oh, wait a minute, they're using all county to disguise cash gifts from fred trump as if they're a legitimate business transactions. >> that was an extraordinary illustration of the kinds of corrupt practices or fraudulent tax practices that your piece detailed. can you talk about its

significance? >> well, its significance is sort of in the kind of grubby nature of the whole thing. this is the president of the united states, a man who has presented himself as a billionaire, a master of high finance. and this was more like something you see on an episode of sopranos. it's a very simple little scheme where you're just padding an invoice and providing no service for it at all. but it has potentially more ramifications than that because there are tax implications. they were in essence dodging a gift tax that could still be claued back by irs and new york authorities. they were also passing along those inflated invoices to their tenants and applying for rent regulation -- i'm sorry, rent-regulated rent increases based on those invoices and that could result in some kind of action, too. those tenants were, in essence, paying more all those years than they really should have. >> you talked about the sopranos. when jim comey wrote a book he talked about his first meeting about donald trump, the family

had this very mob-like feeling. and the documentary last night, one of your colleagues talked about investigative financial journalism. was doing this work, was doing this investigation, was it more similar to uncovering financial crimes or was it more similar to political investigative journalistic work? what was the story like? you guys covered this. it took you 18 months of records and documents and knocking on doors. you have some icy roads, streets you pound in the piece wigs great. just talk about what it was like covering the trump family finances. >> yeah, it wasn't like a political story at all really because this is an era of donald trump's life and the trump family's life where they had no involvement in politics. that really came much later than this. and this was a very -- what's unique about trying to write about private closely held businesses is how little is publicly available there. you cover a corporation, they have a regular duty to report things to their shareholders. there is a substantial public record. but this was really trying to

crack into a very closely held corporation or set of corporations that had never really been -- had any public exposure to anything. so trying to find people who had been in and around that empire was a great challenge. and then getting them to talk. and then getting records that had never been public before, that was the real heavy lift. once we had all that, it was kind of colossal forensic analysis of just hundreds of tax documents and ledgers and, you know, i read a book on real estate accounting twice in the last year and a half. i didn't see that coming either. >> sorry. >> thank you. >> i want to bring a colleague into the conversation. this seems like a piece of journalism that knocks down the claims of fake news. these weren't political players. they weren't, quote, partisan house members. people talk about the mueller indictments being paper indictments. this was a paper case. this received indisputable.

donald trump didn't even really push back hard. he simply called it boring. what do you make of a state of a piece like this with very little substance to punch holes in, the white house trying to avoid it by calling it long and boring? >> we've seen them do that a lot, but in fact we talked about whether this was a political story or a financial investigative story. it was definitely the latter. it is the ultimate in political reporting. political reporting is about puncturing the sort of the facade, that all politicians put up. this is the ultimate facade. this one lasted decades. it came out in a climate where it is very hard for anything to breakthrough. if you think that there is a perfect time to publish this piece in this news environment, i've got a becomer boiler i wil sell you 15,000 that i paid 10,000 for. >> the critique didn't come from the right. it came from the left. people who want to see journalism get attention. it came from people wanting this kind of information to get out.

>> the trouble -- it's great reporting. but look, trump university, i was part of a group that quietly put some money in the trump ads. that was a total unquestionable scam, ripping off poor people, less well educated people, working class people with this fake promise of a fake university degree. they didn't contest t the trump people. they sailed past it. think of your average, the trump voters who might be you can get away from trump. are they going to react to something that happened 20 years before he was president, gee, he's president, he hasn't delivered on a, b, c. i doubt it affects any actual swing voters. >> especially i have to say this has been noted today, none of the sunday shows picked up on this story at all. i think that was a real -- they should have. >> this is the third time we've spent time. we love the piece. we're grateful to you for spending more time with us. thank you.

we'll take our very last break. we'll be right back. ing for res. and we've grown substantially. so i switched to the spark cash card from capital one. i earn unlimited 2% cash back on everything i buy. and last year, i earned $36,000 in cash back. that's right, $36,000. which i used to offer health insurance to my employees. my unlimited 2% cash back is more than just a perk, it's our healthcare. can i say it? what's in your wallet? plaque psoriasis tremfya® is for adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. with tremfya®, you can get clearer. and stay clearer. in fact, most patients who saw 90% clearer skin at 28 weeks stayed clearer through 48 weeks. tremfya® works better than humira® at providing clearer skin, and more patients were symptom free with tremfya®. tremfya® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections. before treatment, your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection or have symptoms such as:

fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. before starting tremfya® tell your doctor if you plan to or have recently received a vaccine. ask your doctor about tremfya®. tremfya®. because you deserve to stay clearer. janssen wants to help you explore cost support options. be right back. with moderate to severe crohn's disease, i was there, just not always where i needed to be. is she alright? i hope so. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common,

and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. 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.

my thanks to bill crystal, betsy woodruff, matt miller and jeff, four of my favorites dee spielt what they say about me behind my babbling. that does it for us. mtp daily starts with my friend katy tur in for chuck. >> i hear you're going to be out here tomorrow. >> i am on my way in the dark of night. >> enjoy your trip. if it's monday, the mid terms are abreuing here at ucla. ♪ ♪ >> hello and welcome to mtp daily. i'm katy tur in for chuck todd. coming to you live from ucla's campus in california. a state that is critical to the midterm battle for control of congress. in an election that is now just 29 days