worse and there is also the generational aspect, which i think will be really interesting to follow. thank you for joining us. that is "all in" for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" starts now. >> thank you, chris. >> thanks to you at home for joining thus hour. a few months ago in the summer of 2018, a guy you probably never heard of got a subpoena. his name is andrew miller. he's not a famous person. for a time he worked for roger stone. and because of that affiliation with roger stone andrew miller, last year, got a subpoena. he was subpoenaed to hand over documents and communications that he had related to roger stone. roger stone and wikileaks and the dnc and the stuff that was stolen from the democratic party and the clinton campaign by russian government hackers. andrew miller compiled with that request for documents and

communications. he did hand stuff over to the fbi, but when he was also subpoenaed to testify about those same matters, to come to washington d.c. and testify in person to the grand jury convened by the special counsel, to that subpoena, andrew miller said no. and the reason anybody has paid any attention to andrew miller's case since then is because his no, his refusal to testify to the grand jury, that has become a legal vehicle for conservative legal groups who are using mr. miller's case as a way to try to attack and derail the special counsel's investigation overall. andrew miller saying no to that subpoena, him subsequently being held in contempt of court, him risking jail time for refusing to testify to the grand jury, that is the way some conservative legal groups are trying to challenge the constitutionality of mueller's

investigation. his case is the way specifically they are trying to get the mueller investigation before the u.s. supreme court because they hope they have a chance of null flyiie -- nullifying the russia investigation. they hope to get the appointment thrown out and the questions about the appointment of robert muellermiller's little case and that's why anybody is interested at all in this one offshoot of the russia investigation and special counsel's work. this part again that relates to a guy you never heard of called andrew miller, and his role, the fact his case was being used as a vehicle to challenge the constitutionality of the office was the only reason to be interested in his part of the case at all until now. as you know, president trump's long-time friend and long-time political advisor roger stone

was indicted a few days ago. mr. stone was arrested in south florida at his home. he had his first court appearance in federal court on friday but mr. stone is being charged in federal court in washington d.c. and so today was the day he was actually arraigned on these seven felony charges he's facing and he was arraigned in the court where he will go on trial in d.c. as a legal matter, longer stone's arraignment today was straightforward today. it was formal. there was a comedy of errors around his legal counsel. neither the lawyers representing him are admitted to the bar in washington d.c. and didn't submit the proper paperwork to the courts so that they could legally represent roger stone at this arraignment today. we learned about that when the court dinged them for it yesterday and said hey, you need to get your paperwork in. they screwed that up with the court a couple different ways yesterday on the eve of the arraignment. then this morning, they blew through the court imposed deadline. they were an hour and a half late and finally submitting

their paperwork to the court, which would allow them to represent their client. it is not a great beginning for roger stone's legal team in terms of the way they are screwing up the basic question of whether they are allowed to represent him just getting the basic paperwork in. when it came to the actual arraignment today, it was straightforward. they waived the actual reading of the indictment. the prosecution side of the isle included both attorneys from the u.s. attorney's office in d.c. and attorneys from robert mueller's office, the special counsel's office. one of the pros kau tor prosecu mueller's team and the d.c. u.s. attorney will be jointly trying this case against roger stone. so that was interesting. that was a most interesting thing that happened today in court. on the defense side, roger stone's defense lawyers entered a plea of not guilty on his behalf to the seven felony charges unless that changes, that will mean that we should expect there will be a criminal

trial for roger stone on the seven felony trials, seven felony charges. we don't know when exactly that would happen if his case does in fact proceed to trial. we do know that roger stone will be back in court again on friday of this week for what they call a status hearing. so all of that sort of preceded the way it should have today. it was fairly formal. but here is this great detail about andrew miller. this otherwise obscure figure in this little part of the russia investigation we haven't been paying too much attention to up until this point and i want to credit two cnn reporters for this. they recognized this thread and pulled on it with andrew miller's defense lawyer. because it turns out under justice department rules, once a grand jury has indicted somebody, that grand jury is not allowed to keep collecting more evidence randomly about that

person who they brought an indictment against. the grand jury serves a specific purpose. prosecutors give evidence and witness testimony to a grand jury. the grand jury deliberates on that evidence and decides whether or not that evidence is enough to bring charges against someone to bring an indictment against a defendant. but then that's it. i mean, once that is done, once an indictment is brought on the say so of the grand jury, the grand jury's role is over when it comes to that defendant. that's the way it works in terms of how grand juries get used. in the case of roger stone, the indictment that was unsealed last week that resulted in him getting arrested that resulted in him getting arraigned today, the indictment against roger stone was approved by a grand jury and once the grand jury signed off, that grand jury should be done with anything having to do with ronl eronl ro

stone. grand juries are a tool prosecutors use for a specific thing. they evaluate evidence and testimony and decide whether or not it adds up to enough to justify an indictment. after the indictment against a defendant, there is no reason for the grand jury to hear anything else related to that defendant. and here is the really interesting part. remember, this guy andrew miller, this sort of obscure guy who is fighting this subpoena, what he was asked about, what his subpoena is about is information that mr. miller allegedly had that pertains to roger stone and roger stone's contact with wikileaks and the information the russian government stole from the democratic party and clinton campaign during the election of 2016. that's what he was subpoenaed about. all of that stuff was in the roger stone indictment, right? roger stone is charged with seven felony counts for lying to congress about his contact with wikileaks and for trying to

persuade another witness to lie to congress or to not testify to congress on these same issues, pertaining to wikileaks trafficking the information that russia stole from the democrats and from the clinton campaign. all that stuff that miller was asked about, that's the stuff that ended up in the stone indictment. so when that indictment was filed against roger stone, the lawyer who is the defense lawyer for this guy andrew miller, he had reason to believe, well, okay, they indicted roger stone now. that's what they wanted to ask my client about. that must mean this whole thing involving my client is done because clearly, the grand jury is done here and did it without my client's testimony. they wanted my client to testify about roger stone and wikileaks. well, roger stone and wikileaks, he got arrested. he's in court, done. the grand jury can't keep collecting evidence about that

defendant if the indicting part of their job is done. andrew miller is off the hook, right? no. it turns out he's not. really? tell me more. sara murray and caitlyn at cnn report that andrew miller's lawyer, his defense lawyer contacted the special counsel's office after roger stone got indicted to ask whether andrew miller would still be needed, whether they would still want him to testify before the grand jury and according to cnn, the special counsel's office told andrew miller's attorney, actually, yeah, we still want your client's testimony before this grand jury. andrew miller's defense lawyer says the special counsel's office told him that they consider this quote still a live case. well, all grand juries do is indict people. if they have a live case, that means i mean, if the grand jury is still working on this, still taking more testimony on this after roger stone has already been indicted, if this is still

a live case before that grand jury, that means they are still working on another potential indictment related to roger stone and wikileaks and what russia stole from the democrats and it could mean that it's just that roger stone will get indicted again. there could be some superseding indictment coming for roger stone on top of the seven felony counts he's looking at. it could be that. that could be the next indictment, next potential indictment but could mean somebody else is potentially looking at getting indicted by the grand jury that would derive from the same general set of facts concerning roger stone and his contact with wikileaks and information stolen by the russian government from the democrats because that's what andrew miller has been asked about. that's when he supposedly needs to tell the grand jury about, which means the grand jury is still working on that.

this little andrew miller case has always been a weird out liar in the russia scandal but what that case has just taught us is that in all likelihood, roger stone does not stand alone or at least this roger stone indictment does not stand alone. there is something else that grand jury is working on. there is something else, meaning another indictment that may becoming from the same grand jury that relates to the same basic set of facts. now, grand jury proceedings are secret and the secrecy of the grand jury is a serious thing. we do not know more whablt abou is going on than we gleam from this in terms of what exactly they are considering or might do next but because of something that happened here on this show live last night, i feel like it would be -- i feel like i would be remiss not to note that the one other person associated with the trump campaign, besides roger stone, who admits to

having months of communication with wikileaks during the campaign including specifically communications about what kind of anti hillary clinton information wikileaks might be dropping during the campaign that might help donald trump's chances at winning. the only other person other than roger stone we know of that had months of communications with wikileaks is this man. the president's eldest son and name sake donald trump junior. his repeated messages were obtained by a reporter at "the atlanti atlantic" magazine. she reported messages between donald trump junior and wikileaks were turned over to congressional investigators. these communications between donald trump junior and wikileaks started during the presidential campaign and continued after the election and after the inauguration until at least midsummer 2017 which would be long after even trump's hand

picked ci arks da director was describing it as a hostile service that embedded actors like russia. donald trump junior was communicating with wikileaks after the public claims even after everything we learned about how wikileaks worked with the russian government to help them interfere in our election during 2016. now we know two of the three congressional committees donald trump junior testified before asked him details questions about interactions with wikileaks. we know he was asked detailed questions about communications with wikileaks in the senate judiciary committee because it was released publicly so we can see that transcript of that testimony. "the washington post" also reported that donald trump junior's communications with wikileaks were the subject of x extensive discussion when he testified to the house

intelligence committee. that transcript we don't have. that was closed-door testimony. we do not know if donald trump junior got himself into any sort of trouble in terms of false statements when it came to his testimony before any of these committees on wikileaks or anything. but we do me that ronl erroger has been indicted for lying about his contacts to wikileaks and appears that the grand jury that indicted roger stone for those seven felony counts is still at work and still taking evidence towards some potential future indictment that touches on those same basic sets of facts. and again, i feel i would be remised to not point out that there is now a long trail of fairly insi lly insisting claim multiple committees on congress, that there were in fact problems with the testimony of donald trump junior. and if we are now at the part of the mueller investigation and russia investigation where

people are going to be charged for lying to congress now like we've seen with cohen and stone, members of congress are telling us now insif there is anybody t should be worried, any of the people that testified before them, really, it's the president's eldest son that should be most worried. this for example was senator richard blumenthal last night. >> i can tell you this much, i was in the room when a great many of these witnesses appeared before the senate judiciary committee. i think many of them should be called back to testify in public and i hope that will be true of other congressional committees, as well, because behind closed doors, there arousse concerning

their truthfulness and pertained to donald trump junior and c contention contentions. this common thread of lying to congress and particularly congressional committees may insnare a number of other potential targets in this special counsel's investigation and become a matter of criminal action. >> senator richard bloom -- senator whether the special counsel reviewed testimony from anyone else, anybody else who the senator perceives might be in trouble for lying to congress now that michael cohen is charged for lying to congress and roger stone is charged with lying to congress and he volunteered, yeah, donald trump junior is the one named person who should really think about having something to worry about on that score and this is not the first time a member of congress suggested that after hearing testimony from donald trump junior meaning these are not just people throwing that

out there because they have feelings about donald trump junior, there are people in a position to know because they heard his testimony. in may chris sent a letter saying he believed donald trump junior may have lied about contacts with another cooperating witness in the mueller investigation, a mysterious character named george representing the united emirates. senator raising the prospect donald trump lied under oath in his testimony about those contacts. then when michael cohen pled guilty to lying to the intelligence committee about his work on trump tower moscow and contacts that project entailed between him and officials at the kremlin, a member of the house intelligence committee, congressman from connecticut came on the show and said well

he couldn't comment on the specifics of closed door testimony before that committee, he said other people who testified with the committee about trump tower moscow testified in a way that was effectively c lly with what mic cohen said under oath, that's a problem when he admits his story to the committee was a lie. he pled guilty to a felony for giving false testimony about trump tower moscow. anybody else that gave congruent testimony on trump tower moscow may have lied in the same waco hin ed -- way cohen admits he did. jackie spear, who is a veteran member of the intelligence committee was speaking with katy and put a spin on it. >> are you concerned anybody else lied to your committee? >> i am concerned other people

lied to the committee and i wouldn't be surprised if we find out through the mueller investigation and report that he is identified others. >> who potentially do you think could have lied? >> well, i'm not going to go there with you right at the moment but i think you could probably figure out people within the trump organization who testified before our committee. >> trump organization is the trump business and not that many people from the trump organization have testified before that committee, the house intelligence committee that we know of. one of them is michael cohen that pled guilty to lying to the committee. another one is donald trump junior who again, we know was asked at least about his wikileaks contacts before that committee. he was also asked about the trump tower moscow project by that committee there are two other people charged with felony knees for lying about wikileaks and trump tower moscow. what are the odds the

president's hepresident e president's eldest son might be in the same pickle? we'll speak with congresswoman jackie spear later on this hour and we'll get a chance to ask her about that. but if the president's eldest son is in a legal pickle here, there is a couple things to consider. one is we really don't know how the president himself might react to that kind of legal jeopardy for an immediate family member for his name sake and eldest son, the president and his defense and what he sees as a red line or something that may provoke him to do things he hasn't otherwise done, if his eldest son in is legal jeopardy, we don't know what to expect from the president on that front. also, you should know that there is a little bit of a logistical hurdle that republicans and congress have thrown up in terms of how this may proceed and this pertains to donald trump junior being in trouble because of his

testimony and also may affect other witnesses in the same kind of potential jeopardy. one of the things we've been reporting on for the past few days is the fact that although the new congress is in session and committees are holding hearings and votes are happening, the republicans have not announced which members of congress they will put on the intelligence committee. they announced the membership for 23 other committees but not intelligence. well, if the special counsel robert mueller and his grand jury do have an interest in looking at certified transcripts of the testimony of donald trump junior or any other witnesses before the house intelligence committee, the special counsel's office can only bring legal action on the basis of someone's potentially false testimony if they have an official transcript of that testimony and they can only get an official transcript of that testimony once the intelligence committee meets and votes to release that official transcri transcript. votes that the transcript can be transmitted to the special counsel. that closed-door testimony, the

transcripts thereof, that's property of the committee and the committee has to vote to release it before the special counsel can get it and the special counsel needs an official transcript before they can take legal action on that basis. well, the committee can't meet to take a vote to release anyone's transcript until they have all their members, right? until the membership of the committee is set and so far republicans won't appoint their members and so nothing can happen on the intelligence committee whatsoever. we reported on that apparent delay last week, the republican house leader ke eer kevin mccar asked about it and said it's a logistic problem, in terms of when the house speakers election. he said the republican members would be named very soon. definitely this week. we've been through monday. we've been through tuesday. those members still have not been named. congressman adam schiff said the first order of business once his committee is formally convened

is that the very first thing they will do is vote to send these transcripts over to robert mueller for his review. but it will take about three days after they take the vote. and ticktock, they can't even take the vote yet. so far, they cannot get anywhere near the first order of business while republicans continue to delay seating their members. if donald trump junior or anybody else who testified to house intelligence is potentially in legal trouble for having lied to that committee, the way that roger stone is now no legal trouble, the way michael cohen is in legal trouble, house republicans are effectively protecting those witnesses as long as they don't seat their members on that committee so that committee cannot release its official transcripts. i don't know how long house republicans can keep that up. but they are stretching it already. more ahead. stay with us. more ahead stay with us cancer. the follow up cat scan showed that it had gone to her liver. we needed a second opinion.

that's when our journey began with cancer treatment centers of america. one of our questions was, how are we going to address my liver? so my doctor said i think we can do both surgeries together. i loved that. now my health is good. these people are saints. ha, they're saints. cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. people are managing their type 2 diabetes with fitness, friends and farxiga, the pill that starts with f.

farxiga, along with diet and exercise, helps lower a1c in adults with type 2 diabetes. it's one pill a day. and although it's not a weight loss drug, it may help you lose weight. do not take if allergic to farxiga. if you experience symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking and seek medical help right away. do not take farxiga if you have severe kidney problems, are on dialysis, or have bladder cancer. tell your doctor right away if you have blood or red color in your urine or pain while you urinate. farxiga can cause serious side effects, including dehydration, genital yeast infections in women and men, serious urinary tract infections, low blood sugar and kidney problems. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have signs of ketoacidosis, which is serious and may lead to death. ask your doctor about the pill that starts with f and visit farxiga.com for savings. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.

senator, i would think we ought to talk about these kinds of things in a closed session. >> and we may be able to get that to you in the closed session this afternoon. >> senator, i believe and i can

go into more detail this afternoon. >> senator, clearly this is a sensitive issue and an issue we ought to talk about this afternoon. >> certainly this afternoon we can talk more about some of the things we have seen. >> i think i'll leave it there for now and we can elaborate this afternoon. i'll ask if general ashley would like to add anything. >> we'll get more details this afternoon. >> where do you get tickets to the afternoon? the intelligence chiefs did go into a closed session with the senate intelligence committee this afternoon presumably at what point they talked about the good stuff. they spent the morning saying that they wouldn't talk about anything in open session. but while the house intelligence committee can't get going, yet, because republicans refuse to announce who their members are for that committee, the intelligence committee in the senate was in full swing and this was the senate intelligence committee, oversight hearing. they have recolledirectors sitt

there together and testifying together at this hearing and for everything they said we can't talk about that here in open session, the things they did say were like a parallel universe corrective to what you have been hearing from the trump administration otherwise. the intelligence chiefs today said no, north korea isn't planning on giving up their nuclear weapons regardless of what you might be hearing from the president about that and no, iran is not trying to make a nuclear bomb right now regardless of what you might be hearing from the president on that and yes, they said iran is in compliance with the obama era iran nuclear deal regardless of what you heard from the president on that and no, isis is not defeated regardless. for all of that substance and for the little bit of fireworks in today's open hearing, if today's hearing did have a theme, it really was that all the good stuff and super pointed questions and all the controversial matters couldn't be discuss in open session, that stuff would happen later today

behind closed doors in a classified setting. >> according to press reports, donald trump met privately with vladimir putin and no one in the u.s. government has the full story about what was discussed. director haspel and director coats, would this put you in a disadvantage position in terms of understanding russia's efforts to advance its agenda against the united states? >> well, senator, clearly, this is a sensitive issue and it's an issue we ought to talk about this afternoon. look forward to discussing that in a closed session. >> so he doesn't get his answer. we don't know what happened behind closed doors when they went back to the issue this afternoon in closed session but that turns out to have been a pressing question from the senator there. remember a couple weeks ago, president trump has taken multiple meetings in person with

russia's president vladimir putin in which the president, our president has ensured there are no other including one case in which the u.s. translator and order that translator to not discuss with anyone anything he had heard that the meeting. couple of weekends ago they described the meeting between trump and putin and helsinki last year, you may remember last year when michael cohen was pleading guilty to lying to congress about the trump tower moscow project and communications with the kremlin around that time after thanksgiving, late november, the white house announced that president trump's next planned meeting with vladimir putin was being called off. president trump would be going to argentina for the g 20 meeting they announced but would not be meeting with russian

president vladimir putin at that event because of a problem underway with russian and ukrainian forces in disputed waters. when the white house made the announcement the meeting between trump and putin, the kremlin at the time and gave us a strange series of statements. the white house might think the meeting is off but the kremlin thought putin and trump would meet in bun knargentina. this afternoon while the hearing was underway, we laernlearned t kremlin was right because the financial times published this. quote donald trump sat down with vladimir putin at the g 20 summit in november with no translator or note taker from the u.s. side to record the dialogue between the leaders according to people that had direct knowledge of the

encounter and briefed on it. the discussions between u.s. and russian presidents occurred at the 19th century theater. mr. trump was accompanied by only melania trump, his wife, but no staff. while mr. putin, of course, was flanked by his russian translator. they got to have someone there. the four of them sat at a table among the last to leave the event. quote, the decision to meet mr. putin and discuss sensitive matters without advisors or a white house translator two months ago could trigger new alarms about mr. trump and his relationship with the kremlin. so financial times today is reporting on yet another instance. this one just a few weeks ago, right? late november. where the president once again sent all american officials and any u.s. translator away so he could talk to putin personally with no other americans there to make a record of it and no u.s. officials there to be able to

brief anybody else on what happened. when "the washington post" first reported on this pattern by the president, veteran u.s. diplomat strobe talbot was saying these approaches with putin was not only unusual but outrageous. he said this type of meeting, one on one meeting with no u.s. officials present gives putin much more scope to manipulate trump. more scope. in light of this russia scandal and still unfolding legal consequences and now what seems like the real possibility that the president's immediate family may be a point of concern when it comes to this scandal itself and legal consequences when it comes to his eldest son, what do you do as a national security matter with the fact that the president apparently still insists on maintaining effectively a secret line of communication with the kremlin?

a secret line of communication that is outside any other u.s. channels with no u.s. officials knowing what is going on between him and the russian president between him and the russian government while he is serve as president. he is still doing this evening as recently as several weeks ago while all of these other things are breaking open in terms of the russia scandal and his own family's potential legal liability in it. we follow this as a political scandal, as a legal scandal, as a national seek curety matter. what do you do with that? a senior national security advisor to president obama joins us next. advisor to president obama joins us next. okay. [ buttons clicking ] [ camera shutter clicks ] so, now that you have a house, you can use homequote explorer. quiet. i'm blasting my quads. janice, look. i'm in a meeting. -janice, look. -[ chuckles ] -look, look. -i'm looking. it's easy. you just answer some simple questions online, and you get coverage options to choose from.

you're ruining my workout. cycling is my passion. i get to select my room from the floor plan... free wi-fi... ...and the price match guarantee. so with hilton there is no catch. yeah the only catch is i'm never leaving. no i'm serious, i live here now. book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee.

this round is on me. hey, can you spot me? come on in! find your place, today, with silver sneakers... included with many medicare plans. call the number on the screen now or visit getsilversneakers.com

>> joining us is ben rohodes. thanks for being here. >> great to be here. >> i want to get your take on this latest reporting from financial times today that reporting that as vently as several weeks ago president trump took another off the books meeting with the russian president with one again no u.s. officials press skpenlt no u.s. translator and we knew he had done this in the past. he's apparently continuing to do this and i wanted to know what you think about this from a national security perspective. >> rachel, i think it's terrifying to tell you the truth. a lot of times when we're in government, president obama would have to go into what we call a one on one meeting with president putin. we always have somebody in the room. usually the national security

advisor. that person was there to read out to the officials in the government what took place, what was discussed in that meeting. the fact that donald trump wants nobody else in the meetings, wants no record of the meetings from the translator suggested those discussions are of no use to the u.s. government. they are of use to donald trump and vladimir putin so that ra raises the question what are they discussing. when you hear donald trump wants to pull out of nato, even though none of the advisors as wacky as they are would offer that position, it makes you wonder if the seeds are being planted. >> the director of national intelligence dan coats was asked about this. actually, i think before the financial times reporting came out. it was about the previous report of the president taking these meetings with putin and said it's a sensitive issue and preferred to discuss it in a closed session. i wonder, again, this is, i guess i'll am asking a hypothet

but can the intelligence community or government more broadly take any steps to sort of mitigate the kind of thing you say here is terrifying to mitigate the worst potential implications of what is happening here? >> the principle thing is the investigation taking place. we know rachel, this is a president tern of this. you'll recall during the transition, jared kushner was trying to set up a secure communications link with moscow. and that's part of what raised concerns in the u.s. intelligence committee, why would the president's son-in-law want to be able to talk to the kremlin without anybody else doing what is being discussed? we seen a pattern of them wanting to have these conversations. we seen the fact president trump is seeking out putin at all of these vein ynuevenues, right? he knows thals when we calls t putin, somebody is listening. what does he do when he goes to

summits like the g 20 or putin is present, every single time we know he has sought out this one on one encounter where the two of them discuss things alone, which is probably deeply worrying to the intelligence community and what is chilling, rachel. is what the community knows about the meetings is probably from their collection on the russians. so in other words, our own intelligence community is probably learning more about what is discussed in the meeting with our own president by the intelligence collection of the russians. i'm not revealing anything in terms of sources and methods but trying to understand what the russians are thinking. so i really what we have here is a president who has chosen to freeze out his own national security team, freeze out the american people. they are the ones losing in this, floating all kinds of terrifying ideas like the united states up ending nato and the order we built. the only recourse for this, rachel, is the mueller investigation because that gets at what are the motivations that would lead president trump to

want to do this unprecedented thing and have these kinds of interactions with the leader of an adversary nation? >> ben rods under president obama. thank you very much for being with us tonight. it's been too long since you've been here. thanks for making time. >> thanks, rachel. always good talking to you. >> in the light of the way ben rhodes put that, the president has taken great pains to make sure there are no americans in the meetings with him and vladimir putin, nobody from the u.s. government getting any readout in every single of these meetings we know about, i think, they have taken no such pains to make sure there wasn't somebody there from the russian government. putin always has somebody there. the russian government read in on this. it's beg kept from our own government and from us. more to get to tonight, stay with us. more to get to tonight, stay with us. higher! parents aren't perfect, but then they make us kraft mac & cheese and everything's good again.

at panera, we treat soup differently. with vine ripened tomatoes, signature cheddar, simmered to perfection. with big flavors, not artificial ones. enjoy 100% clean soup today. panera. food as it should be. enjoy 100% clean soup today. if your moderate to severeor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio®, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio® works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract, and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio® may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection

experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio®. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio®. entyvio®. relief and remission within reach.

with its historical records... ancestry's dna test ...you could learn you're from ireland... ...donegal, ireland... ...and your ancestor was a fisherman. with blue eyes. just like you. begin your journey at ancestry.com. today the chairs of four committees in the democratic controlled house and the treasury department for lifting sanctions on companies linked to a russian oligarch named oleg deripaska even though his associates are definitely own majority stake in the companies. the democrats are asking treasury secretary steven mnuchin, what was the rush with lifting these sanctions? they asked mnuchin to give them a little more time to review this deal in light of the holidays and the government shutdown happening right after the deal was announced. mnuchin said no, they couldn't

have any further time. and now, apart from the democratic committee chairs raising these concerns, a member of the house intelligence committee is raising another major red flag. which will curl your hair. congresswoman jackie spear has sent this letter to treasury secretary steven mnuchin asking about reports of his, mnuchin's financial relationship with a business partner of oleg deripaska. a business partner that owns a big stake in his companies and benefit from the lifting of the sanctions on dara caderipaska's companies. he was asked to please if plain the business dealings. congresswoman spear called mnuchin's involvement in deciding to lift the sanctions when that will have a financial effect quote a deeply troubling matter and a conflict of interest. and that's a big deal allegation, right? saying a treasury secretary out

a personal conflict of interest in a matter like this. treasury has answered this charge twice. check this out. the treasury department ac acknowledges they do know each other personally though for the reporting last year that mnuchin quote frequented his yacht before becoming treasury secretary, the treasury department insisted that is not true. they said today mnuchin attended only one party on blavatnik's yacht and told "the new york times" mnuchin and blavatnik had no business relationship though by this evening and a followup response that had become quote no direct business relationship. important revision there. right. got it. you sure that's the last one? tonight the times reports that when his company made something like $800 million just from the lifting of sanctions this

weekend, $800 million, but the involvement of a treasury secretary that partied on this guy's yacht, just the one time, no direct business relationship but maybe a business relationship. astonishing allegations from congresswoman jackie spear. she joins us next. resswoman jacr she joins us next. you don't want to cancel your plans. [sneezing] cancel your cold. the 1-pill power of new advil multi-symptom cold & flu knocks out your worst symptoms. cancel your cold, not your plans. new advil multi-symptom cold & flu.

this round is on me. hey, can you spot me? come on in! find your place, today, with silver sneakers... included with many medicare plans. call the number on the screen now or visit getsilversneakers.com our grandparents checked zero times a day. times change. eyes haven't. that's why there's ocuvite. screen light... sunlight... longer hours... eyes today are stressed. but ocuvite has vital nutrients... ...to help protect them. ocuvite. eye nutrition for today.

california congresswoman jackie spear has been quoted on this show tonight twice already. first for her comments today

that unspecified witnesses from the trump organization who have testified before the house intelligence committee may have a problem legally in terms of potential liability for lying to congress. also, congresswoman spear has started a bit of a fire storm over allegations she has now made concerning treasury secretary steven mnuchin and the possibility he may have had a financial conflict of interest when it came to his decision to lift sanctions on a russian oligarch named oleg deripaska and businesses associated with him. joining us now is jackie spear. congresswoman, thank you very hutch for being with us. you have been like the table of contents to our show this evening. >> thank you. >> let me ask you first to tell us what your concern is the possibility that the treasury secretary has a financial conflict of interest with the lifting of these sanctions? >> so steve mnuchin sold his interest in his rat pack hollywood studio to leonard

blavatnik. leonard blavatnik is a significant shareholder in da deripaska's company. that company once sanctions were first imposed, dropped like a stone. once the sanctions were lifted, it increased by some 24% in terms of the stock price. i think very strongly that secretary mnuchin should have recused himself or certainly should have asked the ethics office whether or not he should have been involved in the negotiations on the sanctions relative to deripaska and the lifting of those sanctions. >> since you have been pressing the treasury department on this, have you been able to get whether he did seek any ethics advice or whether his recusal was ever evaluated by the department? >> that question was posed in

the letter i sent to him. what's most keconcerning is congress pazes legislation and nine months pass and nothing happens, and we start complaining about that, and all of a sudden there are sanctions imposed on deripaska and his companies except they're postponed. they're postponed for more than 30 days, which is normal. they're postponed until september. and that allowed deripaska to do all kinds of things relative to his ownership interests. and so for all intents and purposes the sanctions were only in place for about four months. >> the thing that is striking from an outsider's perspective and someone not an expert on these things is deripaska seems to be such a dangling thread when it comes to the mueller investigation, when it comes to his relationship for example, the president's campaign chairman paul manafort, whose criminal case is still ongoing. it seems like an odd time for the u.s. government to be taking

steps on deripaska that would have such a financial impact on him. senator mike rounds of south dakota has suggested since these sanctions were lifted maybe the senate might have a little buyers remorse with passing up the opportunity to lift these sanctions. is this something that could be revisited, could be undone? >> i think you probably could undue this. certainly the house voting overwhelmingly to not lift the sanctions. the senate was only three members short of also confirming that the sanctions should not be removed. so i think there's a means by which we could reinstate those sanctions. >> congresswoman, i also wanted to ask you about your assertion today to my colleague katy tur, that people who testified on the house intelligence committee from the trump organization may have trouble when it comes to potential legal liability for lying to congress. i know you can't tell exact

details of testimony that happened behind closed doors, but can you tell us whether you feel those matters will be followed up, whether those transcripts for example will be ultimately conveyed to robert mueller or otherwise be adjudicated the way they need to be? >> so the transcripts, it is certainly the intention of the committee to make those transcripts available to the special counsel. they have to be reviewed for any classified information that cannot be released, but that certainly is the long-term interest. i also think it's very important for the intelligence committee to be reorganized. and unfortunately kevin mccarthy and republicans are slow walking the appointment of their representatives on the committee, which is frustrating our effort to get started. >> congresswoman jackie spear of california, thank you for being here tonight. we'll be right back. stay with us. here tonight we'll be right back. stay with us

your brain changes as you get older. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. with the chase ink business unlimited card, i get unlimited 1.5% cash back. it's so simple, i don't even have to think about it. so i think about mouthfeel. i don't think about the ink card. i think about nitrogen ice cream in supermarkets all over the world. i think about the details. fine, i obsess over the details. think about every part of your business except the one part that works without a thought. your ink card. chase ink business unlimited. chase ink business unlimited, with unlimited 1.5% cash back on every purchase. chase for business. make more of what's yours.

neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of light staves these couriers from their swift completion of their realms. negative dozens of degrees plus the wind chill, midwest tonight is bracing for double digit temperatures tomorrow as an arctic air mass brings really really frigid weather. and it is so cold they are calling off the u.s. mail. the st. paul pioneer press saying that postal operations are being suspended in the ducoaties, iowa, western wisconsin and portion of illinois, nebraska and missouri. that never happens. if you weren't already taking this seriously already take this seriously. now it's time for the "last word" with lawrence o'donnell. >> wicked cold, rachel. that is wicked cold. and let's remember these are