affairs department. that did not work out. he withdrew. he has since been brought back to the white house medical unit but he's not the specific physician stoto the president a longer. we're waiting for more updates once that exam is done. >> kelly o'donnell at the white house. thank you very much. i appreciate it. that wraps up this hour for me. have a great weekend, everybody. "deadline: white house" with nicolle wallace starts right now. hi, everyone, it's 4:00 in washington, d.c., where it's been a whopper of a breaking news day, recovering all of it for you. we start with the man in charge of the mueller investigation, acting attorney general mark whitaker at a hearing of a house judiciary committee that is combative and contentious. whitaker drawing a line in the sand about his conversations with the president about the mueller probe, and he did so after saying he wouldn't answer any questions about his conversations with the president.

>> yes or no, at any point since that briefing have you communicated any information you learned in that briefing to president trump? it's a yes-or-no question. have you communicated anything you learned in that briefing about the investigation to president trump, yes or no? >> mr. chairman, as i have said earlier today in my open remarks, i do not intend today to talk about my private conversations with the president of the united states. but to answer your question, i have not talked to the united states about the special counsel's investigation. >> whitaker also separating himself from other top officials. deputy attorney general rod rosenstein, fbi director chris wray, by refusing to refute the president's smear on robert mueller and defend the russia probe.

>> are you overseeing a witch-hunt? >> congressman, it would be inappropriate for me to talk about an ongoing investigation. >> do you agree with the president's statement that the russian investigation is a witch-hunt? >> as i mentioned previously, congressman, i think it would be inappropriate for me to comment about an ongoing investigation. >> wow. but it may be whitaker's bold statement that he hadn't spoken to donald trump about the sle investigation that gundiundergoe most scrutiny. so it defies logic and reason to think that if landing the probe was his mission, he never spoke about it with the president who is day in and day out obsessed with the russia probe. notably whitaker also refused to answer whether he discussed firing anyone from the southern district of new york. that's where donald trump faces grave legal jeopardy.

>> i want to know if you talked to president trump at all about the southern district of new york case michael cohen? >> senator, i mentioned several times i'm not going to discuss my private conversations with the president of the united states. >> so yes or no, did you discuss with president trump anything about michael cohen? >> congresswoman, as i have expressed several times today, i am not -- >> did you ever have any conversations with the president about firing or reassigning any personnel, u.s. attorneys or others, who worked with the southern district of new york? with the president or anybody. anybody at all. did you ever have any conversations with anybody about reassigning or firing any personnel, including u.s. attorneys with the southern district of new york? >> congresswoman, i sit on top of the department of justice, as you mentioned. >> did you ever have conversations about anybody who works with the district of virginia, firing or reassigning,

with anybody, not just the president, anybody at all. >> congresswoman, i'm not going to talk -- >> sounds like a hell yeah. we're joined by our friends to sit through the fireworks. former aassistant director of the fbi, former u.s. attorney chuck rosenberg, with us on set from d.c., paul butler, and msnbc national political reporter carol lee and sam stein, politics editor at the bailey beast. big guns, all of them, for a big, big news day. frank, i've got to start with you. what was that? >> i'm not kidding when i say i have interviewed more terrorists that were more cooperative than whit we are was today. i tell you, i say that with sadness because the attorney general is america's lawyer. we are his client. and we're represented by the congress members sitting in that

room and he treated us with utter disdain, sarcasm, barely trying to get through this seriously. this is basically thumbing your nose at oversight by the people. and the way he conducted himself today is an indication that he's not america's attorney. he's essentially seeing himself as trump's attorney. >> so let me, frank, put on the table some of my reporting this week about what the preparations for today's testimony and some of what i understand to be whitaker's goals today. one, there was a lot of preparations but for for the reason we believe there to be preparations. whitaker was auditioning for another job in this administration. whitaker had an audience of one, and that was donald trump. and whitaker had as one of his goals to be the sarah sanders huckabee on the justice department.

on those fronts, does that explain some of what we saw. >> it jives with exactly what we saw today. he's auditioning for something. i am thinking possibly we will see him run for office at some point. but, yeah, i did think trump will position him somewhere else. here's the thing, let's put out kind of a cautionary statement to everybody. fp you've got skeletons in your closet. if you have criminal fraud allegations about your past and private sector involvement, probably not the best idea to raise your hand and say, i want in on a trump administration job. we've not seen the last of whitaker. i'm telling you the fbi, ironically the organization he oversees in his current role, ironically the guys and women who protect him, those are fbi agents at his house taking him to work, taking him around d.c., those people, those agencies are actually looking at him

criminally and he's not seen the last of the fbi. and anyone else who's got visions of being that partisan in secretary cabinet level roles needs to rethink their past before they sign up for what trump is asking them to do. >> there's so much here, frank. i want to press on some of the substance of his answers. because i wonder if this statement that he offered today -- i know he wasn't -- i don't believe him to have been under oath but lying to congress is in itself a felony. but what about saying that he'd never talked to donald trump about the mueller investigation. it just seems to defy reason if even trump's allies have said publicly and privately that whitaker's mission as acting ag was land the mueller probe. whitaker's job before being acting ag was session's chief of staff. he was put in that job, i understand, by former white

house counsel don mcgahn after sessions recused himself from the russia probe to filter information back to the white house. what are the chances he never talked to the president about the mueller probe? >> it's strange credulity to think that kind of substantive conversation never took place. in fact, some of the longest pauses, if you look at his testimony today, some of the longest pauses, the point where you can see the wheels turning in his head, are when specifically he's asked about conversations with the president. i think what we're headed to, nicolle, is likely this committee or others calling to testify the career officials at doj who helped prepare him for this testimony. what was discussed in that? were there nuances? well, you talked to the president but, no, you actually talked to an aide to the president so you can say no if you're asked if you talked to the president. those nuances need to be brought out. there needs to be transparency

about this process and i don't think these questions are over today. >> chuck rosenberg, i want to get your thoughts and press on whitaker and his decision to ignore the advice he got to override that advice. i think that's important because i think we will be talking about robert mueller long after matthew whitaker. i want to press you on is this exchange, he was asked whether robert mueller was honest by congressman swallow. let's watch and talk about it on the other side. >> do you believe he's honest, yes or no? >> i have not reason to believe he's not honest. >> so you believe he's honest, you koept believe he's conflicted. can you say right now that the

president is not conflicted? >> i'm not a puppet to repeat what you're saying. >> i'm not a puppet? you could have fooled me p chuck rosenberg, just talk about this posture matthew whitaker is in, vis-a-vis the mueller problem, which he extensively oversees as the acting attorney general at least in this moment of time that we gather. and just the contortions today of the answers, refuse to say it wasn't a witch hunt, something deputy attorney general rod rosenstein had no problem doing. former attorney general jeff sessions had no problem doing. christopher wray has no problem doing. they know it's not a witch-hunt because they know the man and things about the investigation which matthew whitaker should have as well, no? >> you know that's exactly the word, he's a contorsionist. nicolle, it is so easy to say the following things, bob mueller is honest. bob mueller is straightforward. bob mueller is as true as they come. and this is not a wink hutch-hu?

why can't you say those things, the entire department of justice -- in fact much of the nation is watching you today. i don't know how somebody could be that cowardly. i don't know how somebody could dissemible that much. it really is distressing to me. chris wray, good man, rod rosenstein, fine guy. i had no difficulty knocking down the notion this was a witch-hunt. it's not a witch-hunt. never has been or will be with bob mueller at the helm. and if matt whitaker purports to know him the way that we do, he would be able to say that in front of congress under oath at any time. he couldn't do it. >> i want to get why that would be but i first want to go to the legal threats for the president lie and the answer i played at the beginning about the southern district of new york. he refused to stay he had not taken the step of trying to reassign individuals who work at

the southern district of new york and he wouldn't say that he didn't try to do that. why would that be? >> yes, so first there's a predicate we ought to discuss, and that is everybody right now in the southern district of new york is a career civil servant. i believe the u.s. toernl is at not confirmed by the southern district. you cannot define any of them. reassigning career asas would be extraordinary. all of that said, we discussed on your show, nicolle, the fact what's going on in the southern district of new york, the financial investigation of the campaign, of the inaugural committee, of the trump foundation, of the trump organization, of the trumps themselves is as important as the work bob mueller is doing. so you would also hope, although there's no reason to have any hope any longer in matt whitaker, but you would also hope he would be able to say that, he would protect the men and women in the southern

district of new york. he would see they're able to do their jobs, that they would follow the facts, draw all of their logical conclusions. why can't he do that? that also to me is deeply, deeply concerning. >> if you want to get to the bottom of whether matthew whitaker tried to obstruct the fdny investigation, how at this point would you do that, chuck? >> look, because they're career civil servants there, if anybody tried to obstruct their work, we will hear about that one way or another. i have always believed passionately in the mission pft department of justice and fbi and all of its components. and i also know you do not mess with their career civil servants. so i'm assuming because i've heard nothing to the contrary from the good men and women in the southern district of new york, i'm assuming that they are being permitted to do their work. it would also be nice if the person running the justice department would state on the record that i'm going to support

their work. he doesn't have the courage to do that but i am confident, nicolle, i'm really, truly confident they are going to pursue this investigation wherever it leads. >> do you think, chuck, we'll ever find out if a conversation took place between donald trump and matthew whitaker around the cohen sentencing about getting sdny to back off? is it knowable whether or not that ever went down? >> it's knowable, and it's knowable in a couple of ways. frank hinted at one of them. i agree with frank, the pauses, sort of the awkward stares, nervous glances tell you something, but they don't definitively answer the question. but matt whitaker talked to other people, whether it was the folks preparing him for his testimony, the people on his staff, somebody knows who he talked to. and so while we may never get the truth from matt whitaker, we almost certainly will never get the truth from president trump, i believe there are people who know nothing remains secret very long. at some point we're going to find out, i believe.

>> what struck me today is you sleep better at night thinking that the justice department, all of the abuse they take, all of the waves that crash on their shores, all of the attacks on comey and all of the attacks on all of the leadership of the fbi, all of them who are now gone, all of the attacks, you have in your mind this hope and belief they're all pushed back. what you saw today to from whitaker is some of the water gets in. it gets in through whitaker. it gets in through his office. he refused to say he did not try to intervene or reassign the southern districts or other offices. i imagine he didn't have the capacity to lie. i imagine that if he had, he would have given press about robert mueller and said no, that didn't happen. what are you left with? what impression are you left with watching whitaker then? >> this is a man whose long silences, his pauses were suspicious. he would not answer the question about whether he talked to the

president about michael cohen or about the southern district investigation. why not answer, of course i did not talk to the president about an investigation that implicates him that would be unethical. that would probably be a crime. but he could not say that. he did establish himself as the attorney general of president trump's fantasies. every time he had a choice between expressing fidelity to the rule of law and to the appearance of justice or on the other hand fidelity to donald trump, he chose president trump. he does not understand he's not the lawyer for president trump p he's the lawyer for the united states of america, and today in that role he failed miserably. >> the other thing that struck me is the recusal, if you refuse to recuse and the president you serve is under investigation for obstruction of justice, i'm not sure that's not more damaging evidence for the president, who has said on the record in media

interviews he wants a fixture there. he wants his own comey. what do you think of that? >> you saw whatever the president wants, you saw today in whitaker. you started it off, this is exactly what this was. an audience of one. and he went out there to perform. some of the things he said just defy logic in terms of what we know about president trump. the idea that the president who thinks all day long and all night long about his investigations, whether it's robert mueller or southern district of new york wouldn't be bring of knows things up. we know he's brought them up with almost everyone who's been around and doesn't respect traditional boundaries of law enforcement. >> he said he wouldn't do that is -- the idea he wouldn't do that is hard to imagine that's the case. >> and real quickly, this isn't just a post mortem on whitaker because he's going next week, so

the incoming attorney general, if he's confirmed by the senate, has also said that he won't obey the -- the advice of the ethics officers at the justice department. he said he will listen if they tell him that he should recuse himself because of statements that barr has made about the investigation. he will listen. but he hasn't committed to following that. >> i guess that's one good thing in terms of if you want to tack about what that testimony would do to morale in the department, that he's a short timer and he's not going to be there for but another week. >> i want to take chuck's position on it wasn't straightforward and odd he couldn't give straightforward answers to what should be straightforward questions, we have not really had overt signals from sdny or team mueller that they feel like they are being interfered with. and there is -- there are ways they could send those signals. the other thing if you are a champion of integrity and

transparency in the department of justice is one of the big things that was fear was mueller probe may come out while matt whitaker was the attorney general and he would have the power to essentially suppress it. it's pretty clear at this juncture he will not be there when that report is finalized and someone else's decision will be to release portions of it, all of it or just bottle it up. i will say though it's pretty evident what he was doing today was auditioning for another job. we know because there are reports before going on cnn. so this clearly a method he uses. i was struck -- we haven't talked about it but it was galling almost when chairman adler started talking and asked a question, his response was, mr. chairman, your time is up. as if he was the one conducting the hearing into himself. >> if he were a reality tv guy. i want to get on the record something that's a little uncomfortable. he's not thought of -- >> little nervous. >> he's not respected at the justice department in which he serves.

he's not respected in conservative legal circles and he's clear hi nly not respected the democrats. it will be apparent he doesn't have anything he takes to hold the job even as acting, is that clear to you? >> yeah, if we were to be honest about the situation, in no other administration at least recently would this person get anywhere close to this gig. he's not qualified for it for obvious reasons. he's way too close to the president politically. he's compromised in the fact he did not recuse himself. >> bobby kennedy was close to j.f.k. but he was brilliant. >> if you look at his private sector career too, and the nonprofit work he was doing -- >> you wouldn't vet out of a background check. >> also let's be frank about the context we are dealing with an incredibly delegate and possible

bombshell to the president. and this was not the same with bobby kennedy. in that context, he's clearly not qualified. >> not up for the job, constant theme. >> i felt that was one of the things that struck me so much watching the hearing, he's clearly not prepared. he was out of his be honest, th first time in the spotlight. >> which terrifies me. >> and it showed. >> he terrified everybody. after the break, tell-all from ousted acting fbi director described donald trump's effort to obstruct the russia investigation into excruciating detail. trump will not like this one. and amazon's jeff bezos fires back at his would-be blackmailer, the owner of the "national enquirer." the question now, did bezos threaten the cooperation agreement with federal prosecutors? osprecutors? oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar

and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin

may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you. so we improved everything. we used 50% fewer ingredients added one handed pumps and beat the top safety standards the new johnson's® choose gentle and back pain made it hard to sleep and get up on time. then i found aleve pm. the only one to combine a safe sleep aid, plus the 12 hour pain relieving strength of aleve. i'm back. aleve pm for a better am.

the latest inisn't just a store.ty it's a save more with a new kind of wireless network store. it's a look what your wifi can do now store. a get your questions answered by awesome experts store. it's a now there's one store that connects your life like never before store. the xfinity store is here. and it's simple, easy, awesome.

a soon to be released book penned by former fbi deputy director andy mccabe, who was a near constant target from abuse from donald trump, sheds new light on the circumstances surrounding jim comey's firing, a flashpoint in the obstruction of justice investigation. but as we know now, also one of the events that precipitated a counterintelligence investigation being opened up into donald trump. trump has claimed he fired former fbi director jim comey over comey's handling of the hillary e-mail investigation. and in a memo written by deputy attorney general rod rosenstein helped trump make that case. but new details in mccabe's book, according to an excerpt obtained by "the guardian" said rosenstein was distraught over

the use of the memo. quote -- rosenstein made his remarks at a private meeting at the justice department on may 12, 2017, according to mccabe's memoir. mccabe recalls rosenstein being glassy eyed, visibly upset and sounding emotional. he said it wasn't his idea, the president ordered him to write the memo justifying the firing, mccabe writes. rosenstein said he was having trunl sleeping. mccabe writes there's no one here i can trust, he's quoted as saying, all of which fits into reporting we read and talked about on this show surrounding that event and time period. right before comey's firing, "the washington post" reported trump had a meeting with the top two justice officials and gave him a directive to explain in writing the case against romi. "the new york times" detailed rosenstein's state of mind, reporting, quote, mr. rosenstein was caught off guard when mr. trump cited the memo in the firing and he began telling people he feared he had been used. everybody is back. chuck, remind people who andy mb

cane is in this story. his book comes out, he will join us when it comes out. and i imagine andy mccabe finally telling his side of the story is going to be a real trigger for this president, who's still under investigation for possible conspiracy with the russians and possible obstruction of justice. >> andy mccabe was a career fbi special agent. he started working on the streets of new york on organized crime cases. he had worked his way up through the fbi, serving as the assistant director in charge of the washington field office, became deputy director under director comey and when jim comey was fired, andy became the acting director of the fbi. i think he would tell you he made some mistakes, but on balance he's a fine, decent and honorable man. he's also a credible man. i believe that andy is telling the truth when he describes in

his book the way that rod rosenn reacted in the events of leading up to comey and the aftermath. i should add we're seeing this now, mueller had this for a year and three quarters. so you can be sure, darn sure, mueller followed up on all of the logical leads related to this firing and story surrounding it, as any good prosecutor would. >> frank, let me read you a little bit more what he writes because it's very similar to the picture you paint of how you as -- in your role might view the trump operation. mccabe writes in his sharpest criticism that after firing comey, trump and the white house counsel don mcgahn acted like mobsters by in effect offering mccabe protection in return for loyalty. the president and his men were trying to work me the way a criminal would operate, mcgabe writes, recalling a meeting soon after his allegation against the

acting fbi director. i think some of the other history that ensued, mccabe testified comey in fact had high morale and a lot of support that triggered the president, and then the president called and harassed him about mccabe's wife's political career. so the relationship fell apart probably shortly after this offer for protection in exchange for loyalty. >> you got a career fbi agent who's actually worked organized crime referring to the white house administration as a bunch of organized criminals, you need to pay attention to that. i think we need to understand where mccabe is coming from. if trump thinks that people of integrity, career people, lawyers, fbi agents, dedicated to our institutions and constitution are going to go quietly into the night without getting on the record about what they experienced, how they were treated, what he observed, then he's very, very wrong. they will have the last say. my second thought on mccabe and the book is we're now seeing

some of the strongest evidence -- as chuck said, special counsel has had this evidence for quite some time, but now we're privy to some of the strongest evidence we've seen yet of actual attempts at obstruction by the president. so not only do we see mccabe as an important witness in this, but now we've got to consider jeff sessions as a fact witness. we've got to certainly consider rod rosenstein as a major fact witness. if it's accurate he was directed and ordered to fabricate and write this memo on trump's behalf. >> rod rosenstein and i started out at the justice department together, and in his defense, what he was asked was is there a reason to fire james comey? and the answer under the justice department guidelines was yes. when comey commented on the ongoing investigation of hillary clinton in the heat of the election, he broke every rule in the playbook. and that's what -- >> isn't that what donald trump

asks everyone to do every day, comment on an ongoing investigation into russian collusion? >> it was wrong when trump asked and wrong with comey did it. there was a legitimate reason to be concerned. but at the same time rosenstein knew he was being played by the president of the united states. but that's obstruction of justice. mueller's got that information. there was always a question of whether rosenstein needed to recuse himself since at this point he was going to be a fact witness, that time has come. >> one of the reasons i think mccabe's book is so significant is because so much of what we have seen throughout the mueller investigation is you have the president on his bull horn criticizing, constantly talking, saying things on twitter and elsewhere, and then these other characters just not saying anything, because they're abiding by whatever regulations or integrity they have in their jobs, whether it's robert mueller or james comey. we heard from james comey. now we're going to hear from andy mccabe. what we learn with each of these -- and rod rosenstein may

have his time. obviously robert mueller will eventually have something to say. we learn something new every time and every time one of them says something, it always turns out to be damaging to the president. >> let me be the pessimist here i suppose. what mccabe's book reminds me of is that there are two types of damage trump inflicted. one is the obvious, the crime if there is one, of what he's done. but the second thing is just the distrust in the people in the institutions of this country. what he had done prior to the publication of this book -- >> criminal carnage. >> he basically has gone out and run a multi-month campaign to diminish andy mccabe's credibility on this. he called him everything in the book. he said his wife is conflicted. he said he's a liar. he fired him. which, of course, would made andy mccabe vindictive. so it's not just mccabe, it's everyone, including mueller himself. what's happening is a public divergence of opinion on obvious

fault lines. people who like donald trump will not believe a single thing in andy mccabe's book. people who don't like donald trump will believe everything. that's where we're going with a lot of this. there are few institutions and incredibly few people who can transcend that. maybe mueller is one but trump's doing his best. >> to me that's one way of saying that the people -- the president -- >> what the heck -- >> i thought i was short and to the point. >> that was a sound bite. >> the president sets the narrative already because these other characters are silent and by the time they speak, there's division. >> i'm not trying to judge rod rosenstein in that moment but he was pressured, obviously, to write this memo. he had a choice in that moment. he could have said no, spoken up, been fired or quit, or gone along with it. i don't think understood the magna tud of wh magnitude in that moment. >> and comey talks about in the moment he should have said

something. but you never know how you're going to act until something happens to you and they seem to happen over and over again around donald trump. when we come back, america's richest man beats back a blackmail threat from america's most infamous tabloid. that standoff next. searching for a way to help stop your cold sore? only abreva can get rid of it in... ...as little as 2 1/2 days when used at the first sign. abreva starts to work immediately to block the virus and protect healthy cells. abreva acts on it. so you can too.

♪ did you know you can save money by using dish soap to clean grease on more than dishes? using multiple cleaners on grease can be expensive, and sometimes ineffective. for better value, tackle grease with dawn ultra. dawn is for more than just dishes. it provides 3x more grease cleaning power per drop, which cuts through tough kitchen messes, pre-treats laundry stains, and even tackles grease build-up on car rims. tackle tough greasy messes around your home, and save money with dawn ultra. brand power. helping you better. i never count trthe wrinkles.s. and i don't add up the years. but what i do count on, is staying happy and healthy. so, i add protein, vitamins and minerals to my diet with boost®. boost® high protein nutritional drink

has 20 grams of protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals your body needs. all with guaranteed great taste. the upside- i'm just getting started. boost® high protein be up for life.

in the era of "access hollywood" tapes and russian spies, it's getting harder and harder to find scandals that leave you speechless. give 2019 credit, at least it's trying. the richest man on the planet risking complete humiliation by refusing to give into the demands of a trump-friendly supermarket tabloid after "national enquirer" published embarrassing text messages and photos publicizing amazon ceo's jeff bezos's affair last month. bezos launched an investigation in order to find out just how the tabloid got ahold of that material. here's where it gets crazy. fast for the to last night, bezos in a jaw-dropping blog

post, revealed what he called extortion and blackmail on the part of ami, the parent company of the "national enquirer." they privately demanded he make a statement that he had no knowledge or basis for suggesting ami's coverage of his affair was politically motivated or influenced by political forces. or they would release ten new embarrassing photos, including ones he's said to be naked. wow, 2019, you're killing me. instead of bowing to their commands, bezos published the e-mails. in response ami said it would investigate, saying it acted lawfully in the reporting of mr. bezos and at the time of the recent allegations made by mr. bezos it was in good faith negotiations to resolve all matters with him. complicating matters further though is this revelation from "the washington post" reporter having to do with bezos' investigator. >> he does not believe jeff bezos' phone was hacked.

he thinks it's possible that a government entity might have gotten hold of his text messages. >> which government entity? we don't know the answer to that question. but after bezos detailed ami's relationship with saudi arabia in his blog post last night, former cia director john brennan theorized, quote -- i have no doubt given "the washington post's" relentless and appropriate condom nation of mohammad bin salman for the killing of khashoggi, mbs would try to discredit, embarrass and hurt bezos financially if he could. what a mess. joining us at the conversation the perfect person to untangle this web, the political director of "the root." have on it. >> this is a house of cards going on. >> people got too much time. >> too much time. if there's anybody who i believe, and generally be would be skeptical of some super duper oligarch like jeff bezos but if

there's anybody who who know the technology behind how his phone would be hacked, it would be him. he has technology and access to the people with these resources. i don't think that's a flimsy came he made. he believes, look, nobody is going to get into my phone, this must be a government-level agency. >> and he hired vepgter investigators. and is it also speaks about this president as a whole, whether it's president trump, saudi arabia or his relationships with these dictators non-democratic countries his hostilities and decent for america are thank rs and jeff bezos, that's the zairy part, not a bunch of pics ending up on "tmz" or "national enquirer." >> frank, can you jump in, i think one of the problems ami faces is it's all so plausible. it's so plausible to anyone with a television or that even a

casual observer of the news, the pez president's closest media ally tried to blackmail and distort in the president's mind biggest media nemesis. >> yeah, it's very easy to believe. unfortunately, that's the stair -- state of affairs today. a lot of nuances here. you described the statutory elements of extortion in a federal statute. is the fbi getting called in? has bezos filed a complaint? is the fbi going to look at ami now as a subject? do we need to go back and look at the cooperation agreement that david pecker at ami signed off on? was it transactional immunity? was it we're giving you blanket immunity as part of a cooperation agreement? this is a new crime that's being exposed, and my thought is this will likely be prosecuted, and i think ami is in deep trouble. later on top of this, this

international intrigue of bezos possibly having his phone hacked into, very plausible in my career. in my career in corporate security, and my career in the fbi, i can tell you someone like bezos is a target. and wherever his devices go, they are being hacked into. so is it possible that some foreign power got ahold of his extramarital affair-related texts and/or e-mails and calls and provided them to ami? let's layer another question since we're engaging in possible conjecture, did the white house know anything about ami extorting bezos? did any of this come up in conversation? this adds another criminal element, and continues our organized crime theme of the day, which is that we're essentially dealing with a racketeering enterprise. >> let me put up the president's tweet on these topics because it's germane to the conversation we're having. i think the president just last month tweeted, so sorry to hear

the news about jeff bozo being taken down by a competitor, who's reporting. the idea the idea of the competitor is "the washington post" is saved for another show but another unwelcomed window into trump's mind. is more accurate than his lobbyist newspaper, the amazon "the washington post." hopefully the newspaper will be placed in better, more responsible hands. their obsession with "the washington post" is an open secret. they're obsessed with what they view as unfair. even more so than in "the new york times," which he calls the failing "the new york times," he's constantly sucking up to that paper's publisher. i want a nice story. they're obsessed with "the washington post." and the idea he directed a hush money scheme and he had michael cohen and ami involved in that. the idea he would direct a smear campaign with the same character is beyond plausible. >> does he even need to direct it? so many times we've seen the tweet and people who support the president and want to act on his behalf can pick up the signal.

it's not even that hard to decipher. i find like the layers of this story so crazy. first of all, they would put in writing the things they put in writing. >> yes. >> and i know chuck rosenberg has said to me before, criminals aren't necessarily smart. so they put things like this in writing. but the things they wrote -- and then you have bezos, who decides to kind of flip the script and shine a lot on this behavior, which is fascinating. and there's a whole other element to it in terms of who else have they done this to? and bezos is in position where he can stand up to this sort of behavior. so there's that culture aspect to it. and then there's the question of the ami agreement. >> let's talk about that. >> the agreement they can't commit crimes for three years. now they're reviewing the agreement. >> they like to be graded on a scale. but let's play nice.

ami is in a cooperation agreement with federal prosecutors to help them unearth and prosecute the hush money conspiracy theory and they're not supposed to commit any more crimes. >> they're given an essential pass, immunity in the first instance and the terms of that agreement say they can't commit criminal wrongdoing within a certain amount of time. if they were to be violated -- this totally puts that agreement at risk. >> never have i seen so many people have such a hard time not committing crimes for ten minutes, ten minutes. >> i i want to jump in because the daily beast has done a lot of reporting on this, some of stuff well before bezos came out with his own post. would i pump the brakes a tiny bitp bit the government entity hacked it. but there's a group of unsavory characters worth noting. here's the nexus, bezos' now girlfriend, her brother is michael sanchez. he's being looked at as part of the bezos' team internal

investigation. michael sanchez has connections to a variety of weird trump old figures, among them roger stone. we reached out to roger stone for our piece in reporting it. he denied hacking bezos' phone but what was weird about his denial is we never asked him if he hacked bezos' phone. he came out and said, i didn't hack the phone. that was a particularly bizarre quote. >> this is a story you're running tonight? >> this is a story we already ran. today we're looking into what i think a well-known history of ami of using things like extortion and blackmail to get these types of stories. it is crazy that we finally are getting a clear view of it, thanks to jeff bezos actually posting about it. but he's not the only victim of this. >> was mike flynn targeted for blackmail and jeff bezos not? no more excuses with cologuard.

we all make excuses for the things we don't want to do. but when it comes to colon cancer screening... i'm not doin' that. i eat plenty of kale. ahem, as i was saying... ...with cologuard, you don't need an excuse... all that prep? no thanks. that drink tastes horrible! but...there's no prep with cologuard... i can't take the time off work. who has two days? and i feel fine - no symptoms! everybody, listen! all you need is a trip to the bathroom. if you're 50 or older and at average risk, cologuard is the noninvasive option that finds 92% of colon cancers. you just get the kit in the mail, go to the bathroom, collect your sample,

then ship it to the lab! this is your year! own it! cologuard is not right for everyone. it is not for high risk individuals, including those with a history of colon cancer or precancer, ibd, certain hereditary cancer syndromes, or a family history of colon cancer. ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers.

ask (client's voice)ologuard remember that degree you got in taxation? (danny) of course you don't because you didn't! your job isn't understanding tax code... it's understanding why that... will get him a body like that... move! ...that. your job isn't doing hard work... here. ...it's making her do hard work... ...and getting paid for it. (vo) snap and sort your expenses to save over $4,600 at tax time. (danny) jody... ...it's time to get yours! (vo) quickbooks. backing you. 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. we're back. frank, i want to bring you back

in this conversation. jeff bezos -- and i trust all of sam stein's great reporting, and roger stone is a good likely subject. especially denying a crime he hasn't been charged with yet. i think talking about saudi araa because jeff besos wrote about it. this is from his post last night. it is unavoidable that certain powerful people will wrongly conclude i'm their enemy. president trump is one of those people obviously by his many tweets. the post essential and unrelenting coverage of jammal kashog kashoggi. kashog kashoggi knit together for me, frank, that observation, i think,

pretty diplomatically put, i think the "national enquirer" is an intersection between donald trump and saudi arabia, and there is signal intell that the "new york times" reported on that mbs saying in a recorded call that was intercepted that he wanted to put a bullet in shshk khashoggi. >> the enemy of my enemy is my friend. and that may be applicable when we're talking about ami, besos, and saudi arabia. understand that saudi arabia has a outstanding intentilligence

service. they are capable of a lot including operating inside of the united states. acting in their own interest and acting with an organization like ami. there has been reports that ami was seeking saudi funding for their media interpride. there is already a next suus. we could be looking at yet another foreign entanglement involving our media, this administration, and the attempts to stifle free and open reporting against this administration. >> prosecutors will have ami in a vice grip. they kwused to have some protection, now they're starting to look more like a criminal enterprise. in the michael cohen case, in open court, they admitted that

they funded hush money payments as a campaign contribution to donald trump. there was a nonprosecution agreement that required them to obey the law for three years and that was too much to ask. now we're looking at extortion, blackmail, and revenge porn if is not ami doing this bad stuff, it is individual people that when push comes to shove they will find out what happened. >> it is easy to prove because they wrote it out. >> i like when we're in a place where you can say revenge porn in the 4:00 p.m. hour. >> the enquirer at this point is not a newspaper at this point, they're digging up information on trump's enemy and publishing

it. isn't it what we saw with wikileaks and the russians. they hack into the dnc, hand it to wikileaks and we fed on the information. that's what we had here. some government entity, because i can't imagine that it doesn't -- the level of sophistication to break into jeff besos' information. >> he does have $63 billion to find out what happened. so the likelihood that that information is being used by foreign entity, and i don't think anyone could do it scout getting caught. >> and you can't emphasize enough how much they would go to great lengths to protect mbs, his image. there was the glossy magazine

that appeared around his time last year portraying him as reformer and change agent, and they not only have the capabilities, but they have the desire to do something like this and all in the interest of protecting what they see as the future of their entire country and livelihood. >> i read today that the relationship between the trump white house and the saady white house, what do you make of the inta in intamacy. >> i think it is part of the decision to turn power into profit. we keep learning of new and newer intanglements with foreign relationships and jared kushner

and so listatilicitation. that foreign heads of state have been complaining about being hit up by kushner and others in the administration. this will eventually come crashing down. you don't do it in a vacuum. there is too many eyes on this. this is not manhattan real estate deals. this is the real deal in geopolitics for the day. geopolitics for the day. take your razor, yup. alright, up and down, never side to side, shaquem. you got it? come on, get back. quem, you a second behind your brother, stay focused. can't nobody beat you, can't nobody beat you. hard work baby, it gonna pay off. you got this. with the one hundred and forty-first pick, the seattle seahawks select. alright, you got it, shaquem. alright, let me see.

introducing the new capital one savor card. earn 4% cash back on dining and 4% on entertainment. now when you go out, you cash in. what's in your wallet? ( ♪ ) ready to juvéderm it? correct age-related volume loss in cheeks with juvéderm voluma xc, add fullness to lips with juvéderm ultra xc and smooth moderate to severe lines around the nose and mouth with juvéderm xc. tell your doctor if you have a history of scarring or are taking medicines that decrease the body's immune response or that can prolong bleeding. common side effects include injection-site redness, discoloration or itching. as with all fillers, there is a rare risk of unintentional injection into a blood vessel, which can cause vision abnormalities, blindness, stroke, temporary scabs or scarring. ( ♪ )

juvéderm it. talk to your doctor about the juvéderm collection of fillers. talk to your doctor let's see, aleve is than tylenol extra strength. and last longer with fewer pills. so why am i still thinking about this? i'll take aleve. aleve. proven better on pain.

[cell phone rings] where are you? well the squirrels are back in the attic. mom? your dad won't call an exterminator... can i call you back, mom? he says it's personal this time... if you're a mom, you call at the worst time. it's what you do. if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance, you switch to geico. it's what you do. where are you? it's very loud there. are you taking a zumba class? >> that does it for our hour. i want to thank all of my guests, and i want to thank

chuck todd and all of our friends here in the washington bureau for lets ting us be heren a big day. >> the best thing about you being here on a friday, people get to see the secret glass door green courtroom behind you. people don't normally get to see that shot. there you go. >> very cool. >> and they don't know about our new swap, our new -- >> oh, we don't want to tell people about that. you just do it. >> i didn't tell. thank you, nicolle. thank you, if it is friday, it is prime for a fight. good evening, i'm chuck todd here in washington. we have another crazy day on our hands, a