from her. i had great pleasure to interview her live and you can find the episodes wherever you get your podcast. that is "all in" for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" starts now. >> thanks to you at home for joining us. happy friday. since it's friday, that of course, means ten pounds of news in a five-pound bag as usual. we should get a bigger bag for this day of the week. we got a lot to get to tonight including the still expanding still developing story first broken in the "new york times" last night that president trump over ruled career national security officials and ordered that his son-in-law jared kushner be given a security clearance despite whatever it was that turned up in kushner's fbi background check and in a cia review that led to him being denied a permanent security clearance until his father in law had to intervene. the president, the president's

daughter and mr. kushner's very famous lawyer appear to have made direct detailed and very false public statements about this matter before now. we're seeing tonight some sort of confused and to my eyes, slightly desperate efforts tonight to clean up some of those false statements. but this story is still developing tonight. we'll have more on that ahead. we're going to start tonight, though, with a little bit of breaking news. this document has just been filed tonight in the criminal case involving the president's campaign chairman, paul manafort. paul manafort, as you know, is due to be sentenced next week, thursday next week but a federal judge in virginia. this new filing tonight is manafort's best effort with his defense team to argue for lenience in that sentence from that virginia judge. quote, defendant paul j. manafort comes before the court for sentencing after having been convicted at trial of five counts of subscribing false

income tax returns, one count of failing to file a foreign bank account report, and two counts of bank fraud and mr. manafort acknowledges he received aand a victim and submits it to aid the court in determining an appropriate sentence. the u.s. probation office under sentencinga sentence range of 19.5 to 24 years. this range is clearly disproporti disproportidispoor -- dispo disproportionate. we get 40 or so more page what is paul manafort did is really no big deal and lots and lots of letters of support from his

relatives what a good guy he is. we get a reference to paul manafort being an alter boy. there is the inevitable mention of his humble beginnings. there is that odd clanging assertion that paul manafort quote spent his life advancing american ideas and principles. that was in the other sentencing memo in the other court he's facing charges, too. but here is the thing that i think is really going on here. here is why i think this sentencing document is important here because i think it explains a whole bunch of what we have been seeing recently in this case, and i think it explains something important about how this whole thing with the president's campaign chairman, how it may end up playing at the white house. this manafort case in virginia is basically done now, right? all that's left in that case is for the judge to pass sentence. that's where this document tonight is manafort's lawyers telling the judge that their

client should get a very light sentence because he was an alter boy. and you'll remember that case in virginia, remember what he was convicted for, tax fraud, bank fraud, stashing money overseas and overseas bank accounts without irs. those were the crimes in this case. nevertheless throughout their argument to the judge tonight in this new filing, manafort's defense team makes one argument to the judge over and over and over again about why manafort should not get a long prison sentence, and it is not an argument about tax fraud or bank fraud or foreign bank accounts. the argument they keep making over and over again to the judge tonight is no collusion. that's not even in the case. but that's what they are arguing to the judge. quote, in october 2017, unable to establish that mr. manafort engaged in any such collusion, the special counsel charged him in the district of colombia with crimes unrelated to manafort's work in the 2016 campaign. quote, several months later

manafort was charged in this district, allegations again unrelated to the 2016 campaign or any collusion with the russian government and just in case that's not enough in this filing tonight from manafort's defense team, both of those sentences i just read you, they both have footnotes and the footnotes to those no collusion sentences also say no collusion. the first one says quote, mr. manafort's guilty plea in the district of colombia case includes no charges he collided with the russian government. footnote two, the special counsel strategy bringing charges against mr. manafort had nothing to do with the special counsel's core mandate, russian collusion. and then again later on in the filing, your honor, let's come back to our main point. the prosecution in this case did not charge him with anything related to russian collusion and did we mention he was an alter boy who did no collusion, which is an even better way to do no collusion?

i mean, this judge, this federal judge in virginia was weighing paul manafort's sentence, he's not supposed to be sentencing paul manafort on whether or not paul manafort colluded with russia. this is tax fraud, bank fraud and foreign bank accounts. there is no reason for manafort or his lawyers to believe that the no collusion, no collusion argument is going to have any impact on how the judge interprets the sentencing guidelines and figures out how man manafort's conduct might bond to the sentencing guidelines. because of that, because they are making this argument, this no collusion argument that's external tho this case, i think it's worth recognizing and considering that the real idea from paul manafort's defense is that they are now aiming their arguments not necessarily at this judge, they are now aiming their arguments at the public, at the press and ultimately at the white house. it appears that their idea here

is that it would be more politically p politically palatable to get a pardon than a grown up alter boy that became a poor old normally corrupt guy who got away with his financial crimes for years and only got caught this time this year because of his unfortunate term at the helm of the campaign. poor corrupt guy never otherwise would have been caught, getting away with his corrupt stuff, how would he know it would fall on tax cheating because he ended up running this presidential campaign? oops, pal manafort tripped. that kind of guy is a more palatable target for a pardon than the president than a guy who was running the president's campaign while russia was interfering in the campaign to benefit trump and simultaneously this guy running the campaign was meeting frequently with a

russian guy who was linked to intelligence and among other things delivering messages back and forth between trump's campaign chairman and a putin linked russian oligarch tied to campaigns in other countries to affect other elections and not to mention suspected gigantic russian money laundering plots. that guy is maybe not as attractive a target for a presidential pardon. not at least in this environment with these dangling threads out there in erm thterms of the president's implication in the scandal. in this filing tonight and in this sentencing me ine ing memo the judge in virginia, in judge is being bombarded with this in collusion, no collusion message. it's inexplicable if you look within the four corners of what that case was about. but in the larger context, it might make sense. i also think it may explain what's been going on in the

other jurisdiction where paul manafort is set to be sentenced soon as well. this document that we got tonight again is for the virginia case. manafort is due to be sentenced there next week on thursday. the week after that, manafort is due to be sentenced in federal court in washington d.c. and like the virginia case, that d.c. case is also technically over with. manafort is guilty. the filings are in. the judge is deciding what he's going to get. nevertheless, there has been otherwise seemingly inexplicable furious fighting over the past week or so in that d.c. case. and it seemed inexplicable, it's starting to make more sense in terms of what it looks like manafort will be after here. you'll remember that in the d.c. case, that's the judge that ruled that paul manafort broke his cooperation with prosecutors when he lied to them intentionally about a few different matters. that determination by that judge in the d.c. case will have a major impact on the rest of paul

manafo manafort's life and sentence. just as one example, one ramification of that, her ruling that paul manafort broke his plea agreement, that ruling precludes manafort's defense from even trying to argue in her courtroom that manafort should get less than the sentencing guidelines when she sentences him in d.c. they can't even ask for that. because he signed a way the right to even ask for that when he entered into that plea agreement which he later broke when he lied. when the judge ruled manafort lied to the prosecutors about three separate matters, he really did seal his fate in a serious way in that d.c. case. that said, there was a little bit of a curveball thrown on that point this week. when the special counsel's office surprised everyone by notifying that d.c. judge they had turned up new evidence. they turned up new material on this issue of whether or not manafort had intentionally lied.

when i say material, even though the stuff was being shown to the judge, prosecutors told the judge this new material they turned up helped manafort's case. didn't help their side but manafort eastside and we don't know exactly what this new material was that the prosecutors turned up and dutifully handed over to the judge. we got filings on it but as you can see, it looks like mad libs. it's more redaxs than words. nobody has been able to put it together. we do know the material the prosecutor handed over to the judge appears to be about paul manafort's relationship with n konstantin kilimnik and assessed by the fbi to be linked to russian intelligence. apparently what p hahappened th week is manafort's co-defendant, deputy campaign chair rick gates, gates apparently saw news coverage about manafort's on

going legal case and him heading toward sentencing and what manafort lied to prosecutors about and something about that coverage made rick gates contact mueller's office to tell them hey, i've actually got something for you on that issue and whatever it was gates had, he brought it to mueller's office, mueller's office this week turned around and brought it to the judge in d.c. and told the judge hey, judge, this may be ex cu -- ex cull p tory and the issue of manafort lying about his relationship with kilimnik. the judge this week considered that new material that she got from prosecutors and late tonight, she just issued a ruling on it. this is that ruling in its entirety, it's a minute ruling so it's a minute order so it's not one of these long ones and even in this short minute order, it's got redactions.

she appreciates the clarification of the record, however, this new information that clarified the record quote does not alter the court's determination that the defendant paul manafort intentionally made multiple false statements concerning his interactions and communications with ckonstantin kilimnik. it doesn't help manafort's case. dude still lied about his interactions with ckilimnik. this issue turns out to be a very key area of focus. i mean, this is the last thing that manafort appears to be fighting to the proverbial death over as his criminal cases come to an end and he literally waits to find out if he'll die in prison. this is the last thing that he's trying to do. right? no collusion, no collusion. he's arguing at the virginia judge. with the d.c. judge he's arguing everything he can about

kilimnik. over the course of this past week, manafort's lawyers have been fighting specifically in the d.c. case to get stuff about c konstantin kilimnik and court filings and remember, that case is done. it's over. why are theyun unredact all this stuff. nothing is redacted to her? why do they care whether or not this is redacted to the public? they may be having an influence to the other judge in virginia. they may also be trying to influence public opinion about paul manafort and his links to russia or specifically links to russian intelligence.

and they may specifically be trying to say something to the white house about whether or not pardoning paul manafort would make it look like paul manafort was pardoning the guy to the russian campaign during the russian attack on the campaign. the special counsel's office said in court filings and prosecutors said in open court that this guy kilimnik, manafort's right-hand man, right? he is assessed by the fbi to have active links to russian intelligence. this big redactions fight happening in d.c., manafort's defense is insisting that other stuff about kilimnik needs to be unredacted to balance out that assertion that kilimnik is russian intelligence. specifically what they have been fighting to unredact in the filings and transcripts are their own assertions from the defense side that kilimnik is known to have met with u.s. personnel at the american

embassy in ukraine. okay. this is how -- this is the last big fight of manafort's case in d.c. yeah. his defense fighting tooth and nail to get references out from behind the black boxes so we the public can see that information. the judge in d.c. appears mystified why they are fighting so hard. this is from the judge. quote, we have on the record the assertion that kilimnik has connections to russian intelligence. i think there is a desire on the part of the defense that i understand to have on the record the defense assertion he is providing information to the u.s. government. quote, they were definitely, excuse me, there were definitely communications that kilimnik has with people in the state department. the judge says i don't think it's relevant but he's not denying it, so if that's something you want to say publicly, it's said is that enough? the judge continues to the extent you want the public record to reflect the fact he talked to the state department, okay, it's in there.

the judge says quote, i do think that this is just natural vent to what i have to do. it may be relevant to something, but it wasn't relevant to what i had to decide to which paul manafort's defense lawyer kevin downing says, well, then, it seemed to be relevant to the office of special counsel, otherwise they never had to say it or put it in one file. if it's relevant to the special counsel, it's relevant to mr. manafort. the judge says quote, you're still acting like these two things that one disproves the other, i don't find that. defense lawyer i know you don't, your honor. that's clear. it is important that there is no reason for this to be redacted. we think it's very important the allegation for the prosecution on more than one occasion about his being known to have connections to russian intelligence, it needs to be countered on the public record. it's very important. it's very important to mr. manafort and that's why we raise the issue again. we do think it's very important for that allegation of his known ties to russian intelligence to

be countered in a balance manner. again, the way they are trying to balance that out is by letting it be shown in the public record in unredacted court filings that kilimnik, yes, is assessed to be linked to russian intelligence. the fbi assesses him to be linked to russian intelligence but known kilimnik had conversations with people at the u.s. embassy and ukraine. the judge as i say appears bewildered that this is so important and that this is even a defense to the charge that kilimnik is linked to russian intelligence. i think that's key. that point where she says quote, you're acting like these two things, that one disproves the other. i don't find that. but as unimpressed as the judge is by what manafort and his defense team are trying to get in the public record about ka limb ma -- kilimnik, they are trying harder at the end of manafort's

rope and journey through the criminal justice system in the district of colombia and we don't know exactly why they are doing it except perhaps to try to create some sort of impression that maybe the issue of kilimnik being linked to russian intelligence is fuzzy and maybe manafort shouldn't be seen as the person who was linking the trump campaign to russian intelligence during the russian intelligence attack on the election. that is not an argument that is likely to matter to either judge within the four corners of these cases. but that's how they are finishing up. that means the audience is you and me and donald trump. so these legal cases continue. as of today, it is now march, remember when the mueller investigation was definitely never going to make it to march? it would be all over? it's march. and the mueller investigation is in tact and proceeds and these

different legal cases attached to it and related continue. i mean, the manafort case is taking this very interesting public sort of inexplicable no collusion turn at the very end trying to make the case about no collusion and konstantin kilimnik isn't a spy. the judges aren't considering that but nevertheless trying to make that the last public case. i think the audience is the white house. also, robert mueller and the special counsel's office this past week, they won a big case in federal appeals court. a former aid had been trying to get out of responding to the subpoena arguing the appointment was unconstitutional so he didn't need to respond to the subpoena. a federal appeals court one level below the appeals court rule in mueller's favor in that one. we got unsealed filings this week that make it look like mueller is probably winning his other big appeals court case as well. this is the case about the mystery corporation that's owned by a mystery foreign country.

we still don't know the country or the company but newly unsealed filings this week show that the courts at every stage have been very skeptical of that challenge to mueller, as well. ruling it every turn that the company does have to respond to mueller's subpoena and in fact, they do have to pay $50,000 a day in penalties until they compile with that subpoena. both of those appellate cases show that not only the special counsel's office, mueller's investigation appear to be on very strong legal ground also as a practical matter, both mean the grand jury that mueller convened is likely going to get new evidence from both of those entities that have receivedubpo both of them have lost or are losing their fights to not respond to the subpoenas that. that means more information to the grand jury. this week that was another surprise in the maria butina case. federal prosecutors say she is

continuing to cooperate with on going investigations. also the roger stone case proceeds a pace. the judge in that case being told by prosecutors today they expect the stone trial to take five to age deight days in cour ruling late tonight before we got on the air that stone once again appears to be banging his forehead into the low-hanging gag rule that that judge imposed on him and his counsel in the roger stone case, apaparently from her ruling it appears stone is involved in a book that is coming out shortly and the judge was never advised of that book and the book may somehow violate the judge's gag order that stone can't make public comments about the case. i don't know. we'll find out more on monday when new filings are due to address that issue with the gag order and roger stone i's case. that order coming as i sat down tonight. all of these legal cases are proceeding a pace and i want to put one other thing on your radar over what is happening on the courts and what might happen

next because of it. you may remember headlines a few weeks ago about buzz feed. buzz feed prevailing in a liable case that had been brought against them in federal court in florida. buzz feed of course was the entity that published the christopher steele dossier and sued by russian guy whose name appeared in unredacted fashion in that dossier. that liable case against buzz feed made headlines recently in december because that case, the liable case was not successful. buzz feed won the case. case was over. but now the judge in that case appears to have just ruled that a whole bunch of information and proceedings part of that case are going to be unsealed and shown to the public within the next two weeks. among those things that are going to be unsealed, is apparently, the deposition that was made in that case by chr christopher steele himself that became the famous/infamous

christopher steele dossier. steele gave a deposition for that case and has been fighting to keep that deposition under wraps and sited potential danger to i'm h self-ahimself or that . nevertheless, it looks like that federal court in florida will make the steele deposition public anyway, soon, this month. so these legal cases are humming. after michael cohen's testimony this week in congress, in addition to all the legal cases that are up hinhumming, cohen h will be due back before the house intelligence committee next week on wednesday. that same committee is saying they will solicit from alan weisselberg who is mentioned more than two dozen times. now as of tonight, massachusetts democratic congressman tells nbc news that he had initially

planned to wait for the conclusion of the mueller investigation before making any decision on whether he would seek president trump's tax returns, he tells nbc news now that well, given what's happened recently that he decided to go ahead with it. quote, weighs and meaays and me chairman richard neai d-mass has asked the committee's attorneys -- as early as the next few weeks. they kept tells us this was winding down. you thought this was winding down. turns out we're just getting started. stay with us. s out we're just gg started. stay with us guys do whatever it takes to deal with shave irritation. so, we re-imagined the razor with the new gillette skinguard. it has a unique guard between the blades. that's designed to reduce irritation during the shave. because we believe all men deserve a razor just for them.

the best a man can get. gillette. just as important as what you get out of it? our broccoli cheddar is made with aged melted cheddar, simmered broccoli, and no artificial flavors. enjoy 100% clean soup today. panera. food as it should be. you won't find relief here. congestion and pressure? go to the pharmacy counter for powerful claritin-d. while the leading allergy spray only relieves 6 symptoms, claritin-d relieves 8, including sinus congestion and pressure. claritin-d relieves more. with expedia, i saved when i added a hotel to our flight. so even when she grows up, she'll never outgrow the memory of our adventure. unlock savings when you add select hotels to your existing trip. only with expedia.

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

prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

what did he or his agent communicate to you? >> unfortunately, this topic is something being investigated right now by the southern district of new york and i've been asked by them not to discuss it and not to talk about these issues. >> the committee understands you've been in contact with the southern district of new york, is that true? >> i am in constant contact with the southern district of new

york regarding on going investigations. >> constant contact with the southern district of new york regarding on going investigation. you are? that was somewhat of a surprise from the president's long-time lawyer michael cohen this week for this specific reason. as recently as december, that federal prosecutor's office in the southern district of new york told a judge in writing that they were recommending a substantial prison term for michael cohen in part because cohen was not as helpful to them as he might have been. quote, to be clear the prosecutor said, cohen does not have a cooperation agreement and therefore not properly described as a cooperating witness sz that te -- as that term is commonly used. that is in december when he got his three-year prison sentence. they are saying cohen helped then out a bit but not enough to be seen as a cooperator and seen as qualified for a sentence reduction as a cooperator but now this week he says he is in

constant contact with the prosecutors regarding on going investigations. that made us wonder if something changed between december and this week. does michael cohen have a new arrangement with prosecutors? has he finally after the fact become a formally cooperating witness in sdny? while we think we have an answer to that and it's interesting, despite michael cohen's assertion this week that he is in constant contact with sdny on on going investigations, two sources close to michael cohen have confirmed to us that cohen is still not working under a formal cooperation agreement with sdny. he is not therefore a cooperating witness in a formal sense. everyone though he is meeting with them frequently and assisting them with multiple on going inquiries. after three straight days of testimony before congressional committees this week, next week

michael cohen has somewhat unexpectedly been called back for a second round of testimony before house intelligence. cohen's attorney lanny davis told us here on our show last night that that second invitation to cohen for him to come back for another day of testimony, that invitation was extended to him last night after quote new information developed, new information quote that really could be game changing. he told us quote the development of this new information is the reason cohen is coming back next wednesday. what does that mean? new information and how is it developing and what do you mean by game changing? joining us is eric of california. it wasn't his plan to have michael cohen return for another session with your committee, the intelligence committee. he said that became necessary after cohen developed new

information and characterized it's game changing and i know you don't tell us what he said behind closed doors but can you tell us if there is new information or broadly what it's about? >> he is not spinning, and we truly were at the edge of our seats listening intently as mr. cohen told us information that he certainly did not tell us in october 2017 when we interviewed him and certainly did not testify to during the open hearing and that was the arrangement was that he was going to make sure that when he testified to the intelligence committee, he wouldn't talk about anything that could compromise any other agreements he had or any on going investigations but we did take a deeper dive into what mr. cohen knows and we expect him to come back on wednesday with corroborating documents. >> he contents he has the documents to back up whatever h

closed doors. >> i watched him for ten hours in october 2017 and he seemed like someone who had, you know, an interest in protecting someone else as he did. he wasn't straight with us. there were a lot of i don't recalls if it was convenient to protect the president. but here he was very careful in his testimony. you could tell he wanted to understand the question. he didn't want to give an answer where he would be called to speculate and he put his hand on the hot stove and learned not to do that again and i think that as much as he talked about his family, that he does care to not spend the next ten years or the rest of his life in prison. >> part of that may not be his hope but effort. a reason we were trying to chase down whether or not he has a formal cooperation deal is even though he's been sentenced, if he provides prosecutors with information that's good enough for them to use it in the investigation or prosecution of another person at the judge's

discretion and at prosecutor's discreti discretion, that could be used to reduce his sentence and mr. cohen was coy about that or wasn't coy about that when he was speaking in that public session with the oversight committee. does that factor into how you assess his credibility? and do you have to factor that in in terms of not stepping on the toes of law enforcement matters? >> it's really interesting, rachel. he's a man without a life jacket. if that's what he's doing because without a cooperation agreement, there is no assurances with the prosecutors as to what they would do or recommend and so you know, that's why i think if he is indeed telling the truth, you know, he is risking telling a lot more about the trump organization and mr. trump than he had agreed to do and may not even benefit from it at all. and that's why i think you have to even, you know lend more credibility to that and when i worked as a prosecutor with people that had broken away from the gang as mr. cohen has,

sometimes just doing the right thing is what motivates them more than anything. i'm not naive. i know he wants to see his family as soon as possible, but it's important for us to take this information and fill it in by looking at other corroborating evidence out there. a lot of what he's told us matches other pieces of evidence that we had but now we're getting the color that we didn't have before. >> we had reports, congressman, the cfo of the trump organization and felix sater who is a former trump organization employee are executive, we had reports that they are both going to come before your committee hopefully soon. can you confirm they have been invited and can you tell us if anybody else is on your list? >> they are invited. mr. satyr will come on march 14th. it's long past time we take an mri to every organ and tissue in the trump organization to understand one, whether the president and his team and family are financially

compromised and understand today as he serves in the oval office, if he's making decisions that affect our national security to just benefit himself financially. there is reason to look. so those are certainly the two witnesses we have announce publicly but there are others we're learning about in these investigations who will help us better protect our democracy, and the american people from a potentially compromised and co-resulted president. >> from the intelligence committee, sir, thank you for being with us. >> my pleasure. thank you. >> still a lot to get to tonight. stay with us, a lot to get to tonight. stay with us . technology. the most available driver assist techonology in its class.

the new 2019 ford edge you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase sensimist relieves all your worst symptoms, including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist. you can barely feel. when it comes to reducing the evsugar in your family's diet,m. coke, dr pepper and pepsi hear you. we're working together to do just that. bringing you more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all. smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels and reminders to think balance. because we know mom wants what's best. more beverage choices, smaller portions, less sugar. balanceus.org

♪ 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? now when you go out, you cash in. one day, i found a lump on my right breast. in a small town, we don't have a health center on every corner. it would take three to four weeks to be seen. so i called planned parenthood, and they got me in that day. the trump-pence administration just issued a new policy blocking access to care at planned parenthood which could have a devastating impact on millions of people nationwide. had i have waited a day, i would have had stage iv cancer. planned parenthood saved my life. text titlex to 22422 to learn more.

. you will recognize this top white house staffer as jared kushner. senior advisor and son-in-law to the president. here we have jared kushner and his super lawyer abby representing mr. kushner and his dealings with congress and the russia investigation and so on. these are the leading news reports over the past 24 hours that say he got a top secret security clearance only after the president ordered that jared be given one. over the objections of intelligence officials who review these things for a living. but now check this out. this is new tonight. if you know somebody who says they don't believe in evolution, show them this. here are the changing statements from abbe lowell, about how exactly his client jared kushner

got his top secret security clearance. yesterday to the "new york times", this is the first one. quote, in 2018, white house and security clearance officials affirm that mr. kushner's security clearance was landhand handled in the regular process with no pressure. tonight we got statement number two from abbe lowell. we were not aware of nor told of any requests for or action by the president to be involved in the security clearance process. that's statement number two. we were wondering who is included in the we there? yet another statement came in from jared kushner's lawyer abbe lowe lowell, the third one of the last 24 hours and this third one is notably focused on abby loul

h -- abbe lowell himself. mr. lowell was not aware of or told by action by the president to be involved in the security process. they affirmed at the time the regular process occurred without pressure. they told me it was regular process. i mean, abbe lowell is saying don't ask me, ask them, ask the white house. mr. lowell was not told of anything the president might have done about ordering up a top secret clearance over objections. can we -- i don't know if we can do this graphically. do we try to cram all of that evolution into one page for a second? can we do that tiny print? in 24 hours jared kushner's lawyer had to go from no, dad didn't intervene to get jared a clearance. statement one, to okay, maybe dad did intervene to get jared a clearance but if so, jared had no idea about that. to statement number three, okay,

maybe dad did intervene to get jared a clearance but if so, jared didn't tell his lawyer about that. in fact, his lawyer might have been lied to about this which is the only reason his esteemed lawyer might have ever lied to the public about it unwittingly. jared might have known but abbe lowell was in the dark. don't blame him. 24 hours, one guy. as reporting has continued on exactly this point, this is looking bad in terms of how the white house is handling this story and raising questions about whether or not jared kushner gets to keep his super lawyer who among other things has been helping him with russia stuff. lawyers do break up with clients when they find out their clients are lying to them and the lies cause the lawyer to make false statements and they have to put out multiple evolving corrections for in one night and that little part of that story is jared kushner's to figure out now. the bigger problem for the rest

overus of us is just ahead. stay with us. of us is just ahea. stay with us

7. now that i'm chairing that committee and the democrats are in charge of the house, they said they will cooperate. we have people going up to new york to sit with his people and go over our document requests. >> so you have staffers that are coordinating with the -- i imagine attorneys at deutsche bank on document production now? >> i do. >> wow, that's news. there is two pieces of news tonight for which i feel like we need some presidential scandal perspective. number one, is that breaking news that happened with chris hayes here on msnbc last hour, maxine waters announcing her committee staff are going to deutsche bank offices and coordinating with deutsche bank to begin producing documents related to the committee's request which are about the president's finances. that's a big deal. has that ever happened before

with the sitting president? similarly there is the still developing story from "the new york times" the white house chief of staff and counsel wrote memos to file which are apparently somewhere in the white house right now expressing their concern and objections to the president over ruling national security officials to give his son-in-law jared a security clearance despite whatever turned up in jared's background that led national security officials to not clear him before the president intervened. has that ever happened before and b, does history tell us whether or not we ever get to see those white house memos that explained w explained what happened and objections? joining me is michael. great to have you here. thanks. >> thank you, rachel. >> let me ask you about the breaking news we got from chairwoman maxine waters. she says congressional staffers are basically obtaining

financial information about the president's finances that he himself refused to give. is this historically unprecedented territory? >> not a bit. congress is now doing its job it should have been doing for the last two years. in 1973 richard nixon, there was a report that nixon had seriously underpaid his taxes, 1970, 1971 he paid less than $1,000 each of those years. congress investigated, they found that it was absolutely right. nixon had taken illegal tax deduction, backdating a gift of his vice presidential papers to the national archives. he owed $475,000 which he had to pay up, half of his net worth. in the process, nixon voluntarily gave his tax returns to congress so that they could track this down. >> and that relates to the other breaking news story we had tonight from chairman neil from ways and means who said that although he had previously planned, the previous plan had been to wait until the end of

any mueller investigation before they started about wanting to obtain the president's tax returns. it now sounds like they have tasked staff attorneys on that committee with pursuing them. >> that's right. >> i'm struck by the president's reported sensitivity, specifically on the issue of deutsche bank. his relationship with this bank, his personal finances, his business finances. for maxine waters to that deutsche bank is happeneding ov -- handing over materials, that seems like banking materials, financial stuff that the president wants hidden that he's very sensitive about, that seems to me almost closer to him than his taxes. >> yeah. you are quoting the word game changer earlier in this hour. we may be seeing that right now. >> on the issue of these security clearances, michael, there are these reported memos by former chief of staff and former white house counsel john kelly and don mcgahn that according to "the times" object to the president overruling national security career staff

in order to give jared kushner a clearance. and the issue of giving somebody a clearance in this way is one thing. that's a whole kettle of fish. i'm very -- my interest is piqued by the existence of these memos. as a historian, what can you tell us about whether we might ever see those memos. >> number one, mcgahn and kelly would not have written those memos saying they objected to the security clearance unless it was pretty bad and they wanted to get on the record that they were opposing a decision that was being made that they thought was damaging to national security. the problem in terms of your and my finding out what was in those memos is, in terms of actually seeing them, unless someone decides to leak them, these might be said to expose sources and methods. let's say the objection to the security clearance was bad information on kushner that had been learned through interception of a conversation between two russian officials.

so the government would say to release that would expose sources and methods. you know, the president is, for instance -- jay oppenheimer had a security clearance withhold by dwight eisenhower in 1954. some of the documents took 60 years to come open. i hope we don't have to wait that long. we may get a leak or get people talking about what's in them. >> michael beschloss, i knew you would know. appreciate you being here. thanks. >> my pleasure. >> more to come, stay with us. y >> more to come, stay with us. ♪ let me be by myself in the evenin' breeze, ♪ ♪ listen to the murmur of the tall concrete, ♪ ♪ send me off forever, but i ask you please ♪ ♪ don't fence me in. ♪ don't fence me in.

because they let me to customize my insurance, and as a fitness junkie, i customize everything. like my bike and my calves. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ my mom washes the dishes... ...before she puts them in the dishwasher. so what does the dishwasher do? cascade platinum does the work for you, prewashing and removing stuck-on foods, the first time. wow, that's clean! cascade platinum. metastatic breast cancer is relentless, but i'm relentless too. mbc doesn't take a day off, and neither will i. and i treat my mbc with everyday verzenio- the only one of its kind that can be taken every day. in fact, verzenio is a cdk4 & 6 inhibitor for postmenopausal women with hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer, approved, with hormonal therapy, as an everyday treatment for a relentless disease.

verzenio + an ai is proven to help women have significantly more time without disease progression, and more than half of women saw their tumors shrink vs an ai. diarrhea is common, may be severe, and may cause dehydration or infection. before taking verzenio, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection. verzenio may cause low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infection that can lead to death. serious liver problems can occur. symptoms may include tiredness, loss of appetite, stomach pain, and bleeding or bruising more easily than normal. blood clots that can lead to death have also occurred. talk to your doctor right away if you notice pain or swelling in your arms or legs, shortness of breath, chest pain or rapid breathing or heart rate. tell your doctor if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include nausea, infections, low red and white blood cells and platelets, decreased appetite, headache, abdominal pain, tiredness, vomiting, and hair thinning or loss. i'm relentless. and my doctor and i choose to treat my metastatic breast cancer with verzenio. be relentless. ask your doctor about everyday verzenio.

i may have seen this week amid all the news going on that there was finally an arrest and an indictment. and that botched/stolen congressional election in north carolina. here's some slightly jaw-dropping news about how exactly that went down this week. mccrae dowless is the operative in question. he worked for republican congressional candidate mark harris. do y dowless was arrested and indicted this week. he ran the same illegal election scheme in races up and down the ballot in that part of north carolina for years. but this week when mccrae dowless got arrested, the guy who turned up to bail him out is an elected county commissioner in north carolina. who maybe doesn't care so much about his reputation in this matter. local station wral asked why he

did that. >> the reason i've got him out and other people have assisted is with him being out, we can have legal people contacting him to get to the bottom of the true source of what has been going on with elections in bladen county for a long time. >> mccrae dowless denies any wrongdoing and is expected in court next week. watch this space. in court next week. watch this space with expedia, i saved when i added a hotel to our flight. so even when she grows up, she'll never outgrow the memory of our adventure.

unlock savings when you add select hotels to your existing trip. only with expedia. select hotels to your existing trip. with tough food, your dentures may slip and fall. fixodent ultra-max hold gives you the strongest hold ever to lock your dentures. so now you can eat tough food without worry. fixodent and forget it.

one quick note before we go tonight. newly announced presidential candidate jay inslee, the governor of washington state, will be my guest live in studio on monday night. it will be his first cable tv interview since he announced today he is running for president. i'll see you then. now it's time for "the last word" with lawrence o'donnell. >> good evening, rachel. i just pulled a rachel maddow here. i just ran into the chair about two and a half seconds ago. >> do you need to catch your breathe? >>