snapchat and whatever else i'm on. nicolle wallace now. it's 4:00 in new york. the deadline for house democrats for the release of the full unredacted mueller report, along with all the evidence that supports its find i guess is highly unlikely to be met by the justice department. as a result, attorney general william barr is now facing the prospect of a subpoena fight for the mueller findings. barr last friday offered to make a redacted copy of the mueller report available within weeks falling short of promising the full copy democrats are demanding. with the outcome of the obstruction of justice investigation into the president left unresolved by the special counsel, there is increased urgency on the part of the democrats to understand the conduct that led mueller to basically refuse to render a judgment on the obstruction case. that plus public polling that shows the president's exoneration tour had little impact outside of trump's base

guarantees that the standoff over the nearly 400 page report is no short to enter a fraught chapter politically and legally. the chairman of the house judiciary committee writing today in a letter to the ag, quote, while we hope to avoid resorting to compulsory process, if the department is unwilling to produce the report to congress in unreaccount todayed form, we have little choice but to take such action. we also reit our request, not in a month but now to explain decision toss first provide congress with characterization of the mueller report as opposed to the report itself. to initiate a redactions process that withholds critical information from congress and to assume for yourself final authority over matters within congress's constitutional purview. the president clearly unnerved by the looming information in those 400 pages offend a

conspiratorial tirade today in the oval office. >> the attorney general now, and the deputy attorney general ruled no obstruction. they said no obstruction. so there's no collusion, there's no obstruction, and new we're going to start this process all over again. i think it's a disgrace. i have great respect for the attorney general. i live by what he says. i'll tell you this, nothing you give them, whether it's shifty shift or jerry nadler, who i've known, he's been fighting me for half of my life in manhattan, we could give them -- it's a 400 page report, right? we could give them 800 pages, and it wouldn't be enough. >> here to discuss -- sometimes you've just got to laugh. here to discuss the state of the mueller release, our favorite reporters and friends phil rucker white house bureau chief with the "washington post" with us on set. elise jordan former aide to bush

why is, rick stengel and our special guest, former u.s. attorney for southern district of new york and author of the new book "doing justice, a prosecutor's thoughts on crime, punishment, and the rule of law." last time i saw you, we were in our podcast cardinals. >> i dressed up for you. >> all gusyed up. >> i look like an author. >> if you're traumatized you had to watch the process in the makeup room. >> very interesting. >> sorry about that. a strategy to get you off your game. the president, it seems, between the mueller report being summarized by barr with not a single complete sentence included -- does someone like robert mueller at the end of a process have something that can easily be cut and pasted in terms of a summary? why the decision no not include a single complete sentence, would you guess? >> i don't know what bill barr was thinking. we had pressure to put something out. i think it would have been untenable from his perspective

to not say anything at all about the report for a week, two weeks, the amount of time he thought he needed to have a redacted version. >> is it harder or easier to pull fragments of sentences. >> depends on what your point is. if your point is to give optically, nice, well varnished gloss to the report, it's probably easier to pick and choose and cherry pick. i don't know how much distortion there is, if any. obviously when you have -- it took us a while to learn how long the report was. when you have a 400 page report minus appendixes and a four-page letter summarizing it, obviously it's going to have a lot of omission. so the devil will be in the details. maybe there's a lot omitted and it will be an eye-opening thing. maybe the summary is pretty fair and there won't be anything to see there. i tend to think that's not the case on obstruction. there will be a lot of eye-opening things. >> you know someone at the center of the obstruction of justice investigation. tell us about him.

>> andrew goldstein, who i don't have any contact. i haven't spoken to him since he worked for me as chief of corruption in the southern district of new york. he like all the other people i understand on the mueller team is careful, is thorough, is fair and fearless. so you know, a person like him, like the other people on the team and the people i knew in the southern district i talked about in the book, they will go where the evidence leads. they are good a the marshalling the evidence. we talked about before hand. people think they knew a lot of thips that went into the thinking on obstruction. we know 50, 60% of it. barr letter says lots of things did maybe untoward or evidence of obstruction he did publicly. what you forget is that prosecutors have a way of marshalling the evidence. in a trial, at the end of a trial, sometimes even the defense lawyers are taken aback even though they have seen all the evidence unfold. i saw andrew do this against the

speaker of the assembly silver. when you marshall it and it's not coming in piecemeal and it's fact after fact after fact woven together into a narrative, why the government believed a particular person engaged in bad conduct, it can be really compelling. if the pen was in andrew's hand or someone else like him, it may be -- speculating -- the portion of the report on obstruction is not going to sound as nice as bill barr would let us have. >> so the portion on obstruction levels a litany of misconduct, conduct unbecoming of a president. then at the end they neither admitted they would prosecute donald trump, neither did they make a determination to issue a declination letter. what would he have had to be hung up on not to issue one way or the other. everyone said to exonerate him. they insisted the language -- someone insisted the language,

do not exonerate, is in the obstruction summary. >> i think it's kind of amazing it's in the mueller report and bill barr felt compelled to have it in his letter. >> do you think bill barr put it in there? >> the letter? i think bill barr is a pretty smart guy, whatever you think is the conflict of obstruction, a prejudgment. he's very smart and very shrewd. one thing you have to know if you're a good lawyer, front the bad stuff. you can't ignore the bad stuff. when you have a witness on direct examination if your witness has problems if michael cohen testified in court, one of the things he would be asked about, did you not get convicted of lying to congress? one of the most terrible things for the president in the underlying report that we know about is it explicitly says we did not exonerate the president on obstruction of justice. i feel like bill barr needed to have that in the letter to have credibility later. what's interesting is why bob mueller put it anticipating the

rhetoric of the president, the menu exonerates me at the diner. everything in the world, a great episode of "veep," i'm exonerated. it doesn't work like that. they felt the need to sort of anticipate that rhetoric and refute it. then of course bill barr comes in and puts his own exoneration on top of it when i think it was meant for congress. >> you again, and i'm only pushing on this because you know him and you know his work product. for him to have been part of the obstruction team and to have recommended not just that they adhere to policy you don't indict a sitting president. maybe to live in reality where for the latter part of the mueller investigation matt whittaker was the acting ag and then barr, who in a memo wrote that mueller should never be able to interrogate the president on obstruction. the president's lawyers ruled out answering questions, even written questions about obstruction. could an obstruction of

investigation have been completed if you couldn't interview the president, you couldn't look at written answers and you knew between whittaker and barr you couldn't win a subpoena fight. >> that may have been one of the reasons why there was no decision. there's an another completing an investigation is a misnomer. there's always obstacles. maybe the president's team wisely or unwisely threw up obstacles they needed to throw up. it's sometimes not possible to talk to wit they did. sometimes witnesses die, go south, lie to you. what i have confidence in is they did as complete an investigation as they could. this question that a lot of people, friends of mine, former prosecutors are wondering about, not compelling the president to come talk, there are various theories about that. one is fairly compelling that to go down that road, just like senate judiciary -- house judiciary is going down the road of a subpoena, that takes a long time. to the extent bob mueller really did mean it when he said to himself presumably i don't want

to make this my life's work. i want to end this 22 months later. people thought a long time. to have ended it at the time he ended it and given it to other folks, he couldn't have gone down the road of a fight all the way to the supreme court on a subpoena, that would conclude after the next election possibly pr . >> phil rucker it would be appear -- not many people as smart, but the president talked to people who knew this terrain, what he just explained to me and all of us, that prosecutors like the team that worked on the obstruction investigation into donald trump would surely have marshalled all the public facing conduct into a narrative that could be devastating. >> yeah, that's right, nicolle. in that 400 page report a few pages detail the narrative that the special counsel's team found. the president's lawyers were telling him all along that this

material the special counsel's team was gathering could be politically damaging for him but it was so essential for the president's team that the president never sit for an interview with the special counsel and it's what their lawyers consider the greatest victory in all of this. they never had the president sit for that interview which would have been the last piece of evidence mueller never marshalled. it just didn't happen. we don't know why it never happened. we don't know if there were questions in the department of justice about a subpoena to compel the president and what came of that decision. perhaps mueller will explain it in the report. that's another thing that was very much front and center for the president and his lawyers. >> as the conversation, bill rucker, has shifted to the obstruction part of the report, the name that keeps coming up both in legal circles and political circles is don mcgahn. how much did don mcgahn tell him and what did mueller think of accounts of flash points, attempted firing of mueller,

attempted recusal of jeff sessions, the firing of jim comey. is there any anxiety in the counsel's office about that? >> there has been anxiety at times about don mcgahn's koomgs along with other white house witnesses but part of the president's strategy to let them cooperate in part so mueller could get answers from witnesses other than the president. because if the president were to do that interview he likely would have not told the truth and committed perjury. in terms of what don mcgahn said in 30 some hours of interviews with mueller and his team, we simply don't know. i would love to know that information. perhaps someday we'll find out. clearly mcgahn was present for so many moments including deliciouserations in the white house about firing comey and so many of the president's outbursts over the last two years about forney general jeff sessions, rod rosenstein and

others he was trying to get rid of at various moments. >> the standoff between the house judiciary -- it's actually six committee chairs that banded together to demand the unredacted report. the moment they have sort of the wind at public opinion at their back. frankly every republican in their house voted for the full release of the mueller report, do you think the politics are so immovable by the undercurrents the 40% base makes up exonerated no matter what the report had said they probably would have believed that. do you think that the politics stay the same in the near term? >> i think while democrats have a winner in terms of the transparency argument, getting out the full report so the american public has what mueller did, and they have the evidence at hand, i think the obstruction of justice argument isn't going to sway anyone who supports donald trump already. they assume that obviously donald trump did anything he

absolutely could, no matter how dirty, to obstruct justice and keep himself out of trouble. i think the risk -- i actually think that donald trump could be politically stronger right now than he has at really any other moment in his presidency. >> rick. >> you know, the thing i'd be curious about, i'm going to do a melange of things here. the thing i'm curious about was how much mueller was influenced by justice department memos you can't indict a president. remember, bill barr wrote an unsolicited memo to the white house that basically said the chief executive officer of the united states cannot be guilty of obstruction under any circumstances. i want to go back to something preet set about what prosecutors do, they marshall facts, tell a story. the mueller report is going to be a fascinating story. i'll even go to the collusion angle. i went back and looked at the indictment of the 13 members of research agency in st. petersburg. this is something we knew about in government. i learned so much in this

37-page indictment, i cannot wait for the full mueller report. they had russians who came to the united states who tried to make contact with the trump campaign. i still believe both sides wanted to collude, they were just too incompetent to be able to do so. >> even the president's allies will say that. i was expecting a melange, so i want more for you. i don't even know what that means. i've got that word of the day thing. you're my smart eest friend. let me come back to you. if you look at other places where the president has been the weakest, where he's done conduct that would look like obstruction, we found out after the sentencing memo came out, most lab reality and did elabore story we since learned donald trump made efforts to obstruct that investigation, wanted to pull unrecusal play which are he says isn't a thing.

unrecusal isn't a thing. to both of you, to this idea about storytelling, this seems to be something they are starting to convey to the president. you see it in his outward facing flailing of what that might look like. >> there's a world of difference between having corrupt intent and actually committing a crime. you know, do we want a president that has committed crimes? no. do we want a president that violated every ethical and moral norm, we don't want that either. it might be the report says, look, we can't indict him for this, there was no collusion for this. in 1,000 different ways, he did things that made him unfit to be president even though you cannot indict him. >> let me show you some of what chris christie said was happening at sdny. >> southern district has two tour guides, a tour guide through the inaugural and campaign and rick gates and a campaign through his business and personal life and michael

jackson co-- michael cohen. you don't want your lawyer, deputy executive of inaugural as tour guides looking for criminality. >> do you agree sff an old phrase from the movie, is it bad as opposed to good? >> yeah, it's not great. chris christie is right. >> for trump. >> we agree on bruise sprice spn and this. two things for former federal prosecutors to agree on. we want to caution people. maybe everyone won't love hearing this. lots of people don't love the president, think he shouldn't be president, want to be delivered from that. i might be one of those people also. doesn't mean you'll be delivered from that in make place other than the ballot box, doesn't mean by bob mueller. his job was not to get the president. the southern district's job, the place i used to lead, was not to get the president. maybe they will find evidence of a crime, maybe they will have something to say in a courtroom,

hush money or something else or trump organization but people don't like the dreirection of t country and moving away from the ideals of the country should be about, immigration or decency or rule of law, then they should set their sights and their energy on doing things politically. it seems ultimately that's how it's going to be resolved anyway in congress. what i can say about the people in the southern district who i read about in the book, all these people whose names you don't know and faces you're not familiar with, they are strong, progressive, fair minded. if they find things they think are wrong and cross the line into criminality they will say so and bring the cases against the president themselves with the policy. if they don't, they will do the right thing there, too, and walk away. they are not going to be swayed by public opinion and blood lust or any sort of penchant for forgiveness because people like the president. >> as a lifelong republican i never thought i would utter

these words but the sentiment of the resistance, no expectation federal prosecutors would deliver us from trump, i think there's a hope no one is above the rule of law. you stopped taking his phone calls when you still were the u.s. attorney. why? >> the city united states attorney in the southern district of new york who has jurisdiction basically automatically by definition -- >> were you already investigating him? >> i don't talk about investigations i did or didn't do. >> why would he call you? he likes to check in on the government and how the government is going. we know that. phil rucker can testify to that. >> he called me a couple of times during the transition. >> why? >> he wanted to chitchat. >> he called jim comey, too. >> my view is he's a person who wants people in certain positions that are important to him or may become important to him to protect him -- >> why would federal prosecutors be important to him. >> he's got trump organization, trump foundation. >> under investigation.

>> whether or not under investigation, they have them in that district. maybe a nice thing to have someone on your side. tried to do the urchin recusal -- >> people that talk -- donny deutsch who has become a character witness to how trump rolls speaks of decades of corrupt business practices. surely donald trump if he was smart enough to become president is smart enough to know he was probably under investigation by the southern district of new york or soon would be to call you. no offense. you're pleasant company. >> i do jokes. >> you do jokes. do you really think he was calling you for any reason other than to sway your opinions about the things you were investigating? >> i think ultimately he probably had an interest in cases that were happening, unfolding, some publicly, or could happen later. he said to jim comey, i want your loyalty. i want to be careful to say he didn't say anything untoward to me in the two calls we had during the transition. i don't know if he would have

said anything untoward to me in that phone call. i have no doubt that ultimately when his back was up against the wall he wanted a favor done, this is how he's made himself clear to the public about jeff sessions who he said, if jeff sessions was loyal to me he wouldn't have been recused. the implicit nature of that he's going to help me, or the replacement. he's smart enough to know some things. he's not smart enough to know it doesn't work that way. whether me, berman, down the line they are not going to do the bidding of a president for political reasons. they are going to do what's right. i'm proud of the fact i didn't return the president's call. >> that you even have to say that proves my point. the public isn't looking for federal prosecutors to get rid of president trump. there's some guardrails where even the president isn't above

the law. >> that's correct. >> after the break, the looming national security threat offer house security process. a house hearing gets heated over subpoenas. we'll bring you the latest and the president's favorite political punching bag, puerto rico and its citizens who the white house again describes as residents of another country today. donald trump, the cheater in chief. a new book explains what trump's commitment to cheating at golf tells us about the likelihood he's cheating in politics. all those stories coming up. tho. security number on the dark web. good, cuz i'm a little worried about my information getting out. oh, why's that? [bird speaking] my social security number is... 8- 7- 5 dash okay, i see. [bird laughing] is that your daughter? no, it's a macaw. and his name is timothy. timmy, want a cracker? timmy, do you want a cracker? [bird speaking] what do you think, kevin? no. sign up online for free. discover social security alerts.

signnow kayak and opentable let you earn travel rewards every time you dine. with just one reservation on opentable, you can start saving money on hotels with kayak. get started at kayak.com/diningrewards.

all of you.

how you live, what you love. that's what inspired us to create america's most advanced internet. internet that puts you in charge. that protects what's important. it handles everything, and reaches everywhere. this is beyond wifi, this is xfi. simple. easy. awesome. xfinity, the future of awesome. over and over again i hear these comments about, oh, they

are just trying to embarrass the president. no, that's not what we're trying to do. what we're trying to do is protect our secrets. >> every day that we go on without getting to the bottom of this matter is a day that we are putting hundreds, if not potentially thousands of americans at risk. >> i'm old enough to remember when republicans used to say things like that. house democrats there sounding the alarm over new allegation from a whistleblower that the white house overruled career staff members who denied white house staffer security clearances. today the house oversight committee voting to authorize the subpoena for the official at the white house who allegedly made those decisions. this latest escalation in the standoff between the white house and congressional democrats comes as new reporting in the "new york times" describes the impact of whistleblower trisha new bolt's decision to speak out about grave national security concerns while still in the administration from that "times"

report. quote, in a white house where aggressive leak investigations are conducted, it represents the rarest of developments, a damning on the report account from the current employee from ranks. phil rucker still here. you have had some amazing reporting since the beginning of the trump presidency what amounts to corruption of security process and nepotism with the most security information. >> nicolle, we've known for some times there was security clearance with jared kushner, the president's son in law school, this dates back to john kelly's time as chief of staff. one of the things so staggering and explosive about this whistle ploer account we heard about this week, it wasn't just a case of jared kushner or just a case

of jared kushner and ivanka trump but 25 instances where career staff of the government raised concerns and were overruled by the trump administration by political appoint eagles in granting these security clearances an that's one of the reasons why you see the democratic leaders why in the house are so aggressive about the issue and trying to get to the bottom of it because security matters at stake and national secrets people have access to if they have those clearances. >> one of the most stunning things about this scandal is john kelly and former white house counsel don mcgahn are on the record against overruling the process. they wrote contemporaneous memos security clearances were rejected for jared kushner knowing that at the highest levels of the white house staff we might arrive at in moment and getting on the record as being -- >> it's about the corruption of

the process. are there going to be top secrets that go out the door to the iranians because there's a secret spy in the white house? no. i disagree with the idea there's house-of-thousands of secrets at jeopardy. what's disturbing about it is the corruption of the process and the fact this is about conflicts of interest. it's not about secrets. it's about the fact this guy got a security clearance and he has business in saudi arabia. he's reading top secret material about saudi arabia. he has business in india and he's reading top secret stuff about india. it's a conflict of interest. the highest levels of people should know that. one of the things having gone through this process and having people under me that went through this process, the other thing people don't realize, when you're going through the process, someone from the white house calls and says your guy trying to get tci clearance, he has a problem with investments. they talk to you about it. here there are 25 people they

were actually communicating with and they were still overruled by the president. that's a corruption of the process. >> can i add to that, this number is staggering, 25 officials. in the bush white house not everyone needed a tssci clearance. you had to have it to go through the west wing. why do all these individuals, instead of just keeping a temporary badge the way they do sometimes at the white house, why was it overruled in why was it so important? i remember the joke during the bush administration, apologies clinton administration people, was that there were so many people walking around with temp badges in the white house because of the drug use they couldn't get permanent clearance, you didn't see unilateral commander in chief saying, take it, you can have it no matter what. >> we don't -- i guess the difference, again, is that in the trump white house, the four categories go well beyond drug use. the four categories are foreign influence, criminal conduct, drug uses and other

national security concerns. this is a whole different -- everyone at the table, i don't know if i've ever had everyone at the table had to fill out forms we needed to fill out. >> as a line assistant, staffer in the senate and u.s. attorney. the other thing about this, it goes even deeper than what we've been discussing, perversion of the process, not just security clearances but sort of on everything. if i don't like you, then i use some benefit or some clearance issue as a cudgel, if i like you, it's something i confer upon you. if you're a reporter i like, i tout you on twitter. if i don't like you maybe i take away your white house press pass. if you're an ally of mine maybe i talk to the justice department to see if i like you. someone i don't like, i say we should open up investigations against folks. the same with security clearances. we're talking about people to whom he's related you bypass the whole process and overrule the folks.

also at the same time we're forgetting in other instances the president used withdrawal of security clearance as punishment for his political enemies like john brennan. i think there's been talk about adam schiff, chair of intel committee in the house maybe he shouldn't have security clearance. at the same time that 25 or more people in his own white house have gotten security clearances over, as you say, and it bears repeating, the objection of the white house chief of staff and the white house counsel who by the way allowed trump to do a lot of things that i think more reasonable people might not have let him do. they drew the line at that. at the same time saying other people should have security clearance taken away because of political reasons makes the whole thing sound corrupt. >> last word phil rucker, any indication they will subpoena or request john dolly, former white house chief of staff concerned enough about the process to write a memo and former white house counsel don mcgahn also concerned enough about the process to write a memo to the file will be asked to testify

about the committee about so alarmed them about the process. >> nicolle, i don't know if that decision has been made. you can imagine as the investigation goes forward, those are two of several people who would be most likely to be brought before the committee to share what they know. clearly they were intimately involved in this process. remember, back in february of 2018 after the rob porter scandal went on for several weeks, he was the staff secretary who had to leave because of accusations of domestic abuse, john kelly made a vow to fix the security clearance process, to review it, try to professionalize it and make it less political. presumably congress would want to know about that. >> the porter scandal like 15 scandals ago, book one. >> 1500. >> phil, thank you for being here. preet, such a pleasure to have you here. you're only available because you're written this incredible book. i'm sorry we didn't get to talk about it more. when it comes out on paper book

we'll talk. >> you said that on television. >> my pitch on books is come at the end of your bookstore and we'll make news. it's been a pleasure, it's an important book. congratulations on its success. when we come back, donald trump on the war pathogens hurrica -- path against hurricane survivors. his attacks on the victims of hurricane maria may take the cake. we'll talk to the mayor about how she's protecting her constituents from the commander in chief. her constituents from the commander in chief

your brain changes as you get older. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

mismanagement of the goods and services we sent to them. you've seen food just rotting in the ports. their governor has done a horrible job. he's trying to make political hey in a political year. he's trying to find someone to take the blame off of him for not having a good grid and not

having a good system. >> that was the white house deputy secretary today twice calling puerto rico that country, despite the fact it's an american territory where americans live and work. he later called it a slip of the tongue. it illustrates the administration's bitter attitude toward the people on the island of puerto rico. it all starts at the top. donald trump late last night pushing out a series of factually inaccurate tweets. puerto rico got $91 billion for the hurricane. that's a lie the real number is a fraction, $11 billion, according to the "washington post" that figure trump c.i.t.e.s. is long-term high estimate. continuing, more money that has ever been gotten for a hurricane before. again, no. hurricane maria has cost government $120 million government, four border walls worth more than the fake number he gave for puerto rico. pressing forward he wrote this.

all their local politicians do is complain and ask for more money. now, that's just an odd thing to say about politicians asking the federal government for adequate relief from a natural disaster. finally, these polls are grossly incompetent, spend the money foolishly and corruptly and only take from the usa. let you decide who is grossly incompetent here and who knows puerto rico is in the usa. joining our conversation now, san juan mayor carmen yulin cruz. you have been through so much. we've covered all your moments in the early days of desperation. i remember your binder of fema regs. i remember you pleading with the president and washington to help people to save people's lives in the early days, what the government did and didn't do was a matter of life and death. you had paper towels tossed in the faces of your citizens and constituents. does anything shock you anymore

from this president? >> it still continues to shock me. >> me, too. >> it still continues to shock the people of puerto rico. just when you think he's gone the lowest he can go, he still goes lower than that. let's fact check the president, because he has become a fake news cartoon. everything that he has always complained about. first of all, mr. president, 3,000 puerto ricans died on your watch. they died because your government was inefficient, ineffective and unable to do its job. secondly, again, you should fire whomever told you $91 billion were given to puerto rico. as you just mentioned, "the washington post" says between $11 and our estimate is between $11 and $13 billion. there's still 30,000 people with rooftops that are not good enough. if a tropical storm comes, we have to take all of those people

out of harm's way. we have $600 million that the president is holding hostage because he's vanity is much higher than his humanity is. $600 million to feed 1.3 million puerto rican people. senator bernie sanders and congresswoman value velazquez to feed people. what kind of man is he that he looks the other way when people need to be fed. he continues to embarrass himself. he continues to embarrass the office of the presidency. frankly, he doesn't embody the spirit of humanity and the spirit of love and affection that hundreds of american citizens, latinos and diaspara have come to puerto rico to take care of. suicide rates have gone up 60%. we still continue to have

crippled. yes, we are a country -- we are a country that is asking our fellow human beings to help us. the president continues to not understand what his job is all about. he holds a temper tantrum and holds people hostage. 800,000 federal employees were held hostage because he could not get his wall. now he needs political capital, and he just says the things that he says about puerto rico. it is shameful, it is embarrassing, it is unbecoming. with all the lies that he is saying he has become the faker in chief. >> you are trying to put together an island. you are trying to keep people together. you describe a very dire circumstance with suicide rates going up. you describe 3,000 people who lost their lives.

what do you need from the federal government today. >> we need the president to be able to put his ego aside and do his job. we need the president to not hold aid as a weapon and weaponize it, which is something he criticizes from other countries. we need the congress of the united states to hear the call of the people not only of puerto rico but of other places that have been really dealing with very difficult situations coming from the result of climate change. most of all, we need the president to develop a heart. this man is heartless. this man is vengeful. this man racially discriminates against people has are not like him, and he is willing to let people starve, to let people die. we need the american people to get on the phone, call your senators, call your congress people, and let them know that

the situation in puerto rico is not as it was before, thank god, but we still need a lot of help to stand up and move forward and we need the american people to understand that there's a difference between the money that we needed to pick up debris and to deal with the immediate aftermath, and the money the community developed a dr, disaster and relief fund. $1.5 billion would still have not hit the cities of san juan or any other of the 77 additional municipalities. but mostly we need the president to stop lying, to stand up to assume responsibility, and to have the courage to say, look, i haven't done right by puerto rico. i'm going to start today. >> you are still on his mind. i just want to give you the last word on his continued attacks on

you personally. he tweeted, fema and the military worked emergency miracles but politicians like the crazed and incompetent mayor of san juan have done such a poor job of bringing the island back to health. how are you doing? >> well, this is what i have to say to the president. i'm here. come at me all you want, mr. president. you're going to want to run but you're not going to be able to hide that on your watch 3,000 people died. that on your watch, rather than coming here and doing your job, you came here and threw paper towels at us. that will follow you forever, sir. and i'll tell you something else. you can throw anything at me that you want. i am here, and i will call you out on every lie, on every vengeful tweet, on every discriminatory statement that you make, because the people of puerto rico deserve better than you, sir. and frankly, the american people

deserve greater than you. >> mayor carmen yulin cruz, thank you for spending time with us. thank you are for your service. >> thank you very much. >> after the break, he cheats when people are watching and he cheats when they aren't. he cheats whether you like it or not. he cheats when he plays golf. a scathing tell-all to hit donald trump where it hurts. donald trump and his fake golf game coming up. is fake golf game coming up ♪ limu emu & doug mmm, exactly! liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. nice! but uh, what's up with your partner?

oh! we just spend all day telling everyone how we customize car insurance because no two people are alike, so... limu gets a little confused when he sees another bird that looks exactly like him. ya... he'll figure it out. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ if you have a garden you know, weeds are lowdown little scoundrels. draw the line with roundup. the sure shot wand extends with a protective shield to target weeds precisely and kill them right down to the root. roundup brand. trusted for over 40 years. you know that look? that life of the party look. walk it off look. one more mile look. reply all look. own your look with fewer lines. there's only one botox® cosmetic. it's the only one fda approved to temporarily make frown lines, crow's feet and forehead lines look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms.

alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. so, give that just saw a puppy look and whatever that look is. look like you with fewer lines. own your look with the one and only botox® cosmetic. own your look [kno♪king]

♪ memories. what we deliver by delivering. praerp we were all playing together and we clearly saw him hook a ball into the lake in jersey and his caddy said he found it. >> was the caddy soaking wet when he said this. >> he took off running. next thing you know, i've got it, mr. trump. >> i mishit the ball. trump did it but went 20 yards farther than mine. i could not find my ball in this trash. trump's ball had the fluffies

lie in the middle of the fairway. >> lies are legend. donald trump's love of golf is legend as is his penchant for the truth. might surprise rick reilly and just about everyone he talked to about the new book commander in cheat. he doesn't just cheat at golf. he cheats like a three-card monty dealer. he lies about his lies. at winged food, where trump is a member, the caddies got so used to seeing him kick his ball back onto the fairway they came up with a nickname for him, pele. if you're asking why trump's very predictive habit of breaking golf rules matters, he has an answer for that, too. quote, you might be thinking, what does golf had to do with being president. what does it matter that he cheats at it. what's it got to do with leading the country? everything. if you're cheat to win at golf, is it that much further to cheat to win an election, to turn a

congressional vote, to stop an investigation? if you'll lie about every aspect of the game, is it that much further to lie about your taxes, your relationship with russians, your groping of women? if you're adamant the poor don't deserve golf, is it that much further to think they don't deserve health care, clean air, safe schools? joining us, rick reilly. first of all, this is amazing, and plus one to all that. how did we not know this before he won? >> it's funny. i did an interview with the associated press guy who covers the white house. at the end, he goes everybody's so mad about this book. in the press office. like why? we all can't believe we didn't think of it. because it's a window into a guy's soul. you know, i knew arnold palmer pretty well, and he never went into a business deal with a guy until he played 18 holes with him. i asked him once, why is that? he said, for four hours, they can't hide who they are. if they're going to be a jerk on the course, they're going to be a jerk in business.

if they're going to be impatient or lose their temper or cheat, i don't want them cheating me. if they're nice and relaxed and fun, it's going to be a fun deal. people ask me, what does this got to do? it has everything to do. you just had the mayor of san juan on. people don't realize he tried, he got into a deal in puerto rico for a golf course, and he sold all this bill of goods, how he was going to make it so much better and get a pga tour stop there and made it much worse, and they said we're going to close up. and they said no, get a loan from the government. and so this golf course company got $32 million loan from the tourist bureau of puerto rico, and then they just walked away. the trumps just walked away from it. and you're surprised he walks away from puerto rico. he never cared for them. if it's not money in his pocket or a feather in his cap, he doesn't do it. >> how does trump's cheating on the golf course, how do you see it? because you understand it better

than a non-golfer. how do you see it in his day-to-day conduct? how do you see it manifesting? >> just like michael cohen, he has his caddies do his cheating for him. i snuck into the caddie shack at bedminster and said does he cheat. they all look out the window. he said president trump never cheats. i said, you do it for him? yeah. they have four balls in the pocket. they're instructed to throw it out of any bunker or out of the woods. one time, my buddy was playing with him, it went in the lake. they see the splash. trump is always way ahead of everybody. by the time they got there, it was on the fairway. they said, donald, what happened? must have been the tide. >> god. so the corruption -- i mean, illegal people here illegally working at the golf courses. you talk about -- >> all over his courses. >> dirty business he did in puerto rico. i'm sure that's money they would have liked to have had for

hurricane recovery. is there any sense that the financial crimes extend to the golf courses, money laundering or investments? >> you're talking to a golfer. >> you have great sources. >> when a guy cheats to win money from you, that to me is a financial crime. but it goes beyond just what happens on the golf course. he cheats to win -- he wins tournaments that aren't even held. >> explain. >> remember in 2016, he was going around saying you vote for me because i'm a winner. i won 18 club championships, and that's guest the best players in the club sknrx that's without strokes. he's such a liar because he had told me when i played with him once how he does it. any time he opens a new golf course, he opens 15 golf courses, he plays the first round by himself, calls that the club championship, and puts his name up as the winner. it's so diabolical and creepy but kind of genius. >> it seems like his weight, which he had a white house

doctor lie about, would get under his skin. has he attacked you yet? >> i wonder what the heck is going on? i expect to see him with casts on his thumbs. >> i thought trump was actually supposed to be a decent golfer. >> he is. >> so he doesn't have to cheat to be a decent golfer. he spent a ton of time practicing. >> he's got a good swing. he's 73, 73, and he's about a 9. tiger played and said he's about a 9. an caw sorensen said he's about a 10. on the handicap index, he's a 2.8. he does that by fudging his scores and cherry picking. to get your handicap, you have to turn in your 20 scores. it took him eight years. we know he played 66 times last year. he only posted two times last year. >> let me ask a question. one of the things i think about him is he doesn't just cheat because it's in his interest. he cheats because it's in his nature. it seems like he cheats even when he doesn't have to on the golf course. is that true?

>> that's right. he doesn't have to cheat. everyone would happily accept him. besides, golf is all about integrity. we call our own fouls on ourselves. it's the only sport without a ref. you would rather cut off your arm than be called a cheater, yet people catch him all the time cheating and he doesn't seem to care. i asked a psychiatrist, and he said you don't get it. he has something different in his brain that requires him to be the best. for instance, if he beats you for $20, he doesn't want the money. he just says i beat you and tells everybody around that he beat you, and then he buys lunch and he's great and very charming. but it's all about winning. he won two tournaments when he wasn't even at the course. he played a course in philly. they had the tournament in bedminster. he said what won it today? 74. he said well i shot 72 here. make me the champion. so poor joe shu mirts comes down, and donald trump -- that's not done in golf. to me, that's like hanging your laundry in the sistine chapel.

you just don't do that in golf. >> will you stay for one more segment? >> yeah, i'm very mad about that. >> we're going to sneak in a break. eak in a break. 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. but in my mind i'm still 35. that's why i take osteo bi-flex, to keep me moving the way i was made to. it nourishes and

strengthens my joints for the long term. osteo bi-flex. because i'm made to move.

osteo bi-flex. i've always been amazed and still going for my best, even though i live with a higher risk of stroke due to afib not caused by a heart valve problem. so if there's a better treatment than warfarin... i want that too. eliquis. eliquis is proven to reduce stroke risk better than warfarin. plus has significantly less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. what's next? reeling in a nice one. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden sign of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis, the number one

cardiologist-prescribed blood thinner. ask your doctor if eliquis is what's next for you. rick, you're an incident sensation. ro rosie o'donnell just tweeted i love the golf guy. will you come back? >> i would be happy to. this was fun. >> he'll be back. my thanks to elise, rick, rick, and the book, commander in cheat. buy it right now. >> hold it up. >> hold it rightside up. just a note, ps, he met stormy daniels after a golf tournament. that's a good seize. >> golf is like bicycle shorts. it reveals a lot about a guy. >> thank you so much for watching. i'm nicolle wallace. "mtp daily" starts right now with chuck todd having to think about that image of bicycle shorts. i'm so sorry, my friend. >> i don't even want to know, but i have to say, rick reilly, bicycle shorts, all of that, it's giving me flashbacks of angry sports illustrated childhood. >> you're a