always raise the point to make even police better and those of us that need them to be treated equally and fairly and with respect. that does it for me. thanks for watching. i'll see you back here tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. eastern for a new live edition of "politics nation" on father's day. up next, "deadline: white house" with my friend and colleague nicolle wallace. hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in washington, d.c. if you swapped in robert mueller for george stephanopoulos, the mueller investigation may have ended very differently. donald trump trashing his former white house counsel, don mcgahn, in that interview with abc news, claiming that mcgahn lied under oath when he told mueller's investigators that the president wanted him to fire the special counsel. >> he lays out a lot of evidence, including the episode where you ask your white house

counsel, don mcgahn, you tell him mueller has to go. you call him twice and say, mueller has to go. call me when it's done. >> i was never going to fire mueller. i never suggested firing mueller. >> that's what he says. >> i don't care what he says. it doesn't matter. that was to show everyone what a good counsel he was. >> why would don mcgahn lie under oath to -- >> because he wanted to make himself look like a good lawyer, or -- or he believed it because i would constantly tell anybody that would listen, including you, including the media, that robert mueller was conflicted. robert mueller had a total -- >> at this point, the president's lawyer's legal strategy is starting to make a lot more sense. when seated with anyone other than sean hannity or laura ingraham, donald trump seems to fall apart. he seems to lack the mental acuity and the truth-telling capacity to field real questions from real journalists. to be clear, if donald trump had made those comments you just saw

to robert mueller, they would have contradicted the testimony not just of mcgahn but of nearly half a dozen other witnesses who testified to the president's designs on firing special counsel mueller. close trump allies like his friend chris christie, reince priebus, and steve bannon, and meticulous note takers like annie donaldson, mcgahn's former chief of staff. the mcgahn smear comes offer the third day of sustained outrage in national security circles from donald trump's enthusiastic embrace of colluding with foreign governments in the future without calling the fbi. >> your campaign this time around, if foreigners, if russia, if china, if someone else offers you information on an opponent, should they accept it, or this she call the fbi? >> i think maybe you do both. i think you might want to listen. there's nothing wrong with listening. if somebody called from a country, norway, we have information on your opponent, oh, i think i'd want to hear. it. >> you want that kind of

interference in our election? >> it's not interference. they have information. i think i'd take it. >> poor norway. donald trump took his broom and dust pan over to fox news this morning for a little cleanup. but first the twin clouds that have hung over donald trump's presidency since the beginning, questions about colluding with a foreign power and then questions about obstructing the investigation into the foreign powers election meddling have been thrust back into the news by none other than donald trump. and that is where we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. at "the washington post," white house reporter ashley parker. with us on set, former chief spokesman for the department of justice, matt miller. jonathan swan, national political reporter for axios. politics reporter for "the daily beast," betsy woodruff, and elliot williams, former deputy assistant attorney general. matt miller, i have got to start with you. i watched that and thought, wow, i thought we made don mcgahn a white house counsel with all those judges and two supreme

court justices but maybe donald trump thinks he's telling the truth to robert mueller. but if there had been an interview with this president and robert mueller, i mean this is why people like rudy giuliani said they'd lay their bodies down on the train tracks before they'd let donald trump answer questions from mueller about the obstruction investigation. >> yeah. you know, the president's legal time wasn't the "a" team for maybe even the "b" team or the "c" team, but even rudy giuliani and john dowd could figure out if he sat down with the special counsel for an interview, he with do one of two things. he would, number one, admit to a crime, admit to facts that constitute obstruction of justice, or, two, he would lie about it and commit a crime of false statements to investigators. someone said to me george stephanopoulos got his lester holt moment. all he did was turn the camera on and let the president talk. these weren't especially hard questions that george stephanopoulos was asking, and you saw the president just completely kind of have a meltdown on a couple of different fronts, both on the kind of -- you said the russia collusion front, kind of russia

collusion 2020 maybe, and then on the obstruction of justice front. imagine if he can't take those questions how he would do against trained interrogators from the special counsel's office. >> i don't know that it's the right frame to say he can't take the questions. i think it's that the truth is that he is more than collusion-curious. he's collusion-enthusiastic, would not call the fbi. so in the future -- i mean forget about for a second what happened in '16. in 2020, he's in. i mean he's into it. norway, pick up the phone and dial. i'm here for you. and on obstruction, his testimony, if he had simply said what he said to george, would have contradicted that of at least a half a dozen other people quoted in the footnotes in the body of the mueller report. >> if he had said it, it would have been a clear false statement. but it shows the trap he would have been in. he liked to say it was a trap, that the prosecutors were setting for me. he was in a trap by the fact that he obstructed justice. he set the trap for himself.

he could not go in and give that answer because it would be a lie, but he couldn't go and admit to what he'd done because that would have been an admission of obstruction of justice. he didn't do an interview for the reason a lot of guilty people don't do interviews because there's no good way out of it. you either go in and admit to a crime, or you commit a crime of lying about it. >> you've got a tweet out from some new reporting from a source close to mcgahn. you write this. your source close to mcgahn says, anybody who believes trump wasn't telling don to get rid of rumor, using these conflicts is just stupid or believes in the tooth fairy. >> that was in response to having watched what president trump said about don mcgahn. i got this from this source about an hour ago. they also said that really nothing the president said -- if you actually listen very carefully to him, he sort of doesn't really contradict don mcgahn. don mcgahn didn't say that president trump said go and fire mueller. he said talk to rod rosenstein and tell him that these

conflicts are too bad and he has to go. now, president trump denied saying has to go, but you can see the way, you know, he keeps talking. he'll sort of say half a sentence and then he'll start going on about mueller's conflicts. he's not even fully kind of denying those conversations with mcgahn. it's pretty messy. >> let me read what the mueller report writes about this incident. so mcgahn de -- this is from the mueller report about what has been thrust back into the public view not by the media but by donald trump. from the mueller report, quote, mcgahn decided he had to resign. he called his personal lawyer -- that's bill burke, we know. then he called his chief of staff, annie donaldson, to inform her of his decision. he then drove to the office to pack his belongings and submit his resignation letter. donaldson recalled that mcgahn told her the president had called and demanded he contact the department of justice and that the president wanted him to do something that mcgahn did not want to do. that evening, mcgahn called both priebus and bannon and told them

he intended to resign. priebus recalled that mcgahn said the president had asked him to do crazy bleep which rhymes with hit. whenever i say rhymes with, i end up saying the bad word. mcgahn did not tell him the specifics of the president's request because mcgahn was trying to protect priebus from what he did not know. i think the headline under this section is donald trump's attempts to fire special counsel robert mueller. certainly what was investigated as an obstructive act was he intends to fire special counsel mueller. >> yes. this really was one of the more -- i found one of the more exciting portions, got me back to being a proper. they start of the section saying we think donald mcgahn is a credible. we don't believe after interviewing him and talking to him that he had an incentive to lie. a number of other things too. his statements are corroborated if you look, like you said, at the footnotes. annie donaldson, chris christie

and reince priebus build this narrative that suggests don mcgahn is telling the truth. >> let me just add to mcgahn's credibility. mcgahn is complying with the white house edict that he not testify before congress, risking criminal contempt of congress if congress decides to head in that direction. >> right. and the other thing that seemed fishy to mcgahn and mueller points out, what was the urgency? if you notice, it's between the 14th and the 17th of the month that this all goes down, and the president really wants this all to happen on a saturday morning, and he's just really -- so the idea that don mcgahn fabricated this or is confused is just foolish. just like matt said, every time the president opens his mouth, he steps in it even further on this. >> we should also put out that don mcgahn continues to this day to be loyal to donald trump. the only two humans on the planet who have called don mcgahn a liar are donald trump and rudy giuliani, and not even rudy giuliani on all seven days of the week, seemingly just on even ones. >> what's important is that everyone except for president

trump that we know of, who has direct knowledge of the conversations that mcgahn had with the president, concurs unanimously that what mcgahn says matches reality. there's not a single credible witness who disputes thus far any of the claims that mcgahn has made except, of course, trump himself, who as jonathan pointed out, kind of is a little bit iffy in the way he verbalizes this. it's his odd way of talking about these complex legal matters. one of the things that's really interesting is the fact that president trump's legal team sort of shifted the way it talked about mueller when rudy giuliani came in. for about the last year of the mueller investigation, there was this very aggressive, sort of hyperactive response to the mueller probe that showed a marked change from the first year. >> to smear him. ty cobb and john dowd were working with him. they cajoled the president into cooperating, letting everybody cooperate. that was the legal framework on which don mcgahn spent 30 hours with robert mueller's investigators.

and to rudy giuliani and more importantly, less splashy was emmet flood who came in and really halted a lot of access for mueller. so it was a significant change in their posture. but i don't want to say the damage had been done. the truth had been told. they already had all this information, and i think it's remarkable, as you said, that all you see is george stephanopoulos asking questions that, you know -- and i'm not trying to take away from george's performance. it's masterful. but simply asking what's now been public for months, what's in the mueller report, and trump falls apart, sort of falls between these cracks of what's been testified to and corroborated by half a dozen people. >> emmet flood's role is really interesting. when he was first put in place as taking ty cobb's old job, a person close to him told me that emmet flood taking that role meant donald trump would never have a verbal conversation with mueller, and that bore out. >> ashley parker, i want to show you the president's reaction to this line of questioning. he calls george a wise guy.

>> if you answer these questions to me now, why not answer them to robert mueller under oath? >> because they were looking to get us for lies, for slight misstatements. i looked at what happened to people, and it was very unfair. >> you didn't answer questions on obstruction. >> wait a minute. wait a minute. i did answer questions. i answered them in writing. >> not on obstruction. >> i don't know. i answered a lot of questions. they gave me questions. i answered them in writing. >> not on obstruction. >> look, george, you're being a little wise guy, okay, which is typical for you. just so you understand, very simple. it's very simple. there was no crime. there was no collusion. >> nbc's peter alexander, our white house correspondent, adding this reporting to our understanding of this now war of words today between don mcgahn and donald trump. peter's reporting that a person close to former white house counsel don mcgahn is dismissing president trump's comments to

ab abc news where he disputes mcgahn's testimony saying, quote, it's just fantasy land. so we've got fantasy land. we've got the tooth fairy. i mean mcgahn pushing back more than he did the first couple rounds of smears against mcgahn. do you think mcgahn is someone who might eventually get battered enough to testify? >> i don't understand the sense in publicly attacking don mcgahn. i can't fathom it. i mean i really can't fathom it. >> explain that because -- >> goading him into -- i mean i know this is just what the president does, and i don't think he's thinking about it in a strategic fashion. >> because who should expect a president to think strategically. >> i don't believe he is thinking strategically. but is he just trying to goad don mcgahn into making a public statement? i mean it's kind of -- and now we're seeing, i mean, again, i wonder if it's the same source. but sources close to mcgahn, we're seeing these very similar

statements. i don't know. i mean i don't think that this changes the calculus, at least in the short term, about whether he testifies or not. but i just don't see the sense in it. >> ashley parker. >> again, i mean it makes absolutely no sense. the president is getting dangerously close to almost pushing for an outcome that he doesn't want and wouldn't benefit him. so you have don mcgahn, who is someone who based on the mueller report and based on everything we understand, repeatedly actually saved the president from himself. the president may not have liked it in those moments, and in fact he didn't. at the time we heard a lot about clashes with don mcgahn and he didn't like don mcgahn because don mcgahn would stand up to him and give him the lawyer's point of view. and it turns out in hindsight, the president is very lucky that don mcgahn was there playing that role. don mcgahn only testified for those 30 hours you mentioned because he was abiding by -- and you can disagree if it's good or bad strategy, but he was abiding

by a strategy cooked up by the president's lawyers at the time, and he is now risking possible contempt to defy a congressional subpoena. so he is not the person -- he's not like these democrats. he's not the person you want to goad into finally kind of saying, i've had enough. that's not a savvy strategy. >> he's also one of these sort of figures in trump land with ultimate credibility. he's not a liberal fantasy. he's not some whistle-blower. he's not turned on the president. he stands behind the supreme court picks. his legacy is all -- you know, this vast body of judicial appointments. his close ally in the senate is mitch mcconnell. i mean he's not going to be this satisfying witness for the left, and he's not, it would appear, anymore going to feel beholden personally to the white house. he is the ultimate truth teller, and if he simply testifies to what is in the mueller report on television, in front of cameras, it would be devastating to this

president. >> it would be devastating, but i think all the things you just mentioned are the reasons why don mcgahn's not testifying. the president keeps attacking because over the last three or so years the president has learned one lesson about the republican establishment. he can push them around, attack them, beat them up, and they will cave every time. and don mcgahn is nothing if not a member of the republican establishment. from everything you here, he and trump basically hate each other at this point. but mcgahn's -- >> isn't his integrity on the line? hasn't he already testified in the mueller report to the truth? >> he testified to the truth, but the place where he cares about his reputation is with mitch mcconnell, is with the members of the federalist society, the republican establishment, and none of those people want to see him bring donald trump down. >> he would be the rare figure because he has those allies who could sustain telling a few minutes of truth about the garbage that went on in this west wing. he was asked to write a phony letter to the record denying a story that was true. >> he might, or he might be an outcast in the republican party for the rest of his life. where is the reward for telling

the truth in the republican party right now? look what's happened to justin amash when he stood up and told the truth? his days as a hero of the republican party are probably over. >> i want to ask all of you about the wisdom of doing a network interview. how did this even happen? >> do more. why would we question the -- why? what are you doing? are you sabotaging everyone? >> help me help you. i saw your interview. i hope you're next. >> i think there should be more of them, and they're great. >> i agree 100%. >> keep talking. he's giving lawyers lots of work, and i think i have a lot of colleagues that i think would enjoy seeing the president talk more because it's just literally -- he is getting himself -- or ought to get himself in trouble every time he opens his mouth. i think we'll talk about the campaign finance stuff a little bit later, but this was a treasure trove that he opened up in the interview yesterday, essentially stepping up to future offenses. so keep talking, man. keep going and talk to the reporters. >> ashley, even the cleanup

seemed problematic. let me play this clip from "fox & friends." >> how are you going to -- if you don't hear what it is, you're not going to know what it is. >> that's right. how do you know it's bad if you don't listen to it? >> no. they're saying, oh, he would accept it. well, if i don't listen, you're not going to know. now, if i thought anything was incorrect or badly stated, i'd report it to the attorney general, the fbi. i'd report it to law enforcement, absolutely. >> ashley, i said yesterday that that sound made my hair follicles hurt, and it really does. it's the listening that's criminal. it's not what they say. it's the conduct. i mean we're two years in. the mueller report started, was conducted, and it ended, and he still thinks that the contact and the conduct of listening to a foreign power is permissible is galling, shocking. >> well, not just that, but he

seems really to be missing the point. he's basically saying, look, if the opposition isn't devastating enough, if it's really inaccurate and it won't hurt my opponent, then of course i would turn it over to the fbi. the point as you said is it's not just the list nng. it's the listening, the receiving of it. it doesn't matter if it's good or bad oppo. what matters is there's a foreign entity actively trying to interfere in a u.s. presidential election, period, end sentence. >> ashley parker, what's your sense of how the white house feels about the wisdom of the abc interview? >> so two points on that. one thing that i think betsy and jonathan also understand and might find funny is we spend all of this time frantically calling sources to try to find out what the president is secretly and privately saying and thinking and sometimes you just turn a camera on, and he just says it publicly. and i will say there was a sense within the white house, even before sort of the full extent of his comments were made

public, that they knew that what he said was problematic. they knew that there was going to be some cleanup involved, and you saw that. you saw hogan gidley coming out. you saw people from the campaign coming out and they're in a tough position because they can't actually say the president says something deeply problematic and that was a mistake. they're just sort of saying, that thing you thought you heard him say, he didn't actually say. >> we're back to don't believe what you see. don't believe what you hear. maybe we should get used to a whole lot more of that? >> sort of. or as the president said himself, it's not what i said. it's what i meant. >> all right. buckle up, right? ashley parker, thank you for spending some time with us. after the break, a rare rebuke from the head of the country's federal elections commission for donald trump's invitation to foreign governments to provide dirt on trump's political adversaries. also ahead, the stage is set. the first 2020 democratic debate spots have been selected. we'll show you what that will look like less than two weeks from today. and another law breaker in

the president's midst gets a pass from the president. kellyanne conway accused of violating the law by the special counsel's office and remains in trump's good graces while her potential legal troubles mount. all those stories coming up. introducing the all-new 2019 ford ranger, it's the right gear. with a terrain management system for... this. a bash plate for... that. an electronic locking rear differential for... yeah... this. heading to the supermarket? get any truck. heading out here? get the ford ranger. the only adventure gear built ford tough. has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company,

hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. i come face-to-face with a lot of behinds. so i know there's a big need for new gas-x maximum strength. it relieves pressure, bloating and discomfort fast. so no one needs to know you've got gas. gas-x. so no one needs to know you've got gas. is that for me? mhm aaaah! nooooo... quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker and is 2x more absorbent than the leading ordinary brand. [son loudly clears throat] [mom and dad laugh] bounty, the quicker picker upper. now with new prints featuring characters from disney/pixar's toy story 4 in theaters june 21.

we like drip coffee, layovers- -and waiting on hold. what we don't like is relying on fancy technology for help. snail mail! we were invited to a y2k party... uh, didn't that happen, like, 20 years ago? oh, look, karolyn, we've got a mathematician on our hands!

check it out! now you can schedule a callback or reschedule an appointment, even on nights and weekends. today's xfinity service. simple. easy. awesome. i'd rather not. the national security community reportedly reeling today in the wake of president trump's admission that he'd accept help from a foreign government in the next election. alarming reporting from politico reveals the scope of the fall joet. quote, trump's comments, according to interviews with nearly a dozen law enforcement

veterans have undon months of work, essentially inviting spies to middle with 2020 presidential campaigns and demoralizing the agents trying to stop them. it has backed chris wray into a corner, putting him in a position where he might have to publicly chasz tiez the president and risk getting fired or resign in protest. the fallout prompting the chairwoman of the federal elections commission to issue a statement. she prefaced by tweeting, quote, i would not have thought i needed to say this, but -- here's that statement. let me make something 100% clear to the american public and anyone running for public office. it is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a u.s. election. this is not a novel concept. any political campaign that receives an offer of a prohibited donation from a foreign source should report that offer to the fbi. the table is back. i've worked on so many campaigns. it is surreal to me, and this

extends -- so after you get this briefing, you get the one about how you can't take anything from a pac or a superpac. that we are here educating the leader of the free world about election laws is staggering. >> i can't remember the last time i saw a statement at all from the chair. the fec, let alone a statement like this. i think what it shows is the alarm that goes off inside the government when you see a statement from the president like this. and i think her statement was directed not just at the president but at all these people that work on campaigns across the country because you will have people who see the president saying, oh, it's okay to do this, and then in an environment where he's invited foreign governments to interfere -- and i'm worried not just about russia but all these other countries the president has buddied up to, there might be all kinds of intervention, and you have people on campaigns who think, well, the president said it's okay. i'll do it. you have the chair of the fec making clear do not do this. you will go to jail. >> i was somewhat surprised when i interviewed jared kushner

recently. >> remarkable interview by the way. congratulations. >> thank you. i said to him -- i asked him about the trump tower meeting and the email he received where there was an offer of help from the russian government, and i said, why didn't you pick up the phone and call the fbi? and he said, well, everyone's playing monday morning quarterback. i said, okay. fine. would you do it again if you got another email for 2020 like this? would you call the fbi? and he said, i don't know. it's hard to answer hy hypotheticals. people were fairly shocked by that response. but then you have two weeks later the president saying, actually, yeah. e explicitly saying he would want to receive it. >> add brad parscale who said something similar. and add kaley mcenanny that she took this as a directive from the president. add rudy giuliani, who days after the mueller report came out downplayed the results.

and jared kushner, before he sat with you, said that, oh, the meddling was just a few facebook ads. >> what they don't understand is why the president can't just say, we don't want it? it's illegal. >> how about we don't need it? >> well, i think he said something -- variations of that, but they just don't understand why he can't just say a very short sentence. no, we don't want it. we don't need it, and we would report it. >> the president's rhetoric on this is really important because it's directly attached to how election security works. we've talked to tons of folks in dhs who work on securing vital infrastructure, including folks on the political side, who say part of the reason that it has been really difficult for that department to harden the defenses going into both 2018 and now 2020 is because the white house doesn't care. if there's not buy-in from the white house to do the sort of beg, sweeping fixes that you need, to take a complicated and

vulnerable infrastructure system, particularly an election system, and significantly harden that without white house buy-in, even if there's tons of appetite within the department, it's just really hard to do. so for the president to say this type of illegal foreign election meddling is actually welcome just sends a message to the folks at dhs, whose mission it is to make elections secure, that the white house doesn't care. >> a source close to chris wray said to me, he won't listen. i said, really? because a president that tweets about coups all the time, that seems like a -- it seems to chris wray and andy mccabe said on this show yesterday he's in a terrible position not because of what this looks like for him, to have the president so e mamascue and undermine his authority, but the entire workforce heard the president of the united states say the fbi director is wrong. >> it puts people in the bureau in a really difficult spot.

at the same time we have to remember these are really busy people who don't have a lot of time to spend rule minating ove what the president said, but to have the president say this project that you've been working on for months, more than a year now, is not only a low priority but the opposite of a priority for the white house is naturally demoralizing. >> let me just show you how this played on fox news. >> there is no wiggle room with respect to dirt, with respect to opposition research. it was the federal election commission has already decided in other cases that that is, quote, a thing of value. the phrase "a thing of value". >> money or a thing of value. >> correct. comes from a statute, which prohibits receipt of money or a thick of value from a foreign national, whether the person is working for a foreign government or not. >> so what the president said he would do to george stephanopoulos, if he did it, would be felonious.

>> correct. meaning he would be committing a felony, and the person giving it to him, if that person was ever here and subject to our jurisdiction, would be committing a felony as well. >> okay. let's get this out of the esoteric realm of campaign finance law and talk about regular people. the idea of a music promoter and a russian lawyer coming up and offering you campaign dirt is literally like a guy showing up at your house with a pickup truck full of televisions who says, hey, these fell off a tractor-trailer, but i'll you one. you take it in your house and start watching stuff on and then a week later call the cops and say, i think there's some tvs that have been stolen somewhere. >> they never did that. >> the president is saying in the future he would. >> maybe. >> yeah, right. >> the tv doesn't work. >> the tv doesn't work, literally. so let's be clear. he has stated that he would do it in the future. the other interesting thing, though, is what saved trump junior from being charged was

that it could be something he didn't know he was committing a campaign finance crime. the president is on notice right now -- >> the stupidity defense. >> well, campaign finance crimes are a little more complicated than that, but -- >> but intent. >> intent is the term of the law. the president is on notice now, the head of the federal elections commission has issued a statement. george stephanopoulos has told the president that this is ultimately a crime. so if this is to happen in the future, they can't hide behind the sort of defense we didn't know what it was. but let's again put this in perspective. this is a test for christopher wray. this is a test for the fbi director and every other republican in america to not keep coddling the president, and are you going to stand up or not? >> is there any suspense on how that test ends? are you waiting for an outcome? >> we're not, and it's a shame because, look, i came into the doj under wray in 2004, and i worked with him in the criminal division. this is unfortunate to see, but it's yet another person who has

sort of heard the intox caicati song of donald trump -- >> i don't know if that's wray's affliction. i think that wray falls into the category of public servants who's there because he thinks he can protect the institution he leads. and i'm not offering apologies, but i do think they fall into different camps and i think for a lot of the national security and law enforcement people, that's how -- that's some of their mind-set. that's how it's been described to me. >> jeff sessions, who is not one i would be quick to defend, but, look, jeff sessions might have thought he was protecting the institution too. >> i'm with you. i'm with you. >> but still managed to get dragged into the president's web of insults and mistreatment of -- >> as jim comey says, he'll eat your soul. betsy, elliott, thank you for spending some time with us. after the break, at long last we've got the list. the democratic debate matchups. who is onstage with whom? which candidates get to challenge joe biden? that story is next.

of all time. lease the 2019 rx 350 for $399/month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. with licensed agents available 24/7. it's not just easy. it's having-a-walrus-in-goal easy! roooaaaar! it's a walrus! ridiculous! yes! nice save, big guy! good job duncan! way to go! [chanting] it's not just easy. it's geico easy. oh, duncan. stay up. no sleepies.

...6, 7, 8 it's geico easy. ♪ ♪ ♪ big dreams start with small steps... ...but dedication can get you there. so just start small... start saving. easily set, track and control your goals right from the chase mobile® app. ♪ ♪ chase. make more of what's yours®. instate-of-the-artn technology makes it brilliant. the visionary lexus nx. lease the 2019 nx 300 for $359/month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

today, life-changing technology from abbott is helping hunt them down at their source. because the faster we can identify new viruses, the faster we can get to stopping them. the most personal technology, is technology with the power to change your life. life. to the fullest.

i love that music. we're just 12 days away from the first democratic debate airing right here on msnbc, a two-night throw-down where candidates will have the opportunity to challenge each other about policy, generational change, electability, likability, and any other ability they can think of onstage for the very first time. this afternoon some big news. our first look at the two groupings. here's the list for the first night's debate, wednesday the 26th. it will be booker, castro, de blasio, john delaney, gabbard, inslee, klobuchar, beto, tim ryan and elizabeth warren. the next night, here's who we'll see. michael bennet, the front-runner joe biden, buttigieg, jill brand, harris, hickenlooper, swalwell, williamson and andrew

yang. joining our conversation, karine jean pierre and jason johnson. let me start with you. >> yeah. so like it's like if you're going to see a comedy show, like you're going to see dave chappelle and like i don't care with the previous show. i want to see the main act. night two is the one that's going to matter. it's not just because it has some of the bigger names. it has the people who are closest to each other when it comes to the voters they're trying to grab, right? >> let's put those -- there we go. there it is up there. that second night again is bennett, biden, buttigieg, gillibrand, harris, hiken looper, sanders, swalwell, williamson and yang. so you're talking about harris -- >> harris, bernie, and biden. this is really key. bernie sanders benefits because he doesn't have to be next to elizabeth warren, because he is cratering right now. here's his chance to put his

contrast with himself and joe biden. but also you've got senator harris, who has also been dipping in the polls and losing to elizabeth warren. you've got two candidates on the downswing who have their opportunity to go after the front-runner. night two is going to be the popcorn night. >> i think night one is actually going to be a very good one to watch. i'll say this, because it's the first one. people are curious. it's at prime time. elizabeth warren is surging right now. they are giving her a second look. and i actually -- at first i was like, oh, man, she's not going to be on with biden. maybe her team might be a little disappointed -- >> she'll be on with berkooker, castro, de blasio, delaney, gabbard, inslee, klobuchar, o'rourke, ryan and warren. >> she's going to be the one that people are going to target and be going after, but at the same time she has so much energy when she's onstage, she takes over the whole entire room. the thing is how is she going to do that, bottle that up and be a

very strategic and smart debater, which i think she could do. so i actually think people are going to tune in for this first one just to see what's going on, what's happening. and they're taking a second look at elizabeth warren. >> i think it's ironic that the dnc went out of their way to try to not have an undercard and got one anyway. the first night is somewhat of an undercard, other than elizabeth warren who is in that top tier of candidates. if i were her, i would be a little perturbed that you're left all alone. you don't get to engage with some of the other front-runners. but she has a different -- there's something that's different about her than the other candidates. i'm not sure she needs to attack biden or bernie, with whom she's competing with votes on the left because elizabeth warren has more of a unique message than the other candidates. the other candidates have to attack. she just has to tell her story and share her message because she has one, which is not true about all the other candidates. she can do that on night one or night two. >> she's become so central to, i think, the left's drive toward

impeachment should they ever arrive there. she is one of the driving forces, not the only one. don't tweet me. but she is one of the driving forces. she called for impeachment. so i think that -- i think you're talking about her policies. she's got piles and piles of policies. she also has been driving the impeachment message, the sort of laws were broken by donald trump in the mueller report message in a way has really excited the democratic base. >> yeah, she's -- and again i'll probably get tweeted at for saying it. >> we'll split them. >> she's sort of the ted cruz of the race. what i mean by that is she has the sharpest edge to her. she's never going to be outflanked on the left. and she's got real -- like her policies have real meat to them. bernie sanders is very good at talking in high terms, in sort of sweeping themes. she sort of drilled down on every single issue, and she's calling for radical structural

change. there seems to me, again -- you guys know this a lot better than me. i'm not a student of the democratic party in the way you guys are, but there's a real hunger for the kind of structural change that she's putting up, and just not having done it before. being a fresh face, not having gone through the process and being sort of lastier year's ne or last cycle's news has its own value. i remember covering the 2016 campaign, and there is just that sense that ted cruz had around him where he was connected to the base. the activists loved him. he was fresh on the scene, and he did have detail and substance to the policies he was putting out there. >> and then on the second night, it would seem that on the first night, elizabeth warren really does maybe frame the substance of the debate. on the second night, you think it all becomes a biden pile-on. >> yes. >> yes. >> absolutely. he needs to put on some armor. absolutely. >> people are going to try and pretend that they won't at

first, though. that's the thing. >> see, that's such a democratic thing. there's two thing that democrats do. look what happened to us. i'm not recommending it. don't try this at home. >> is gillibrand on the stage with biden? >> let me look. >> so there you go. she needs a breakthrough moment. she's defined herself as a candidate for women. my gosh, if she doesn't -- >> what is? " . >> mayor pete is going to have to come after him as well for being old school. i was saying this all along. who's going to be the dick gephardt? who is the person who's going to go on the suicide run? i'm going to take down the big guy because that's my moment. i don't think bernie sanders and harris have to do that. they're not going to have to go after joe biden. they're going to be making electability arguments. >> it's going to be about issues. it can't be ugly. it can't be personal.

it probably will be ugly, but it can't be personal. what i mean by that -- i actually don't think the base wants that. >> i agree with you. >> i think there is a hunger for how are you going to move us forward? we are in a dire strait? how are you going to move this country forward, and what's your vision and what's your policies? and i'm hoping that it does not get personal. >> let me ask all of you one question that keeps me up at night when i'm not worrying about donald trump on twitter. so joe biden, i don't meet people in my normal life at drop-off, at summer camp, at the airport, at costco who are unenthusiastic about him. not everyone's sure he'll be the nominee. not everyone's sure he should be. but they all like him. what is the downside to the second night being a pileup on biden? >> that he doesn't perform well. i mean that's the downside for him. look, joe biden's message -- >> is there any danger in the democrats? a lot of democrats outside our line of work think he's their best chance of beating trump. >> look, if that's true, if he is the best chance of beating

trump -- and no one knows if that's true. that is his message basically. his message is i'm the best chance at beating trump and i used to work with obama. you can only beat all these other candidates if you get in a fight with them. your point about the base not wanting to get personal and ugly, i hope it does because i want to see which of these candidates can throw a punch and take a punch because when they get in the ring with donald trump, they're going to be on the receiving end of -- >> i guess my point is it's going to get ugly. i'm just saying the personal attacks. they're going to talk about policies, the generational change, you know, what his policies of 40 years ago or the last 40 years, i should say. that i understand. it's just like i'm hoping it doesn't get personal as to, like, you know -- i don't know, your age or whatever. >> i will tell you this. two things. one, i have the official, you know, met the guy on the streets conversation. i literally was jogging this morning. 60-something-year-old older

white guy heard me talking about the debates. and he's like, you're going to the fish fry next week. i'm a 67-year-old white man, and i don't really think joe biden is the future. we need somebody else. thei the guy overheard me saying this as i'm running on a like in maryland. my friends are putting together bingo charts and have anita hill and the first time somebody says, i have a plan for that. people want to see these folks scrap. i think while folks like joe biden, i think people think he's entitled to this and that he may not work hard. and a good scrap is what's going to show, no, no, i want this job, and i'm willing to fight for it. he needs that before he looks like mr. inevitable. >> last word? >> i don't have anything smarter than that. >> none of us does. after the break, she's the woman who made alternative facts a thing. today she's in need of some alternative facts of her own to escape the hatch act violation that a group says should lead to

her firing. that story coming up. this is the ocean. just listen. (vo) there's so much we want to show her. we needed a car that would last long enough to see it all. (avo) subaru outback. ninety eight percent are still on the road after 10 years. come on mom, let's go!

when it comes to type 2 diabetes, are you thinking about your heart? well, i'm managing my a1c, so i should be all set. right. actually, you're still at risk for a fatal heart attack or stroke. even if i'm taking heart medicine, like statins or blood thinners? yep! that's why i asked my doctor what else i could do... she told me about jardiance. that's right. jardiance significantly reduces the risk of dying from a cardiovascular event for adults who have type 2 diabetes and known heart disease. that's why the american diabetes association recommends the active ingredient in jardiance. and it lowers a1c? yeah- with diet and exercise. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections, and sudden kidney problems. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. a rare, but life-threatening, bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis

or have severe kidney problems. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. so, what do you think? now i feel i can do more to go beyond lowering a1c. ask your doctor about jardiance today. ♪ applebee's new loaded chicken fajitas. now only $10.99. every day, visionaries are creating the future. ♪ so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. ♪ the united states postal service makes more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. ♪ because the future only happens with people who really know how to deliver it.

it looks to me like they're trying to take away her right of free speech. i mean she's got to have it really sounds to me like a free speech thing. it doesn't sound fair. so -- >> mr. president, you're not going to fire her? >> no, i'm not going to fire her. i think she's a terrific person. she's a tremendous spokesperson. she's been loyal. she's been -- she's just a great person. >> so when you have a president with no regard for the law, you just might end up with aides with no regard for the law. the president ignoring the recommendation from one of his own political appointees, the special counsel, who said trump aide kellyanne conway's repeated violations of the hatch act are cause for removing her from her post. but someone's not letting this go. the house oversight committee announced they will hold a hearing with the office of the special counsel where conway will be invited to answer for her violations. chairman cummings releasing a

statement that says this, quote, complying with the law is not optional. president trump should terminate ms. conway's employment immediately in light of these dozens of violations of federal law. allowing ms. conway to continue her position of trust at the white house would demonstrate that the president is not interested in following the law or requiring his closest aides to do so. everyone is still here. i think i was talking about this during the break. if i talked about it on tv, i'm sorry to everybody. when i worked in the white house, we had two of everything, because you couldn't spend a nanosecond doing anything other than official government business. so if you had any occasion of contact -- i ended up going to the campaigns. i didn't have this situation for long, but you had a political phone and a political laptop. you did nothing. the lines were so stark. it's not just an obliteration of norm's question. i think it's a real test of whether donald trump's teflon nature when it comes to breaking the law is transferrable. >> in this case at least, i

don't know if it's politically transferrable, whether they'll pay a political price for it, but she's not going to lose her job. there's so much wrong with the president's argument around free speech. the supreme court has looked at the hatch act specifically and made the point, everyone has the right to free speech. no one has the right to be a government employee. you don't have the right, as a government employee, to use government resources to attack a campaign opponent. and it is especially galling to me because you look at i think about pete strzok and lisa page, the two former fbi employees, who were in their own time exercising their free speech rights to talk about donald trump, not publicly, but privately, and have been accused of treason by the president for doing that. but i have another concern going forward. if kellyanne conway, if there's no consequence for her doing this, and appears there is going to be no consequence, there's nothing to stop the white house from hiring a new press secretary, reinstating the daily briefing, and using the daily briefing every day in 2020 to attack the democratic nominee

from the white house podium with the official u.s. government seal behind them. >> and sell javanka's shoes and hats. some of the violations weren't just around political conduct. i think some of them were around buy this, buy that. >> that's right, she's a repeat offender, and the repeated offenses were starting to attack from the white house democratic candidates, which is an obvious gross abuse of government resources and a violation of the law. >> rich painter was my ethics official, so i couldn't even have a soda by your colleague, jim vand high, who is a white house correspondent for "the washington post." >> was he trying to bribe you for stories? >> no. he did offer to buy me a coffee. the laws were so strict. i wanted to read some of what the hatch act says. this is what you know as an employee, and kellyanne has been around politics a long time. employee means any individual other than the president and vice president employed or holding office in an executive agency other than the government accountability office. an employee may not use his

official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election. it also forbids you from doing anything commercial. she seems to be guilty on both those fronts. >> right. and i remember when she did say if she'd go out and buy ivanka's shoes and handbags or whatever it was, that sean spicer said from the podium she was being counseled about it. and i'm told when president trump heard about that, he's like, no, she's not. i'm not counseling her. that's great. >> i'm guessing he's not the counselor of choice. >> he certainly didn't agree with the idea that she should have been counseled for that. so the fact, just to echo matthew's point, the fact that they made such a strong recommendation, this was a political appointee. again, this is not some deep state. i'm using that in a glib way, but this is a trump political appointee who made this recommendation. they described it as unprecedented.

the president has the discretion as to whether to fire her or not, but again, i don't know as a layperson what is stopping them, you know -- like what does stop the white house press secretary standing up and making statements about candidates that he's against and making campaign statements? i mean, if they know they're not going to be fired -- going to be fired -- >> nothing. i mean the answer is nothing. >> does this hatch act mean anything, then? is there any -- >> not to them. >> it's about ethics and norms. i look back, there were members of the bush administration, the obama administration, there are other people who have been dinged for this. castro was sort of sanctioned for saying, hey, look, you're talking about campaign stuff. so it matters. but also it helps us sort of separate church and state so that you don't have kellyanne conway basically doing home shopping network for the trump organization whenever she goes on tv. the problem this speaks to, which is what has always been the issue, is it speaks to how

the democratic party has absolutely no fear. they've elicited no fear in this administration. they can do this sort of thing, and trump basically says, come at me. i'm not going to do anything. which is how he responds to everything. >> he actually set that, come at me. >> i worked in the white house office of political affairs under obama. i had three blackberries, a personal one, a political one, and a white house one. they were in my pockets and -- anyway, look at the end of the day, the fish rots at its head. it's a lawless administration like you were saying. he believes he's above the law, the rules don't apply to him, the law doesn't apply to him, and it doesn't apply to anybody that works for him. >> and the beat goes on. we're going to sneak in our very last break. don't go anywhere. we'll be right back. ht back. a wealth of information. a wealth of perspective. ♪ a wealth of opportunities. that's the clarity you get from fidelity wealth management. straightforward advice, tailored recommendations, tax-efficient investing strategies,

and a dedicated advisor to help you grow and protect your wealth. fidelity wealth management. to help you grow and protect your wealth. ♪ (music plays throughout)♪ ♪ play it cool and escape heartburn fast with new tums chewy bites cooling sensation. ♪ tum tum tum tums with new tums chewy bites cooling sensation. and i don't add trup the years.s. but what i do count on... is boost® delicious boost® high protein nutritional drink

has 20 grams of protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals. boost® high protein. be up for life. ours is a proud bloodline. we hail from the battlefields to the badlands. from the mountains and the midtowns. from the islands to the highlands. and directly to those who understand... that when you get behind the wheel. you're not just driving a jeep wrangler. you're joining a family. it's tough to quit smoking cold turkey. so chantix can help you quit slow turkey. along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix, you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting. chantix reduces the urge so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye.

when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking or life threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. quit smoking slow turkey. talk to your doctor about chantix.

we're out of time. my thanks today to matt miller, jonathan swan, careen jean pierre and jason johnson. to our friends here at the washington bureau for hosting us, and to you for watching. a new cover-up. let's play "hardball." \s good evening. i'm crist matthews in washington. he's done it again. the president just told us he would take political dirt from a foreign government woke up this morning in full denial. in big 2020 news, the lineups are set which will be held over two nights. i'll predict the candidates, and at the end of this hour, back-seat