field because to be honest, great profile, great background isn't going to do it because the older voters are biden voters who takes them away. somebody who ignites passion among younger voters. >> really interesting. we'll be watching your programming. stay tuned tomorrow for more of joy's outstanding conversations from tomorrow. have a great weekend. that is all for this weekend. the "rachel maddow show" starts now with ali melber there. if i were at a fish fry on a friday night in columbia, south carolina, i wouldn't have that much politics on my mind. >> a lot more fish. >> you have a fantastic week. thanks for joining us at this hour. rachel has the night off. she will be back on monday. i will try not to break the furniture while i'm here. tonight is officially the first summer friday of 2019. it doesn't feel like it tonight in the news. for starters, a couple of hours ago a federal court unsealed something that we not only did not see coming, we didn't even

know it existed. a series of hundreds of text messages between trump campaign chair paul manafort and a fellow he calls shawn. that would be our friend shawn hannity of the fox news channel. apparently mr. manafort and mr. hannity were exchanging text messages on a nearly constant basis in 2017 and 2018 starting a few months before manafort's indictment on multiple felony tax and bank fraud and conspiracy charges. pretty much right up to the moment mr. manafort went to jail. the judge in manafort's case was examining these text messages to determine if manafort and his lawyer may have violated the gag order on the case by talking to a tv host and now the messages have been made public. the texts are largely messages of support from hannity. i know this is very hard. stand tall and strong. we are all on the same team, says hannity.

manafort responds, and we will prevail. exactly, says hannity. hannity also spends a lot of time asking if manafort is watching his show and they discuss hannity's theories of the deep state and hillary clinton's crimes and how manafort is being railroaded, sometimes hannity appears to text manafort during his broadcast, quote, you watching? manafort responds, yes. i love you. manafort, i hope potus, meaning president trump, understands your point. hannity replies, i tell him a lot, a real lot. so that is how this evening started. right now let's take a look at this. you are looking at a live shot from columbia, south carolina, or you will be momentarily where 22 democratic presidential hopefuls are gathered to take part in one of the biggest political events in this key early primary state, namely congressman jim clyburn's annual fish fry.

tonight is the first time in the race that so many democratic contenders are appearing together at the same event. also tonight, a bombshell story on the cover of "new york" magazine. here's the headline, this is what i was wearing 23 years ago when donald trump attacked me in aburg dorf dressing room. because all of that was not enough for one summer friday evening, the washington post says that president trump has directed immigration and customs enforcement to, quote, conduct a mass roundup of migrant families with pre-dawn raids in major u.s. cities on sunday. now there's been some confusion about these raids. trump first said the raids would round up millions, then officials said there was no such plan. then it was reported that a much smaller plan had kind of sort of been in the works for a while maybe and now we have word that

donald trump has ordered that operation. the trouble with covering news like this is certainly an operation to round up 2,000 undocumented immigrants specifically targeted at families, well, that's a big, serious consequential thing for a lot of people. that is a scary thing. but if there's one thing donald trump is invested in more than any other, it is that he is personally ordering big, serious consequential scary things aimed at immigrants. i mean, we don't know if this operation is actually going to happen on sunday, but we definitely know the president wants people to think it is. as the washington post put it today, quote, some within dhs and i.c.e. says the president appears to be using the operation for political purposes as he begins his re-election bid. law enforcement officials worry that by publicly discussing the plan trump has undermined capturing those on the target list as it likely pushed migrants with deportation orders underground. if trump is undercutting the

success of his own operation by announcing it in advance, it's probably safe to say that announcing the operation is more important to him than actually carrying it out. that's a pattern. earlier this year president trump announced on twitter that he was cutting off federal emergency aid for california that he was convinced that they were doing something wrong with the forest management or something. it turned out he never ordered fema to do anything of the sort. last fall trump boasted confidently about a new tax cut that he and republicans in congress had come up with. they were putting the finishing touches on it. it would be unveiled right before the election. no one in congress had any idea what the president was talking about and even white house officials quietly admitted they were mistified. when asked about the tax cut trump's own treasury secretary said this, i quote, i'm not going to comment on whether it is a real thing or not a real thing. trump talked about it at his

rallies. it was a major applause line, but as you may have noticed, there was no new tax cut plan. there never had been. the president likes to say that his border wall is being built, has been built, is nearly finished, is finished. one time they even put up a flak on some replacement fencing that had been ordered by the obama administration and they just called it trump's wall. it's created the strange, uncomfortable dynamic in which everyone, the press, foreign governments, they have to be gauging what relationship if any trump's pronouncements have to reality. last year after trump announced he was calling off negotiations over the dreamers, undocumented immigrants brought here as children, "the new york times" noted in passing, quote, it was unclear whether the president's tweets represented any change in his immigration policy or were just the sort of venting he is known to do after reading a newspaper article or seeing a television program.

the same year when trump announced he was delaying a trade agreement with south korea, david ignatius said were the president's comments been holding the new trade deal, was that real? did he really mean that or was he just ad-libbing. the president is in effect an unreliable narrator of his own presidency, and everyone knows that which is a big, big part of what makes the current situation we are in, this fraught situation with iran so dangerous. >> did you green light something or had you said if we do t i'll do this? what was the order you gave? >> nothing is being added until the very end because things change. >> never gave a final order? >> no, no, no, but we had something ready to go subject to my approval and they came in and they came in about half an hour before. sir, we're about ready to go. i said, i want a better -- >> were planes in the air? >> about ready to go. no, but they would have been pretty soon and things would

have happened to a point where you wouldn't turn back or couldn't turn back. so they came and they said, sir, we're ready to go. we'd like a decision. i said, i want to know something before you go. how many people will be killed? in this case iranians. i said, how many people are going to be killed? sir, i'd like to get back to you on that. great people, these generals. they said -- came back and said, sir, approximately 150. and i thought about it for a second. i said, you know what, they shot down an unmanned drone, plane, whatever you want to call it, and here we are sitting with 150 dead peej that would have taken place probably within a half an hour after i said go ahead and i didn't like it. i didn't think it was -- i didn't think it was proportionate. >> okay. obviously we don't know what happened last night in the white house when a missile strike on iran was ostensibly ordered and canceled. we weren't in the room, but it is nearly impossible to believe

that it went down as the president described it to chuck todd today. the president is saying that half an hour before the planes were to take off to launch a carefully planned missile strike he asked his generals how many casualties there would be, and the generals who had planned this operation and presented it to the president and prepped it to go and were ready to launch, you know what, that's a good question. we hadn't thought about that. we're not sure. let us get back to you. if that is what happened, that level of carelessness and slap dash planning would be a scandal unto itself. ryan goodman suggested that it would likely be illegal to approve an operation without knowing the estimated casualties that it would cause and then there is the multiple source reporting from various outlets contradicting the president's version of events. "the new york times" reporting that the planes were already in the air when the president canceled the operation. the washington post reporting this evening that in fact the president was informed of the number of estimated casualties

earlier in the day when he approved the strike. the president being an unreliable narrator makes it difficult, if not impossible, for us as citizens to understand exactly what is happening here. was there actually a strike ordered and then called off at the last minute? why did that happen? who in the administration decided it would be a good thing for us all to know that that is what happened? because it was leaked to the press almost immediately. much of the information we're getting may, in fact, by the various factions trying to box the president into a particular course of action because as we know, the president's main source of information is this, cable television. the "times" reports that, quote, mr. trump's national security advisors split about whether to respond militarily to the downing of an american drone. quote, senior administration officials said secretary of state mike pompeo, john bolton, and gina has kehl, the cia director, had favored a military response but top pentagon

officials cautioned that such an effort could have a spiraling effect. if it is top pentagon officials who are the primary voice against escalation with iran, then this is probably a particularly bad time for one acting defense chief to be handing off to another acting defense chief. tonight the president did announce his intention to nominate that new acting chief to be the actual defense secretary, which means he will be going through the senate confirmation process as this confrontation with iran unspools. ever since this administration withdrew from the iran nuke dleerl and began rachetting up pressure on iran, it's been unclear what its goal is or what its end game is. we've reached this point where to hear the president tell it last night, last night we may have been minutes away from a strike that could potentially have led to a war. and we have little to no clarity

about what happened or why or what happens next. joining us now, courtney que, the national news security and military reporter who just returned from the united arab emirates. courtney, thank you for joining us tonight. courtney, you know the pentagon well. yesterday night we got reporting that planes were in the air and ships were in position and the president called off the strike. today the president told chuck todd that the planes were not in the air. what are you hearing? >> reporter: so the ships would already have been in position. so u.s. central command has anywhere between 60 and 80,000 troops, ships, aircraft throughout the region at any given time. the aircraft -- the officials who i've spoken with say that in fact the aircraft were not in the air at the time yet but that they were close. so, you know, you made a good point in the intro, and that's the idea that the military when they were planning the

operations and all the options, they look at all of the contingencies, and one of those is the collateral damage assessment. that is the potential for how many civilians could be hurt or killed in this kind of an operation. what we don't know is exactly what happened at that meeting at the white house yesterday? did they sit him down and explain to him the collateral damage assessment or not? but the notion that it wouldn't be part of the original military planning is pretty difficult to understand, ali. >> and following on that, is it possible that the president would only have learned that approximately 150 people would die with minutes to spare? i would imagine when there's a submission of that sort of proposal general barry mccaffrey told me they have proposals for any contingency, about places you don't think we have aggressive relationships with. the idea of what we call collateral damage, the death of people, that would have to be very high up in that report.

>> it would be but, again, what we don't know is exactly what happened when they presented that to him. if that's something he didn't ask the question or if for some reason they didn't present it. as part of basic and very standard military planning for an operation like this, especially something so high profile, i find it impossible to believe that that wasn't part of the original planning but, again, we just don't know how the conversation was. when you look at the basic idea here, i was also struck when the president said that 150 people, whether that is civilians or iranian military, would have potentially been killed in these kinds of strikes. that is not -- the military officials i was speaking to said this would be -- any kind of reaction would be very proportional, that it would be -- to what actually happened here. the iranian revolutionary guard shot down an unmanned drone, an expensive drone, no loss of life. you would think that the u.s. military response would be something that would take out

perhaps the place where they shot the surface to air missile from, perhaps the radar system that was used to lock in on the grown. something like that. the notion that it would involve that many casualties was surprising. >> there was some question about where this drone was shot. what iran claims is it was in iranian air space and america claims it was in international air space. we're now hearing some reporting that it was in iranian air space. what are you hearing about that? >> so the u.s. military denies they had any access. the military maintains they both stayed in international air space. one of the problems is iran sees the strait of hormuz as their territorial waters and air space. they might believe despite the

fact that the community sees it as international waters, they may believe it drifted into their territorial waters. i was out on the gulf of oman where that drone was shot down and i can tell you that that area is considered international waters if, in fact, the drone went down where the u.s. military tells us it did. >> courtney kube, thank you for your reporting. joining us now, dr. vale naaser, a veteran of the obama state department. dr. naaser, thank you for joining us. >> thank you. >> the president has said that the drone was shot down in international waters as i was just discussing with courtney, and he's been out making the case that some sort of rogue actor may have organized the attack. fox news is reporting that the president was told that iranian leadership was furious that the drone was shot down and that's why he called off the attack and all along the way iran has

rebuffed these claims. they have refused the exact coordinates. it's come up and said it intended to hit the drone. it wasn't an accident. there was a manned aircraft that it chose not to hit. why is iran responding the way it is. >> i think the iranians are frustrated with the economic pressure on them. they realize that washington's very comfortable applying pressure on iran. iran's economy is now in shambles. the united states wants to reduce iran's oil to zero, wants to bankrupt the economy, crush it. iranians want to essentially change the impasse that they're in. they want to change the calculus in washington. put pressure on trump. send a signal to trump that using maximum pressure is not cost free.

if he doesn't want to go to war with iran, he has to think about this definitely. >> when you say if he doesn't want to go to war with iran, he has to think about this differently, what does thinking about this differently mean? one side he's been inviting president rouhani to dinner. he's done it eight times and rebuffed the president the day before and said he would take with the ayatollah. there's obviously some distance between negotiations with iran and throwing down drones and launching airstrikes? >> first of all, the iranians want the u.s. to release some pressure. they are not going to go to talks if they are choking on their sanctions. secondly, they don't trust trump. he, after all, broke a nuclear deal that was working and then

he has a national security team that are hawks. trump says, let's talk. look who's standing behind trump, john bolton, secretary pompeo. these are people who don't want to talk, they want to crush the iranian regime. as a result, it's not very clear to them. what's the purpose of this pressure? is it really to talk or is it to bring about regime change and the collapse of the iranian state. secondly, iranians want to go into talks and think trump takes them seriously. okay, i just applied pressure and they're surrendering, waiving the white flag. i can put even more pressure on them at the table. so they're trying to get some leverage from trump by saying, look, we have sophisticated military. we can't shoot down a drone 30,000 feet in the sky. we're willing to be as reckless as you. we're willing to risk more. we're willing to hit tankers,

disrupt the oil economy, hit our neighbors. you know, don't think just because we haven't done anything in the past two years that we're going to play dead going forward. >> one of the things we've been discussing today and for the last week that the united states has far superior military power than iran. iran can wage asymmetric war. they have influence around the region and small in sometimes the corollary to american airstrikes, for instance. >> well, first of all, iraq proved that, proved the technological superiority of the u.s. forces does not guarantee that it can actually successfully manage a war. we won the war against iraq in two weeks and then got stuck in a quagmire that approved to be trillions of dollars. secondly, iranians understand

the american might may be great, but the political tolerance for risking body bags and risking the wrath of the american people is actually very short. they know that trump doesn't want to go to war. that's not his inclination, but also in an election year trump may have vulnerabilities of going to war with iraq. he's not as vulnerable to iranian pressure as we may think. >> dr. naaser, thank you again for joining us tonight. >> thank you. we have a lot more to get to this first summer friday. senator chris murphy will get here and we have the latest of new allegations of sexual assault. stay with us.

when crabe stronger...strong, with new nicorette coated ice mint. layered with flavor... it's the first and only coated nicotine lozenge. for an amazing taste... ...that outlasts your craving. new nicorette ice mint. i've done all sorts of research, read earnings reports, looked at chart patterns. i've even built my own historic trading model. and you're still not sure if you want to make the trade? exactly. sounds like a case of analysis paralysis. is there a cure? td ameritrade's trade desk. they can help gut check your strategies and answer all your toughest questions. sounds perfect. see, your stress level was here and i got you down to here, i've done my job. call for a strategy gut check with td ameritrade. ♪ through the at&t network, edge-to-edge intelligence

gives you the power to see every corner of your growing business. from finding out what's selling best... to managing your fleet... to collaborating remotely with your teams. giving you a nice big edge over your competition. that's the power of edge-to-edge intelligence. as a family, we always mum and dad are always saying... i love the breakfasts... it's the lunch for me... we both like the snacks... and the comfy seats... granny always says... the crew are so lovely with... can i get you anything madam? my uncle loves emirates for... the thousands of channels... plus i never miss a live match...

and my sister, if she ever spoke to me... would say... it's the free wi-fi... duh! you get so much more on an emirates flight... even the baby would say... fly emirates. fly better.

these are their names. jessica leads, rachel crooks, kristin anderson, jill harth, kathy heller, temple taggart mcdowell. melinda mcgillivry. nina luxonen, jessica drake,

summer zerbos, juliet huddy, alba johnson, casandra searles. at least 15 women have accused the sitting president of the united states of sexual assault or misconduct. most of them coming forward during the 2016 campaign before he was elected. incidents of groping, forced kissing, unwanted sexual attention. today there's another name to add to the list but this one is different. e. jean carole is a journalist. she's written for some of the top magazines. at one point she had her own column. she reports a violent assault by then real estate tie coop president trump. they bumped into each other in the mid 1990s. fair warning, the excerpt i am about to read is very graphic in nature so if you've got young

viewers, you may want to ask them to leave the room. quoting from the piece, in carole's account, trump shoves her against a wall inside a dressing room, pulls down her tights and these are carole's own words, forcing his fingers around my private area forces his mean news halfway or completely i'm not certain inside me. like all of the allegations of sexual misconduct, the president denies this. in a statement this evening he says in part, regarding the story, in quotes, by e. jean carole, she's trying to sell a new book. that should indicate her motivation. it should be sold in the fiction section. i would like to thank bergdorf goodman for confirming they have no video footage of any such incident because it never happened. the president also said, quote, i've never met this person in my life. for what it's worth, here's a picture of donald trump talking with e. jean carole in 1987 about a decade before the

alleged attack. as for why she's coming forward now, death threats, being dismissed, being dragged through the mud and joining the 15 women who have come forward with the credible story how he grabbed, badgered, belittled, malled, molested them to see him turn it around never sounded like much fun. it's taken e. jean carole years to come forward but now she is speaking out. she'll join my colleague lawrence o'donnell as a guest on "the last word." we'll be right back. ight back.

what is that? uh mine, why? it's just that it's... lavender. yes it is, it's for men but i like the smell of it laughs ♪ 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. i was told to begin my aspirin regimen, blem. and i just didn't listen. until i almost lost my life. my doctors again ordered me to take aspirin, and i do. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen.

listen to the doctor. take it seriously. so chantix can help you quit slow turkey.rkey. 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.

the latest charter school scandals are piling up. leaders of one san diego charter network? indicted for conspiracy and grand theft. thankfully, the governor's charter school policy task force just made important recommendations for reform: more accountability on charter school spending. and giving local school districts more control over the authorization of charter schools. reforms we need to pass now. so call your state senator. ask them to support ab 1505 and ab 1507.

if you were skeptical of the president's claim that he learned about potential civilian casualties only minutes before a planned missile strike on iran and called it off you're not alone. quote, the idea that an american president didn't bother to ask about civilian casualties before ordering a massive military strike, getting around to it only 600 seconds before the attack was to begin, is mind boggling. don't let this ever feel normal. don't let this ever feel normal. joining me now is senator who tweeted that, senator chris murphy of connecticut who sits on the senate foreign relations committee. thank you for joining us tonight. you are on the foreign relations committee. were you or your chair men briefed on the idea that we were on the brink of starting war? >> i can't speak for the chairman of the committee, but certainly members of the committee were not briefed on

this. in fact, we have spent the last week pressing for a vote in the united states senate to make it very clear that the president of the united states does not possess the legal ability to preemptively strike iran without congressional authorization. the constitution is pretty darn clear on that count and while it is unbelievable to think that the president didn't ask about casualties until ten minutes before, it frankly isn't surprising to those of us who, you know, have listened to how totally uncurious this president is about the national security briefings that he is supposed to being reading, how he asks very few questions about the policy proposals that are being put in front of him. it just makes us all shudder to think about what comes after the strike if we do actually get into a long-term war with iran. if the president isn't asking about casualties, is he really asking about what the effects are when it comes to american troops that are being put in harm by his recklessness. >> let's talk about the authorization to use military

force. senator schumer said today as you just articulated that you are looking for a -- an action in congress for this. there's been some chatter that this administration is prepared to use the authorization of military force that was authorized for 9/11 to go ahead with this. >> yeah, that's been asked. the authorization that was passed in 2001 was an authorization to root out al qaeda primarily in afghanistan. if you use the 2001 aumf to suggest that anywhere any member of al qaeda has ever been or transited through, then that is a permanent authorization for war without any congressional check in almost every single country in the middle east and africa. the fact of the matter is, i don't think there's a lawyer worth his salt who would tell the president that you can pervert the 2001 aumf to invade iran over a dispute that has

nothing to do with their support for al qaeda, by the way. we're talking about invading or a at that being iran because of their nuclear ambitions or because of provocations that have happened in the last few weeks. so we are all very worried about the president's potential reliance on an outdated authorization or his just willingness to ignore the entire issue of authorization. he may just say that he has article 2 authority to protect the united states and the congress be dammed. that's why we have to pass this by next week. >> we had heard perhaps it was the people at the pentagon who cautioned against doing this. maybe it was someone from the joint chiefs. we know john bolton is hawkish on iran. we know that secretary of state pompeo is. we've heard that gina haspel of the cia was arguing for military action. you notice i didn't mention a defense secretary. in the past hour the president

has nominated mark esper. >> it's tragic it's taken six months for the president to put this name forward. we were all bewildered as to why it took so long to put shanahan's name forth. esper has much more practical experience. yes, he does come from the defense structure and i'll be willing to take a look at his nomination. i'm glad the congress put it in perspective. his twitter feed exposed to the entire world how absolutely out of control the decision-making process is inside the white house. frankly, a new secretary of defense is not going to change that reality. the president does not consider facts. he makes it up as he goes along. this campaign of mindless

escalation with iran has had no end game behind it and i'm not sure that a new secretary of defense is going to cure those aisles. >> thanks. >> a new democratic plan for getting most out of non-answers from a former white house staffer. stay with us. staffer. stay with us ♪

there are roadside attractions. and then there's our world-famous on-road attraction. the 2019 glc. lease the glc 300 suv for just $459 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. here are even more reasons to join t-mobile. 1. do you like netflix? sure you do. that's why it's on us. 2. unlimited data. use as much as you want, when you want. 3. no surprises on your bill. taxes and fees included. still think you have a better deal? bring in your discount, and we'll match it. that's right. t-mobile will match your discount. when crabe stronger...strong, with new nicorette coated ice mint. layered with flavor... it's the first and only coated nicotine lozenge. for an amazing taste... ...that outlasts your craving. new nicorette ice mint.

metastatic breast cancer is relentless, but i was relentless first. relentless about learning the first song we ever danced to. about teaching him to put others first. about helping her raise her first child. and when i was first diagnosed, my choice was everyday verzenio. it's the only one of its kind that can be taken every day. it gives us more time without cancer progressing. verzenio is the only cdk4 & 6 inhibitor approved with hormonal therapy that can be taken every day for postmenopausal women with hr+, her2- mbc. diarrhea is common, may be severe, or cause dehydration or infection. before taking verzenio, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection. verzenio may cause low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infection that can lead to death. serious liver problems can occur. symptoms include tiredness, appetite loss, stomach pain, and bleeding or bruising. blood clots that can lead to death have occurred. tell your doctor if you have pain or swelling in your arms or legs, shortness of breath, chest pain, rapid breathing or heart rate, or if you are pregnant, nursing, or plan to be pregnant.

common side effects include nausea, infections, low blood cells and platelets, decreased appetite, headache, abdominal pain, tiredness, vomiting, and hair thinning or loss. my relentless reason: it's them. my choice with my doctor: it's verzenio. ask your doctor if everyday verzenio is right for your first treatment. former white house communications director hope hicks showed up foreclosed door testimony before the house judiciary committee. we could see from the transcript yesterday that hicks refused to answer 155 questions including really tough ones, like where was your office located in the west wing? now house judiciary chairman tells politico that he plans to use that transcript as a real life illustration of the white house stonewalling as they ask the court to force don mcgahn to testify. it's one thing to tell the judge blanket immunity is not a right

thing. it's another thing when a judge can see what that means in actuality and how absurd it is. if nadler could win that against don mcgahn, that would open up testimony for more witnesses the white house has kept out of reach. there's one more aspect to keep an eye on. when it was first announced that hope hicks would testify, another interview with another trump insider was announced the same day, annie donaldson. it turns out she was a big notetaker. her notes figure prominently in the mueller report like when she wrote about the president being, quote, in panic/chaos over the russia investigation or when she wondered whether it was, quote, the beginning of the end because she was worried that the decision to terminate comey and the manner in which it was carried out could be the end of the presidency. on monday annie donaldson's chance to testify will show up. will she show up and talk?

if she doesn't, if she still stonewalls does that give nadler even more fire power in the court battle ahead? joining us now, former u.s. attorney and msnbc contributor barbara mcquade. the house judiciary chairman jerry natd ldler is saying the transcript, it's fodder for an argument that the white house shouldn't argue for this immunity or this executive privilege over some of these questions. >> yes. they had to go through that exercise. they established the record that the -- what they're saying is that a witness doesn't have to answer any single question at all. the mere fact that they were an aide to the president means that

hands off, congress, you can't ask this person anything. now hope hicks did answer questions that pre-dated her time in the white house, time on the campaign and the transition, but anything that occurred during the time in the white house, including as you said before, location of her desk. >> why would there be an objection to an answer like that? clearly that's something people would know. >> i think they were making the point, we are going to object to every single question. you have no right to ask her any question whatsoever. now the executive privilege is slightly different, which is on a question by question basis you can invoke that privilege to say, i'll answer most of your questions, but when it gets into these candid deliberations between the president and the aide, we want to make sure that we include -- incentivize people to be candid. so there is room. it is a legitimate thing to protect executive privilege. >> there might be national security any interest?

>> yes. what i worry is using executive privilege over everything, then it will be rendered meaningless down the road. it is something that's important to use judiciously, selectively. when president trump says i'm fighting all the subpoenas, i'm refusing to answer anything, it really loses credibility when he does try to assert it. >> assess house chairman jerry nadler's chances. how does this work as he sues, as he goes to court, and what happens? >> i think there is a very strong likelihood that the committee prevails on this argument. this idea of immunity, executive immunity has been addressed by just one court. it's been rejected by that court. i don't see any reason to think it will come out differently. they had to go through that exercise yesterday to build the record, show the judge was happy. the courts are reluctant to get involved but here where he can show we really are at an impasse, we really do need a

court to direct members of the white house staff to come in. i think they'll prevail. >> if the court is reluctant to get involved in political items, do they have to say this is not political? it's a legitimate pursuit of information. you'll see them refrain from getting involved in questions and political questions. when you have a battle of constitutional powers, i think there is enough precedent with the united states versus nixon saying that the executive privilege is only a qualified privilege and that if the need for the information out weighs the need to keep the information confidential, then that privilege has to give. i think we'll get an answer. if nadler persists in this legal strategy, he will prevail. >> the judge in paul manafort's case unsealed 56 pages of text messages between sean hannity and paul manafort in 2017 and 2018 when he was supposed to be under a gag order.

did you get a chance to see any of those, make sense of what they mean and what impact they have? >> i did take a look at them. what we see is paul manafort is communicating with sean hannity. it's not just that shaean hanni is sympathizing, but from a legal standpoint, paul manafort is under a gag order. i don't want you talking about it in public. what does he do? instead of speaking to himself, i've got a pretty good friend. he is sharing information with sean hannity with the purpose that it will be shared on his show. they're coordinating strategy so that sean hannity is sharing what paul manafort wants him to share and then paul manafort and his lawyers quote sean hannity and some of his guests on the show back to the judge and say,

look what all of these legal experts are saying. they think in my favor as well. he's really trying to play the public and play the judge by circumventing the gag order in this way. >> barbara, it is great to have you here. thank you so much for all of the help you provide us and our viewers with. >> thank you so much. >> barbara mcquade is an msnbc contributor. we have a major development in the story the show has been covering. you'll want to hear this just ahead. this just ahead. a that if we took two dimensional patient imaging and put it in holographic displays, we could dissect around the tumor so we can safely remove it. when we first started, we felt like this might just not be possible but verizon 5g ultra wideband will give us the ability to do this. ♪ when crabe stronger...strong, with new nicorette coated ice mint.

layered with flavor... it's the first and only coated nicotine lozenge. for an amazing taste... ...that outlasts your craving. new nicorette ice mint. (gasp) (singsong) budget meeting! sweet. if you compare last quarter to this quarter... various: mmm. it's no wonder everything seems a little better with the creamy taste of philly, made with fresh milk and real cream. with the creamy taste of philly, what is that? uh mine, why? it's just that it's... lavender. yes it is, it's for men but i like the smell of it laughs ♪ but i can tell you liberty mutual customized my car insurance so i only pay for what i need.

oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no... only pay for what you need. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

mno kidding.rd. but moving your internet and tv? that's easy. easy?! easy? easy. because now xfinity lets you transfer your service online in just about a minute with a few simple steps. really? really. that was easy. yup. plus, with two-hour appointment windows, it's all on your schedule. awesome. now all you have to do is move...that thing. [ sigh ] introducing an easier way to move with xfinity. it's just another way we're working to make your life simple, easy, awesome. go to xfinity.com/moving to get started.

today it was officially revoked. for weeks the only abortion provider in state of missouri a planned parenthood clinic in st. louis locked in a legal battle with the state health department trying to yarnk the clinical license. the entire state with no legal abortion facility. they refused to make up their mind, whether or not planned parenthood could keep its license. the state gave them until today to make up its mind. in a five-page letter to planned parenthood the health department told the last clinic it would be yanking its license. the fight is not quite over. the clinic is operating under a temporary reprieve even though its license is revoked. the clinic can stay open and doctors can continue to perform abortions until the judge

decides whether or not to let the state take away the clinic's license. when that will happen, when the judge makes up his mind is anyone's guess. rachel has been reporting on this show how the state of missouri told planned parenthood to stay open, in order to keep its license, that planned parenthood must subject every woman seeking an abortion to a mandatory medically unnecessary pelvic examination. doctors already administer a pelvic exam right before an abortion. that is medically necessary and it's fine. based on a new interpretation of state law the state told the last abortion clinic in missouri it must do a second unnecessary internal pelvic exam on every single woman who wants an abortion in missouri, at least three days before the actual procedure. the state essentially gave planned parenthood a choice. either agree to those terms or shut down. so planned parenthood agreed.

the staff and physicians started talking to us and the media how traumatizing it was to put their parents through an invasive procedure that they do not need. one doctor at the clinic told us the new mandate was akin to state sanctioned sexual assault. but they did it anyway, to stay open. and went on three weeks until wednesday. the doctors at that clinic said, they had had enough and would stop doing the extra exams. >> the idea we've been having to put women through something that's totally unnecessary, uncomfortable, inhumane just because the state has reinterpreted the rules isn't fair. i can't justify the harm inflishinflic inflicted on my parents to get one of the safest types of medical care provided in the country. the fact missouri is holding women action to care hostage and threatening the last bit of abortion access we have left in

the state at my health center, i think it's time for us to stand up and fight back. >> for three weeks the state mandated planned parenthood subjected women to a medically unnecessary vaginal probe before they can get an abortion. for three weeks the state ignored what these doctors said was best for their patients. for weeks the state made an unnecessary pelvic exam the cost of getting an abortion in the state until eventually those doctors said, no more. well, tonight the missouri state health except changing course. the state still wants to shut down the clinic, they made that clear in a letter, but in the same letter changed their mind about the extra pelvic exam saying planned parenthood no longer has to do this three days before 0 woman's abortion. three weeks this went on at insistence of the state.

after outcry from doctors, patients, medical physicians around the country the state changed its mind. we'll be right back. ht back. ...6, 7, 8 ht back. ♪ ♪ ♪ 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®. what do you look for i want free access to research. yep, td ameritrade's got that. free access to every platform. yeah, that too. i don't want any trade minimums. yeah, i totally agree, they don't have any of those. i want to know what i'm paying upfront. yes, absolutely. do you just say yes to everything? hm. well i say no to kale. mm. yeah, they say if you blanch it it's better, but that seems like a lot of work. no hidden fees. no platform fees. no trade minimums. and yes, it's all at one low price. td ameritrade. ♪

something worth watching on the west coast over the weekend. oregon state legislature in salem, oregon. democrats have majority control. the house and senate have big democratic majorities. one of the priorities for this session, pass a cap and trade

bill. a climate bill which republicans adamantly oppose. however, there aren't enough republicans in the oregon house or senate to defeat a bill like that, and so the democrats were poised to pass it. republicans figured out one thing they could do. they could leave. in order to have a quorum making a decision on action they need 20 senators to be present. 18 senators are democrats. they need 2 republicans to show up as well to be allowed to take action on any vote. wednesday night the republicans all left. and they haven't been seen since. the senate president formally requested the governor dispatch oregon state troopers to go find them so now oregon state troopers are searching the state to find the republicans who fled into hiding so oregon cannot pass a climate bill. this is what is happening politically in oregon right now. it took a dark turn. after law enforcement got involved this republican state

senator threatened multiple times overtly including on tape that if oregon state troopers find him and approach him he will shoot and kill those troopers. >> this is what i told the superintendent. i'm not going to be a prisoner in the state of oregon's that simple. >> the rhetoric caught militia and one told the "daily beast" they were mobilized to protect the runaway republicans and there was "potential for violence" and would were defend the senators "at any cost." tonight word from a reporter for a local nbc station in oregon tomorrow's senate session canceled because reports of a planned rally that may include militia members i don't know how this resolves in oregon but gospeed and good luck to the troopers try to do their job in the face of this.

rachel is back monday live in miami getting ready to moderate the first democratic debate. i'll be back on my show monday at wurn a1:00 and 3:00 p.m. don't miss it. now time for lawrence o'donnell and "the last word." >> thank you. see you. and running against democratic senator who beat roy moore. doug jones joins us later to discuss his rematch with ron moore and senator jones' reaction to president trump's crisis management with iran, and other issues. but first -- today the president of the united states was accused of rape. again. the president's new accuser, columnist and author e.