and joyce is right about the breakdown. there are -- manafort is charged with nine counts of bank fraud, five counts of failing to fail a correct tax return and four counts of a foreign bank count. so multiple categories must be included in those counts. >> eugene, let me put up something that aaron blake wrote today. this is what hiring the best people look like. people that pleaded guilty, michael cohen, michael flynn, rick gates, george papadopoulos. we'll get a verdict today with paul manafort. and indicted his first endorser in congress, chris collins. so this is the best people for you. >> this is what you elect donald trump as president of the united states. this is who he is -- >> a criminal enterprise? >> this is the kind of people he surrounded himself with. you know, paul manafort is on trial for tax fraud, bank fraud. everybody around this table knew about paul manafort, knew about his reputation. you know, and so this wasn't -- this is not at all far-fetched. >> it was an open secret in washington. he had a dir

joyce, let me start with you. bearing in mind, you're not an expert on election law, but i want to stick with one point that geoff just raised there about the dangers, the legal dangers of taking a meeting with representatives of a foreign country to offer dirt here on an opposing candidate in a u.s. election. help us understand the legal consequences of that. >> there's a very specific statute that prohibits this kind of conduct. it makes it illegal to accept or to solicit a donation or a contribution related to a u.s. election from either a foreign citizen or a foreign government. so on its face, that prohibition would seem to apply pretty clearly. if, for instance, while running a presidential campaign, you took a meeting with russians who wanted to give you some information that you could use to get your candidate elected. obviously, there's lots of legal detail work that has to be done to make sure that each element of that statute would be satisfied. but on its face, this is a very damaging admission for the

trump's not good at that. >> joyce vance is back with us.hat do you make of lindsey graham's half of a joke, as he calls it? >> it's actually not a very good joke or maybe the joke ends up being on someone in the trump fam male. because when senator graham is talking about collusion we know that the federal charge would really be conspiracy. and the ens of a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a criminal act. so it's really pretty simple. it could be as simple as the russians offering to provide election assistance and someone on the trump side saying if you say it's what it is, i love it. >> and from the graham defense is since donald trump is bad at everything, he is so bad at trying to commit a crime he can't commit a crime. >> they've been trotting this up as too disorganized to collude. what i was struck by as i went through it minute by minute is within hours of that dump the trump people had chosen their talking points. as chaotic as they were, they had seized on which e-mails to weaponinize, which to use t

joyce vance, thanks for sticking around. phil and chuck, thank you very much. >>> and liar versus liar. is robert mueller's star witness in the paul manafort case as trustworthy as prosecutors need him to be? through ancestry, through dna i found out that i was only 16% italian. he was 34% eastern european. so i went onto ancestry, soon learned that one of our ancestors we thought was italian was eastern european. this is my ancestor who i didn't know about. he looks a little bit like me, yes. ancestry has many paths to discovering your story. get started for free at ancestry.com ♪ it is such a good time to dance ♪ ♪ it is such a good time to [ laughing ] ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo ♪ scoobidoo doobidoo [ goose honking ] ♪ [ laughing ] a bad day on the road still beats a good one off it. ♪ progressive helps keep you out there. ♪ with the new chase ink business unlimited card i get unlimited 1.5% cash back. it's so simple, i don't even have to think about it. so i think about the details. fine, i obsess over the details. introducing

joyce, let me start with you. what did you hear in that, that might be of interest to robert mueller? >> if she can prove it, then mueller and his team will be all ears. if she can't prove it, then it's just more hearsay. >> kimberly atkins, let me ask you about this idea that people in the white house had sort of casual knowledge and hearsay knowledge of what went on, both on the campaign in terms of the chain of control or the knowledge ahead of time about the hacked e-mails. >> yeah, i mean, i think it's an extraordinary claim. i agree with joyce that you need some sort of evidence to back it up if that does exist, that could be potentially explosive. i think the way that omarosa talked about it is also interesting. it seems that she's preparing for this legal battle that she's about to engage in with the campaign, who has filed an arbitration claim to -- over this book and saying that they had an nda with her. by saying that she essentially is a whistleblower. she kept using that term, that seems to be the def

honig, joyce vance and mike lupica. i'll begin with you. you've tried many cases and been around many cases. have you ever seen live leaks of interview negotiations on a call-in show. >> no, i've never seen anything like it. i think what's happening is there's a chess game getting under way. rudy giuliani is making these demands on conditions for an interview that are really just outrageous. he wants written questions. i've done hundreds of witness interviews. i've never once submitted a written question. it defeats the whole purpose. you need to size the person up. you don't just want their lawyer to turn out some lawyerly response. certain areas are out of bounds. >> well, in a lot of cases there's what's called interrogatories which are the kind of low stakes written question thing that nobody considers as serious as a real interview. >> exactly, they're formalities. it's no substitute for sitting across from someone and sizing them up. >> and i believe, mike lupica, if you could work on a lyric about interrogatories, you have one minute

as joyce said, this happens all the time. it can be remedied. the key for me on this is whether there's any appealable issue. it sounds like there's no disagreement between the defense and the prosecution on this. it sounds like it was an amicable agreement to resolve it. if this is what happened we move on. don't forget, there are alternate jurors if indeed this continues to happen, this is why you have alternates. you cannive sert someone and dismiss the juror who is causing an issue. this may have been it. we may be wrong. there may have been something else going on, as well. >> joyce vance, let me ask you to weigh in on the other story we mentioned at the top of the show, this ruling this conversation could be sealed because of concerns about gates' testimony in the context of the larger ongoing investigation. >> this i think is very interesting. we also heard this week that it was possible that gates wouldn't be any jail time at all at the end of these proceedings. you'll remember he was indicted along with manafort for the whole kit and ca

that's how they see it. >> joyce, it seems like that is a strategy of necessity. and if that's a strategy of necessity, it would seem the facts are not on their side. i think there are probably, what, four witnesses who can corroborate the other side of what rudy is describing, who can corroborate comey's side, andrew mccabe who is his deputy and others in the fbi. but the larger point seems to be that his own lawyers are making their client sound guilty of at least obstruction of justice and maybe making it sound like a legitimate line of inquiry to ask what he knew about the meeting with russians to get dirt ton his opponent. >> they are on the one hand, but i think it is absolutely 100% accurate that all that they are doing here is playing the public relations strategy. they don't want to see motivated citizens doing what they did on health care or on immigration, calling their representatives on the hill and demanding impeachment. so they're willing, in essence, to sacrifice the more legal argument in favor of that strategy. but what they're describing as a pe

let's bring in joyce vance and david priest. thanks for being with us. according to politico, and rudy giuliani, that the president will make the mueller sit down call within ten days. does that mean anything particular to you? >> i've lost track of how many times now rudy giuliani has put this story to the forefront. the president is deciding in ten days or the president is is making a decision about what the conditions are on which he'll speak to bob mueller. it seems like the trump side of this equation feels like they have some benefit to keeping this on the front burner. the reality is if mueller need an interview with the president, he has the tools at his disposal to get one. he can issue a subpoena and get that interview without negotiating. if he only needs certain portions of an interview, he'll work out an agreement with the president, but the most important thing to understand is that it's not the president's decision to make. witnesses and witnesses in criminal cases don't get to decide whether or not they'll speak to federal prosecutors. >>

joyce vance is back with us.urns out this paper trail is enormous and is not going to be in place, apparently, if time for confirmation hearing. >> it is enormous. and the problem with that is we're now looking at a process where instead of using the archivist, a nonpartisan process that was really created in response to excesses during the nixon white house to screen documents, we have a process where lawyers who represent president bush in his personal capacity will make decisions about what gets turned over to the senate for review. >> it seems to be designed by republicans to deny the senate and the american public the information needed for this incredibly important confirmation. what's so strange, the chairman of the committee requested the information, said the committee needs it. the archives says we're not going to have it in time for your scheduled hearing and the chairman of the committee says, okay, never mind, we'll do it without it. >> it's an artificial deadline. and obviously they want the result,

here to help us understand all the day's developments, joyce vance, former u.s. attorney and law professor, frank figliuzzi. on set with us white house reporter from the "the washington post" ashley parker and mike schmidt from sniemz. -- "the new york times." joyce, let me start with you and the machinations of this for a nonlawyer and someone outside this court, it seems like a bizarre, bizarre trial with a very interesting character as a judge. tell us what it means that they were on pause for so long, do we know what they were doing and what are the scenarios for what could have been going on. >> we don't know exactly what was going on, but this really isn't at all unusual for a trial. sometimes when you get to this point and even earlier on in a case, issues can come up. there can be the need for a lot of back and forth between the judge and the lawyers as they sort out legal issues. and sometimes you can see juries either sitting in a courtroom or back in the jury room wondering what the delay is about because the judge doesn't necessarily share it with the

joyce and paul, you're leaving us. do you have any last word, joyce? >> i wouldn't say under the vacancy and reform act the president can replace rosenstein with anyone else ho has been senate confirmed. he could slide someone into sessions' seat to run that investigation until he gets a nominee through the senate. >> scary thought. after the break, throwing in the towel. donald trump today calls off nuclear talks with north korea, a major set back on what he once hoped would be a foreign policy win that he could ride to midterm election glory. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ at priceline, to save you money.ways like mixing and matching airlines to get lower prices on flights. oh, that's how i saved on my trip! oh, for your wedding?! no, my ex-boyfriend's wedding, he's confused. jason! mix and match airlines to save more. with the right steps, hasn't left my side. 80% of recurrent ischemic strokes could be prevented. a bayer aspirin regimen is one step to help prevent another stroke. so, i'm doing all i can to stay in his life. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begi

i think it's a very good guess. >> joyce, do you agree? thumb is to always agree with chuck rosenberg, former u.s. attorney, former chief of staff at the fbi, former head of dea. chuck is dead on the money here. cohen has gone from volatile public presence to radio silence. that is a sign loud and clear that he is cooperating or approaching cooperation with prosecutors in the southern district of new york. >> you're nodding. >> yeah, i think, of course, he's cooperating because he has no cards left to play. it looks like there's overwhelming evidence on him suggesting bank fraud and tax fraud. i think when they first leaked, started leaking tapes, i think they were sending signals to trump he should pay attention to him. and now he's gone silent and i do think he's cooperating. i don't think his value to prosecutors is on campaign finance violations. i don't think that's a real threat to the president. he does have knowledge, however, about the machinations in trump tower in june of 2016 in that famous meeting when a group of russians came

joyce, chuck, phil, and shannon are all still here.ke on this list that axios has put together. do you think that is a comprehensive list? >> not a chance. i think that falls into the category of the known unknowns and the known knowns. every time we see an indictment or a plea agreement out of the mueller team, we read it and say wow, i didn't know that. i never heard of alexander van der zwaan or mr. patten, or i had no idea that cohen did this or the russian military officials did that, every single time. so i presume that we have a tiny fraction of what mueller has. and even trying to guess at what he has that we don't know about i believe is a fool's errand. >> joyce vance, what's your sense of what we may learn of all of these things that mueller has collected? how much of it are we going to see? and what of it do you think might be the most critical piece here? >> well, prosecutors don't have any kind of a political timeline. so i feel pretty sure, chuck can correct me if i'm wrong, that bob mueller didn't wake up this morning a

strategist former spokesperson for the california republican party she's in new york and brian joyce host of the brian joyce show on talk radio on w g o w with him brian joins us from chattanooga tennessee jen what's your take on don macand leaving the white house. well larry it's something i've expected for a while there has been often some contention and some differing opinions here between don began and the president i've been hearing about this since even last fall so part of me wonders what took them so long but i think this is the natural course of events here when you're dealing with someone like president trompe someone who doesn't mind changing horses midstream we've seen that with the onset of rudy giuliani coming onto his legal team and i think don began it was more of the old school washington d.c. type of attorney that president trump thought he needed in the beginning but now i think president trump is starting to see as his poll numbers continue to rise as he continues to explain this investigation to the american people that he actually needs to win in the court of pu

. >> joyce, this is two things. this is using the granting and removing of security clearances as a political weapon. they are only supposed to be removed for national security risk if someone has leaked classified information. so to me the striking things about that letter are, one, pointing out a new norm that has been busted. but the other is what we said at the top, getting his base on a war footing against not just the mueller probe, but against the entire national security apparatus so that whatever is learned about russia's role in the 2016 election is brought down a notch in credibility. what does that look like to the men and women investigating this president? >> so, i think it will do nothing other than cause them to stiffen their resolve and continue to do their jobs in the best tradition of the justice department, to ignore the noise, to ignore the people on the outside who try to influence your work, and to proceed just based on the facts and the law. and they'll do that. i don't have any doubt, but on

attorney, the great joyce vance, assistant watergate prosecutor and jill wine-banks. in addition to the power house panel of lady lawyers we have phil rucker, white house bureau chief for the washington post. all of them, each and every one msnbc analyst and/or contributor. great to have them here. phil, i want to start with you because you're in new york city. you get pride of place. i want to spend some time, if i had my way, we'd spend some time talking about the weirdness of donald trump talking about anyone else's hair, his hair getting whiter and whiter sort of blows my mind. his is not changing at all. if anything it is getting more and more orange. the thing i want to ask you about is donald trump's anxiety. he did not talk about paul manafort last night. he has started talking about paul manafort on twitter this week. how freaked out by paul manafort is donald trump? >> he's bothered by the paul manafort trial. he's bothered by the media coverage. he's been consuming it very closely, watching on cable news and he doesn't like the fact that manafort is being t

>> joyce, your take? >> it's interesting to see the president go through lawyers faster than a chain smoker goes through cigarettes. i mean, mcgahn is just leading the steady drum beat of lawyers departing. this one, ari, you're right because there's been so much publicity surrounding it. it's cut both ways. on the one hand there's this effort to cast mcgahn in a good light, the person who's gone and been the bright line between trump and some serious misdeeds. on the other hand there's been this story that he's parted ways with the president, the story that he spoke with bob mueller for over 30 hours, implying that the president didn't know what he talked about, but that it would have been issues close to the presidency. but one thing that we all know is that mcgahn has been central to the president's success in getting federal judges confirmed. i would not be too quick to take that leap of faith that says that mcgahn is on the outs with the president. we have seen reports, though, that he's been hesitan

and back with us, joyce vance.id, what do you suppose is going through the trump minds as they watch the collins case unfold? >> thank goodness daddy has the power of the pardon probably is their first thought. >> yes. >> which chris collins does not have. and i have been talking tonight to both republicans and democrats and business people up here in western new york where i live. and it is astonishing to hear how on both sides people really dislike chris collins and feel like he is getting his just deserves in this indictment. >> when i look at the collins case, the father, the congressman is the big fish. the son, it seems to me, is the place where the prosecutors would go and be willing, possibly, to make a deal for the son to testify against the father. then putting even more pressure on the father to possibly testify or reveal something about his relationship with the five other republican members of congress who he got to invest in this stock that he was charged with insider trading. >> yeah. you know, a lot

jonathan capeh t capehart, david jolly and joining me by phone, msnbc legal analyst danny cevallos and joyce vance. i'll get to the lawyers in a

this is about, as joyce said, russians and ukrainians. the evidence that's going to come out here is ugly, and it's going to point badly toward the president and who he surrounds himself with. so i think manafort gave it a shot to not let this trial happen. i think mueller heard what he had to say, and mueller said not good enough, we're heading to trial. >> michael steele, he just raised an issue that befuddles me and i think a lot of people out there, and it is this, that basically we're talking about russia's involvement. sort of an act of war against the united states government, and yet there has been nothing but crickets from most of the members, most of the republican members of the united states senate. why? what is going on here? it's our country that is being attacked. >> well, this was a matter of -- the question of putting party before country, it's putting donald trump before everything else. these are men and women who are looking at their states, looking at the president's value to them in that state, meaning he's very popu

joyce, i'll start with you. surprising are these continuing attacks from the president on his own cabinet members and how damaging do you think this might be to the justice department? >> you could say that the president couldn't have paid attorney general sessions any higher of a tweet than though say he's missing in action on an investigation where the attorney general is recused and shouldn't be playing any role. to the extent he's missing in action, he's doing his job properly. but i think the more subtle point to your question is the damage that is being done to the justice department when the president rails day in and day out against doj lawyers and the fbi, the damage here is incalculable. and these are agencies protecting the safety of the american people and the president shouldn't do anything to damage that and he insists on doing that over and over again. >> ryan, to joyce's point about the attorney general, what is the president trying to accomplish with these attacks like we saw today in the tweet?

joyce, finally on roger stone, so many of his aids being pulled into this. do you see a possibility where this is all double checking things and no charges ultimately come, or is any client seeing this many aids brought into the grand jury room that work for him going to be fairly nervous? >> anything is possible. but stone is surrounded by a whirlwind of grand jury activity. it looked earlier this week as though in talking with the woman in new york, the so-called manhattan madam that something interesting happened in that interview and they took her into the grand jury to lock down her testimony, to get her to repeat whatever she told them that was to interesting under oath. the only real question is not will he be indicted. it is when will he be indicted. >> joyce vance and harry lipman, a very illuminating conversation. we benefit from your legal expertise so much. thank you. >> up next, there are some immigration judges that say the doj is dolling out punishments. one of those judges that says it's time to fight back joins us next. this is the ocean. ju

attorney and contributor joyce vance. anna and gabby are here on set. joyce, i'll start with you. the discussion around jeff sessions, nbc news has reporting that five republican senators met with sessions. they had breakfast together last week. it was the day that the president was tweeting about sessions. they said, don't give up. stick around. we're behind you. we back you. please stay. they were asking him to stay, as sessions, according to our reporting, was bouncing off them for advice. what do you make of that? >> sessions put out a pretty interesting statement after the president accused him of never taking over the justice department. he justified his performance in that office by saying that he had done an outstanding job of putting the president's agenda into action. he talked about his immigration work. he talked about his work going after criminal defendants in drug cases. it is interesting that he's, on the one hand, being criticized by this president and, on the other hand, supporting his agenda. it looks like he'll accept the advice from those five senators. he doe

joyce, i'll start with you. the president comparing michael cohen unfavorably to manafort, suggesting manafort didn't, quote, unquote, break, right? what does that say to you about the possibility that paul manafort may end up getting a green light on a pardon from the president? >> this isn't subtle. the president doesn't make any effort to hide what he's saying here. he's saying that people who remain loyal have some chance maybe of pardon. people who break from the herd are no longer part of his inner circle, are no longer people he considers friends. you have to wonder about this tweet, where he sort of discredits michael cohen as a lawyer, since he's the one who hired him in the first place. it is clear that paul manafort is in pardon territory in this president's mind. the only question is how congress will view that, if it actually happens. it would have to be a bridge too far. giving a pardon to someone who can testify against you and your family, even though technically lawful under the constitution, is

matt miller, joyce vance and eli stokel are all here. joyce, it sounds like people who know him best, people like the 20-year veterans of his company, are saying you're seeing what we've always known. it's not like some giant business that's well-run with controls and law-abiding employees. this is a slightly corrupt mom and pop operation. is that what's being revealed as the bright lights of the southern district and robert mueller's probe shines on it. >> the justice department seems determined to go after whatever criminality they can find in this investigation, and i think your point is a good one. sometimes businesses or anything that appears one way from the outside doesn't look quite the same when it's exposed to the harsh glare of the spotlight. it doesn't look like trump org is this fabulous business that trump has held it out to be. there is an interesting comment in this article that talks about trump testifying in a deposition and saying, the value of my business is whatever i say it is. so we may see that the emperor at the

do you see, joyce, what do you see next in this sdny part of the story? >> the sdny part of the story still has a lot of room left to grow because one of the most interesting aspects of this story now that it involves david pecker is this vault full of information he had. hard to believe he had a vault full of information that didn't come into play in other areas. and so we'll see whether this story branches out. it's interesting to remember that the original john edwards stories were tabloid stories. and that grew of course, into that prosecution. there could be a lot more here. interesting to speculate. we don't know yet. >> glen, do you think we will inevitably see any of this information, will it see the light of day given what tom just said about essentially a kind of pause on the basic building of that case around michael cohen? >> you know, it may see the light of day. i know we've all observed that michael cohen entered into a noncooperation agreement. but you know, chris, it's not at all unusual that just as prosecutors will return a series of in

joyce and paul you're leaving us. any last words?vacancy and reform act the president can replace rosenstein with anyone else who has been senate confirmed. he could slide someone into sessions' seat to run that investigation. >> scary thought. after the break throwing in the towel. donald trump today calls off nuclear talks with north korea, a major setback on what he once hoped would be a foreign policy win he could ride to midterm election glory. i don't keep track of regrets. and i don't add up the years. but what i do count on is boost®. delicious boost® high protein nuritional drink now has 33% more protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals boost® high protein. be up for life. boost® high protein. be right back. with moderate to severe crohn's disease, i was there, just not always where i needed to be. is she alright? i hope so. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw sig

joyce vance, thank you for your time. appreciate you calling in. >>> up next, donald trump goes to lebron's home state but he doesn't even mention his krit schi -- criticism of the king. details coming up. including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist. well, esurance makes it simple and affordable. in fact, drivers who switched from geico to esurance saved an average of $412. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call. paying too much for insurance that isn't the right fit? well, esurance makes finding the right coverage easy. in fact, drivers who switched from geico to esurance saved an average of $412. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call. your hair is so soft!e company. did you use head and shoulders two in one? i did mom. wanna try it? yes. it intensely moisturizes your hair and scalp and keeps you flake free. manolo? look at my soft

joyce vance, can you weigh in here on one thing that stuck out to us here at the show. when president trump was throwing out the possibility of who to pardon, he mentioned martha stewart and it would be for a similar crime. this is of course his first congressional ally in the congress. >> it is his first congressional ally in the congress, but i think it's so important for us to understand that the pardon power is not a power that presidents are meant to wield on behalf of their friends and families. the pardon power exists so that the chief executive in our government can do justice. for instance, during the obama administration when congress amended sentencing policies to treat people who had been convicted of crack cocaine offenses the same as folks who had been convicted as powder cocaine offenses, that sentencing change wasn't retroactive and so president obama used the pardon power to create fairness for all people who had been accused of those crimes, whether it was going forward or looking backwards. what we're contemplating here is very different. it's a presi

joining me now, tom winter, daniel goldman, joyce vance, and kristen welker. tom, first to you, set the stage of what has happened today with allen weisselberg. >> andrea, today, what's different from yesterday, yesterday we were talking about david pecker and payments or a payment that was made to karen mcdougal. today, allen weisselberg, this has to do with another count in the information that michael cohen pled guilty to on tuesday. basically what's talked about here, in the criminal information there is an "exclusi "executive 1," who is not named. we understand that that's allen weisselberg, who we hear has been granted immunity. he's able to offer testimony, provide information to prosecutors and investigators that are involved in the michael cohen investigation and to be able to provide that information to them without concern that whatever he said, if it may have been self-incriminating, may have hurt him from his own legal liability standpoint, that he would be able to say that without that coming back to him, essentially. so what we've learned today

alan joyce will join us first earlier this hour -- later this hour.g. ♪ yvonne: this is "bloomberg daybreak: asia." i am yvonne man in hong kong ramy: i am ramy inocencio in new york. policymakers are ready to raise rates again as long as the economy stays. on track. investors will be seeing more clarity from jay powell at the annual jackson hole gathering including his take on the turmoil in emerging markets. our global economics and policy editor is in wyoming right now. beautiful background there. good to see you. how do the latest minutes set the stage for jackson hall? reporter: economists agree taking a look at the -- and for a much confirm what everyone has been expecting. number one, i rate hike at the september meeting -- a rate hike at the september meeting. number two, strong possibility of another rate hike in december. further gradual rate hikes are needed. the was also said at the meeting. a lot of discussion about topics that have been more and more in the discussion of the markets lately. the question of the natural rate. we have had o

is that all he is, joyce? >> he really is.is a distraction for people from whatever the drama is for the day with trump. i don't mean omarosa, i mean the evidence that is beginning to amass. throwing up distractions saying it is a witch hunt and you can't trust bob mueller. when in fact you know that is not true. but that is his role. >> joyce, did you get a sense that he was coached by his client? he says one day they did talk about giving flynn a break, and not putting him away. and then next time, he says i never talked about that. was that the client saying hey buddy, you are getting me in hot water here, too close to the truth here. >> it could be the president coaching the lawyer, which we can talk about the dysfunction of having the client telling the lawyer what legal strategy to engage. it could be that as giuliani sees the public failure of some of the strategies he is trying, he is moving onto the next one. hoping something he throws up against the wall will stick. >> it is not working. since day 1, giuliani has dan

joyce, to g. to sigh as always. thank you for joining us. >> thanks for having me. >> i have to cannot the conversation i was having with the senator. does rudy giuliani hurt his ability to properly represent the president by giving all these interviews? it's just so easy when he says something for us to find the tape of something else he says. we've come to expect it from the president. but from his lead lawyer? >> you know, it's become so easy that it's not even a sporting adventure anymore. >> no. >> the problem here is something we all know to be true. people who are being honest don't have to keep changing their story. you only have to keep changing your story if you're lying. so sadly i think in many regards because this is someone who we all loved as america's mayor, we're watching him diminish his reputation. it's painful to watch. it's difficult to watch. one wonders if he himself might not end up with some exposure. and certainly the president will be accountable, at least in a criminal forum, only for wha

final word to you, joyce.en you look at what they're going to do when the -- when manafort's team gets in the ring, so much of this coverage is what looks bad for him. could you give us any wisdom on what they'll try to do to rebut what josh says has been a tough day? >> they don't have much of a rebuttal opportunity here. their best argument, the argument that they suggested that they would use in their opening statement is that it wasn't manafort, it was gates. but there was testimony from witness after witness yesterday and today, indicating that manafort was the person who provided them with final details. manafort saw and reviewed every document before it was signed and filed. it will be virtually impossible for them to make that argument. and they'll be stuck, as so many defendants are, simply with arguing that the government didn't present enough evidence to meet its burden of proof and that it's not enough for the jury to think that the defendant might be guilty. that the jury should, in essence, hold

i want to add to our discussion joyce vance who we call on for big legal questions. take a listen, senator warner likening this of an men -- enem list. take a look. this had an eery memory of an enemies list. these people were being singled out to have either their clearances revoked or in the process of being revoked to me smacks of nixonian type practices of trying to silence anyone who's criticizing this president. >> joyce, our experts thus far tonight have discussed why this looks bad. why it's petty. and why it is perhaps problematic for the national security interests of the united states. it is, of course, a higher bar than all of those things to get into whether this is the kind of thing that could be unconstitutional or illegal or that courts would get involved in. i wonder your analysis at that level. >> well, this is retaliation, pure and simple. not only does the president not try to hide it with some kind of window dressing, he just flatout acknowledges that it's retaliation. so it's very reminiscent of this controversy that we had over the firing of ji