back with us now, joyce vance, former u.s. attorney from alabama. joyce, is that kind of a red flag to prosecutors? to a layperson, that seems like a red flag, somebody saying i can't show you my tax returns because i'm under audit. and now here is his former personal lawyer saying, nah, i don't think he is under audit. in fact, i think he was afraid of getting audited if anybody did see his tax returns. to me that seems like a red flag. >> it's a pretty big red flag, right? why would you lie about it unless you had something to conceal? >> in terms of the susceptibility of the president's tax returns to review, which i think is the right way to say that, we are hearing from members of congress that there are things in his tax returns that they are going to want the look at in order to corroborate some of these serious allegations from mr. cohen today. would something -- if the president has told lies about whether or not he is being audited or why else he might not be able to make those available, would that add to the case essentially for them bein

ken dilanian, my colleague here, and msnbc contributor joyce vance, former federal prosecutor, joyce, what was your ta takeaway? >> i think it's a fascinating situation where we have andy mccabe now talking about events that we suspected but perhaps didn't have confirmation of. and something that jumps out at me, as he talks about briefing the gang of eight with devin nunes in the room and talks about the fact that there was perhaps evidence collection from cia even if they didn't get some sort of a bright line warning that the investigation was opened, that president trump knew he was a subject of this investigation as soon as bob mueller was in place. that's important because it makes it a lot easier for prosecutors to show that when he took steps after that, whether it was dangling pardons or threatening to fire bob mueller, that he did it with knowledge that he was a subject. and that's a very close step to proving that he intended to obstruct the investigation. >> is that why he keeps repeating something that happened earlier with jim comey, that comey told him three times he was

we are joined now by joyce vance, the former u.s. attorney for the northern district of alabama. an msnbc legal contributor. also joined by jennifer ruben who's an aopinion writer at "the washington post," and eugene robinson. and joyce vance, i want to gen with you just on the legal matter, this breaking news, possible federal crime by a congressman today via tweet. in your reading of the statute controlling this and in your reading of that tweet, do you see the possibility of the crime of intimidation and interference in a congressional hearing by congressman gaetz? >> based on just the tweet itself it's something that prosecutors might take a look at. it doesn't look to me like something offhand i would charge unless there was much more significant evidence that gaetz actually intended to prevent cohen from testifying completely or was trying to get him to not testify about different subjects. i think it's when you pull the camera back further out and you think about the fact this is sitting congressman making this kind of comment to a witness who's coming out on a serious mat

attorney joyce vance, with us at the table associated press white house reporter jonathan lemire, nbc news senior nerl expandant keers simmons make his triumph frapt return, and tim o'brien, bloomberg opinion executive editor. kieran, let me start with you. we're happy to have you back. you've covered this story from foreign capitals, most importantly moscow. the idea that the new chairman of the house intel committee is now going to begin anew all of this work that could have commenced two years ago if republicans had been interested in our national security, he's now today announcing he's going to start to investigate whether or not donald trump may be compromised. it's stunning. >> it's absolutely stunning. and hiding in plain sight if you want to find the motivation around the world for many of the things happening, it's two words, make money. he's a president who telegraphed around the world, i'm the guy you can do deals with. i'm the art of the deal. ol goings and property magnets around the world read that as bring your money and we can do deals. if you're russian, we can do de

and joyce vance.> i would like willie to start talking about the president's physical, but i guess we can get to that a little bit. >> we'll talk about his -- >> he's 199 runs a 4.75, 40. >> he's lying about his health. >> he's lying about his health. >> it's crazy. he can't stop lying. >> i know a guy who's 6'4" -- >> i do, too. >> -- and weighs close to 240 pounds. he does not look like that. >> no. >> if he's fighting an obesity crisis, which he is, no doubt he's obese -- >> guys, it's not funny. it's dead serious. >> look up the stats. this guy is either obese or medically morbidly obese, and something he's obviously battling. i think he should talk about it with the american people. but you have to -- listen, i don't care if he weighs close to 300 pounds. that's something that he should talk about. mika you wrote a book about this. >> i did. we talk about america's fight with diet and obesity and food addiction. this is something that really connects the president with much of the country and the

attorney for northern district of alabama, joyce vance. joyce, let me start with you. your biggest takeaways from yesterday's testimony? >> the biggest question going into yesterday was whether or not we would seek credibility from michael cohen, would he be believable after being convicted of lying to congress? and the answer on all accounts was yes. he was restrained. he appeared to tell the truth. he didn't go too far. for many veteran prosecutors that was the most important piece. repeatedly given the opportunity to demonize trump or to say that there's direct evidence of collusion he didn't go that far. >> what would you say then was the most damning moment from a legal perspective. anything new we learned yesterday besides seeing it for the first time. did we learn any new piece of information and if so what would you say from a legal perspective is the most interesting for any potential prosecution. >> it was a real smorgasboard. it's impossible to say. one of the most interesting pieces is that cohen put president trump a little bit closer to the crime that coh

attorney joyce vance who spent 25 years as a federal prosecutor and at aforementioned, tom hamburger, because it's your reporting we're discussing here tonight, i'd like you to begin and talk about the setting of this meeting at this club not far from here in midtown manhattan, why it matters, why it could be foundational. >> brian, it was, as you described it, an unusual meeting at an unusual place. at the height of the 2016 presidential campaign. august 2nd, paul manafort, the campaign chair, leaves campaign headquarters in trump tower and goes over to 666 -- to the 666 building and to a club at the top called the grand havana room, a cigar club. there he and his campaign lieutenant, rick gates, meet with a visiting foreign national, konstantin kilimnik and the meeting occurs at the height of the campaign, three men meet and one of the things we know from the bits of courtroom records that have not been redacted and we've been able to review is they chose to leave separately so their meeting would have a lower chance of being seen, so they all meet secretly for dinner and then leave

attorney joyce vance and former federal prosecutor paul butler. this material sounds like a lifetime of dirty tricks contained in electronics, they got it all. >> a terabyte is a lot of data. for comparison, audio files versus video files, it's video files you see in discovery when there's this much. led zeppelin 4 goes on for 42 minutes and it's only 97 megabytes. a megabyte, there are a million in a terabyte so prosecutors have a lot of evidence against stone and i'm betting a lot is video or maybe large dumps of da data. paul, who makes the decision of what's in what's out? there may be something about personal lives that may be interesting but have no material relevance. >> the lawyers will make arguments about what is admissible and what isn't and the judge decides. in terms of the motion today it's to get more time because the evidence is supposedly so complicated. the main charge against stone is false statements. i think it's an easy case for mueller. the defense to false statement is either i told the truth or what i lied about wasn't mat

joyce vance still with me and elliott williams as well. >>> joyce, pick it up where you were loving it oleaving it offe. the whole issue of trying to itch peach the integrity of rod rosenstein and his oversight of the mueller probe. >> there is an important principle of prosecution. prosecutors investigate crimes not people. jordan was insinuating that rosenstein had somehow directed mueller to target individuals, asking whether that information was concealed behind redactions. it seems extraordinarily unlikely to me that that be the case. rosenstein might have, in fact, used names, but that would have been based on predicated investigation indicating that further investigation was warranted as opposed to this sort of targeted witch-hunt that jordan was trying to suggest might have been asked for. >> we're going to take a quick break as well while the committee is in recess. we'll be right back. we'll be right back. so even when she grows up, she'll never outgrow the memory of our adventure. unlock savings when you add select hotels to your existing trip. only with expedia. select hote

with us is joyce vance, betsy and sahil are back as well. yce, talk through a little bit the pros and cons of what happens if and when andrew mccabe does end up testifying under oath to these lawmakers. particularly if he sues the justice department. >>. >> the situation is complex. he had a very storied career. had a great reputation, but near the end, he ran into trouble over allegations that he had misled his supervisor, then director jim comey and been untruthful about directing a subordinate to leak to the press. when he was dismissed it was over an allegation that he failed in something that was important to the fbi. everything in that confuses what could have been a straight trajectory for mccabe. everything he says has to be viewed through the filter of lack of candor. that will cause issues for him on the hill. despite the allegations of lack of candor in that one instance, much of what he says has the ring of truth. it's backed up by other information going on at the time. so his testimony, i think, will be highly anticipated, but p

and joyce vance is here to cover the legal points for us. she is a former federal prosecut prosecutor. and we're joined by jerry george who spent 28 years at the "national enquirer," including as the los angeles bureau chief. has david pecker ever been up against anyone like jeff bezos before? >> i think for the first time david pecker has met his match. we have finally gone through the looking glass, and we are way beyond yellow journalism. we are now in the area of the rico act. this is extortion. >> yeah. joyce vance, let me go straight to you on the legal points here because there is so much in here. jeff bezos is very clearly saying this is extortion. this is blackmail. i read that e-mail from a lawyer in new york to marty singer from los angeles, and i have never seen an e-mail quite like that from lawyer to lawyer. >> it looks like our common understanding of what blackmail is, this kind of a threat. in federal law, there is a family of crimes under this umbrella of extortion and blackmail. but what they consist of at their core is th

barbara mcquade and joyce vance are both former u.s. eys, thank you both for being here, i really appreciate it. joyce, let me get to you first, obviously the big question that looms over the newly-installed attorney general is, will he make the mueller report public, will he move to do that. d do you anticipate that he will do that? because he was noncommittal during his confirmation hearing. >> he was noncommittal during the confirmation hearing, and he was careful to say that to the extent it was released, it would be consistent with the law, which means there are a couple of big restrictions. he won't be releasing any grand jury material, that remains secret. and there will certainly be carve-outs for anything that's national security seckurecurity. but ultimately what barr releases could be a narrow report, if anything. the expectation seems to be that mueller will write what prosecutors call a process memo, explaining charging decisions, why you decided to charge, why you decided not to charge. that could be a far narrower report t

attorney joyce vance, michael steele, former chairman of the rnc, and former nbc news national report ircaerl lee. paul, let me start with you. manafort has often been a trigger for this white house. he's gone on the north lawn and called him brave. described his cases against 10-year-old tax cases. he's really laid it on the line. and the move today like the sep sentencing move for cohen, for example, have really rocked this white house this they have come out. >> president trump's inclination is to defend paul manafort, he feels sympathetic for his former campaign chairman, especially since some of the crimes paul manafort has been charged with predate the trump campaign. so trump felt some sort of sympathy for manafort there. i have to tell you at the moment the bigger trigger for the white house and for president trump according to our reporting is the anticipation for the mueller report as well as next week's public testimony by michael cohen. white house officials will say publicly they're not concerned at all about cohen's testimony but that testimony promises to bring a lot of

i want to bring in two experts on this, former federal prosecutor joyce vance and the atlantic's david frum who served in the white house as a speech writer. joyce, how do you read what the congress is doing here to try to put some parameters around any decision bill barr makes? >> congress is absolutely right here. and i find representative schiff's comments to be very persuasive. in the normal case, when doj doesn't indict someone who is under investigation, it's because they don't have sufficient evidence to sustain those charges in court. that's the assumption that we can all draw when a mayor or a senator who is under investigation isn't indicted. that's just not true with donald trump. if he's not indicted, the best we'll be able to say is because doj policy says he can't be indicted. congress is the one who has to make that decision about whether there is accountability. they need the evidence that's been collected by mueller to fulfill their constitutional obligation. >> right. and that's where the limits of the starr precedent are, because he was operating under different rule

joining me now, danny savales, sima ire, joyce vance and david korn, washington bureau chief for mother jones. i'll start with you, david. there is a sense in which the worst decision that a lot of the folks may have made was signing on with donald trump. because in paul manafort's case, the crimes detailed in the sentencing memo don't have anything to do with the campaign. signing up with trump exposed what he had been doing for decades. i will read a little bit of it. according to the sentencing memo, manafort engaged in extensive lobbying activities in the united states on behalf of ukraine without registering for the work as required. he funnels over $11 million from overseas accounts to pay for lobbyists to engage in unregistered lobbying in the united states. in submissions in 2016 and february of 2017 he caused false and misleading statements to be made relating to the lobbying work for ukraine. he may spend life in prison because he took an unpaid job with donald trump. >> remember, he was part of the trump campaign interaction -- curious, bizarre interactions with russia that l

and someone else you may recognize, former federal prosecutor, friend of "the beat" joyce vance.to everyone. building on what your former colleague was saying, brian, how do you view what mccabe is doing here, which is incredibly significant given that rod's not out of doj yet. he still is part of the management there. mueller is moving forward with this probe. what is mccabe doing in your view? >> i tend to agree with matt that we probably shouldn't overinterpret the utterance or the brief invocation of the prospect of the 25th amendment that is being ascribed to rod rosenstein here. i suspect if you're in andrew mccabe's position, you're going give some attention to certain provocative aspects of your remembrances from this time because he is, after all, selling books. what i take stock, what i put stock in is more some of the what he ascribes to president trump during this time period. >> i'm sure you want the get to that. as i mention, you're a hillary clinton person. we can get to that. we do some of that on this show. but i don't want to move too quickly past what's so cruc

joyce vance, everything emily said plus take the reporting from the last ten days in "the new york times" and "the wall street journal" that donald trump sought to obstruct the investigations out of the southern district of new york by asking his acting attorney general matt whitaker to see if the political appointee there, jeff berman, could take over some of those cases and "the wall street journal" adding in the reporting this week the judiciary committee had some evidence of that going on. >> it's a real risk at this point in the investigation for the president to make the effort to obstruct. he's watched mueller indict people for that conduct. he knows that his own conduct is under scrutiny. the fact that he took this step of trying to convince his acting attorney general at the time matt whitaker to create new leadership, friendlier leadership in the southern district of new york, tell us he had something significant to fear. what we always have to remember is none of what we hear for the first time is news to this president. he lived it. it's his life. the evidence is about his co

. >> joyce vance, msnbc contributor. ma ma matt miller, msnbc correspondent. he's worried the line was cross here. >> it looks like the fbi should do exactly what they need to do. rosenstein would have been acting director. when you're confronted with a situation where the president of the appears to be falling in the o orbit of a foreign leader, you have to find out the truth. that doesn't mean you're insubordina insubordinate. >> sounds like there's a lot to talk about from the mccabe interview. another clip where he describes an intelligence briefing. >> the president said he does not believe they have the capability to hit us with ballistic missiles. president putin told him the north cokoreans don't have that. >> and saying what? >> it was not consistent with the intelligence our government possesses. the president replied, i don't care, i believe putin. >> astonishing to produce evidence, then confronted with absolute disbelief. >> for the rest of us on the outside, it should be stunning but in a way isn't. we've seen the president walk out of a pemeetin

attorney joyce vance agreed the president's own words just right there in an instant will likely meanig trouble for the president. >> here we have the president himself saying it's not a national emergency. every lawyer will pick up on that and trump may think they will go to the nineth circuit, the most liberal circuit in the country, there will be cases there but there's one case in progress on the texas border, that's in the fifth circuit, one of the conservative circuits that exist in the deep south. i expect they will succeed there as well. the president will have only himself to thank for their victory. >> the aclu for its part says it will be filing a lawsuit next week challenging the president's emergency declaration. we're joined by jonathan allen. we welcome to the broadcast tonight emily cochran and franco for the newspapers covering immigration and foreign affairs. welcome to you all. john, i want to read you something from the washington post tonight. here it is. white house lawyers including white house counsel repeatedly warned trump of the legal risks of proceeding. on

here now what joyce vance had to say to nicolle this afternoon. >> along the way at various steps what we see here is the institution held. the institution was stretched. there were problems. there were challenges. but the people and the institution held. >> i am guessing as a former fed you concur. >> i not only concur. i think part of what was so critical about nicolle's interview and that i think the panel that joyce was on after the interview made clear, is there has been a fundamental assault by president trump on the independence of law enforcement counterintelligence in this country. the fact that the institution as joyce pointed out actually had to figure out how to survive. >> and how to hide some stuff. >> and how to construct investigations in order to ensure that they could continue. right? what andrew mccabe, the picture he made even clearer today, i think than he had before, was how much he recognized how imperiled the independence of the institution was, to joyce's point, and the degree to which he had to figure out how with his -- the fact that he might imminently be fi

meaning -- >> i would never disagree with joyce vance, even if i did have a dispute. no, she's dead right. here's why. what we have seen kendis, is a series of satellite indictments of these other players that are sort of circling around the central conspiracy. there is no reason for bob mueller to dribble out in various court pleadings that, you know what, folks, we also have evidence of a conspiracy here. what he's doing is textbook organized crime investigation. he's picking off all of these players. he's developing some as cooperating witnesses who can help put meat on the conspiracy bones and the big conspiracy is right in the center. and i think we should not mistake silence from bob mueller on the conspiracy issue with bob mueller having no evidence on the conspiracy. i think big things are yet to come. >> jim, you agree? >> i do. you have to look at what the conspiracy is, right? people have been talking collusion, collusion, collusion. this is really about foreign influence in a campaign. and what mueller has been doing, i agree completely, is he's following

attorney joyce vance, a courtroom veteran that's spent 25 years as a federal prosecutors, peter baker for "the new york times," and josh gerstein for politico. josh, that's where i'd like to gen. what was it like? what was he like? >> well, it was a moment of high courtroom drama when we heard stone was going to take the stand. it wasn't something that people expected. but as you alluded to in the intro, it seems that stone doesn't do abject contrition and kind of groveling apology very well. his talents are in the realm of provocation and this was not a place to pursue that kind of a strategy. and so to see him sitting there on the witness stand questioned by his own lawyer, questioned by prosecutors, cross-examined by a prosecutor and questioned by the judge, he seemed a bit shaken by the experience. he seemed rattled at one point. he was breathing rather heavily into the microphone and he insisted as we discussed that all these apologies were genuine but the judge wasn't having much of it. she made clear pretty early on that she wasn't buying it. she said his explanations were evol

joyce vance and i have a piece in "the washington post" on this today. you have two sdny investigations. you have pieces that have been referred to the department of justice. it seems inevitable that if mueller does close soon, there are other pieces, for example foreign influence peddling by the governments of the united arab emirates who have tried to seek favor with the trump administration going all the way back to the transition, that seems ripe for a criminal probe. whether the mueller probe ends or not, there are a number of criminal probes which have a long way to go, will certainly last until the end of his administration. that's not counting anything new that the house of representatives might uncover that turns into a criminal investigation. >> and the fact is that the house intelligence committee did not issue any subpoenas for so many people who were obvious potential witnesses and now that they are in charge, of course they're going to be issuing the subpoenas that devin nunes, who changed the whole character of that committee, kasie, you k

attorney joyce vance is here, and in washington where roger stone appeared today, ken dilanian. tell us what happened today. i understand all of the flamboyant press appearances that are entaning but they may be coming to an end. >> that's right the judge made it pretty clear she wants the parties to do their talking in the court, not outside. she said it was okay to talk about immigration or tom brady, but not the facts of the case. she asked both sides so submit briefs. the main news is that they talked about a trail date in october. the judge said she preferred august. they have gone along with waiving his right to a speedy trial because of a massive amount of evidence being dumped on him. they said there is terabytes of evidence. now he is turning that over to stone's team with harddrives and they have to go through it all. he also sees material in a serge. that they're still going through. they also turned that over to stone's lawyers as well. >> ken, we have heard them talking about being reassured that he was not a subject or a target in the mueller probe. i'm told by two

attorney joyce vance agreed, the president's own words just right there in an instant will likely mean president. >> here we have the president himself saying it's not a national emergency. every lawyer will pick up on that and trump may think they will go to the 9th circuit, the most liberal circuit in the country, there will undoubtedly be cases there, but there's one case in progress on the texas border, this's in the fifth circuit, one of the very conservative circuits that exists in the deep south. i expect they will succeed there as well, and the president will only have himself to thank for their victory. >> the aclu, for its part, says it will be filing a lawsuit next week challenging the president's emergency declare ration. and texas democratic congressman joaquin castro promises to introduce a resolution to block the declaration. for more here tonight, we're joined by jonathan allen, the veteran political journalist who is our nbc news political recorder. we welcome emily cochran, who covers capitol hill for "the new york times" and back with us, franco ordonez, covering imm

. >> joyce vance, appreciate your legal perspective. thank you for coming on. again soon. >>> coming up, if you look close enough, you can see beto o'roarke somewhere in the crowd. if you listen close enough, you might hear him getting closer to a presidential run. what he's telling the other guy in the frame. plus the congressional race that got more interesting this morning. where we could see the twin turned activist versus the first combat pilot. we also have breaking news just happening now involving investigation by the senate intelligence committee about russian interference in the 2016 election. we've got this new reporting right after the break. afr the b. i never thought i'd say this but i found bladder leak underwear that's actually pretty. always discreet boutique. hidden inside is a super absorbent core that quickly turns liquid to gel. so i feel protected and pretty. always discreet boutique. we know that when you're >> tspending time with thelass grandkids... ♪ music >> tech: ...every minute counts. and you don't have time for a cracked windshiel

some of our favorite reporters and friends, "the new york times's" reporter matt apuzo is back, joyce vance is here and nbc news national political reporter heidi preside preside president billia and at the white house today, ken dill lanian. ken, let's start with you. i understand all of the flamboyant press conferences may be coming to an end. >> they may be coming to an end, nicolle. the judge made it clear she wants her parties to do they're talking in the court, not outside as roger stone had been doing. he said it was okay to talk about immigration or tom brady but not about the facts of this case. she said she's entertaining a gag order and she asks both sides to submit briefs. i guess the main news that came out of this today, nicolle, was that the mueller team talked about a trial date of october in the fall. she said she would prefer one in august but she would entertain october. some are not objecting to that, going along with waiving the right to a speedy trial because of the massive amounts of evidence rob the mueller is essentially dumping on them. he said he sees terabytes of

attorney joyce vance. good to have all of you here. mara, what did you think of that scene of roger with trump supporters against the backdrop of that interview where donald trump is having it both ways? >> well, first of all, that was quite the scene in washington, d.c. roger stone getting a hero's welcome. it really does feel like we're living in two americas. i think that was my first reaction there. in terms of donald trump, you know, not even having thought about whether to pardon roger stone, it's kind of like with friends like that, i mean, my god. it's one thing for the president to say yes, no, maybe, i'm thinking very carefully about it. it's a very important issue. but the idea it hadn't occurred to him, that might send a message to roger stone. >> see, i had a slightly different take which i think he is definitely leaving it open to have a pardon. >> true. >> i think the idea that he is saying he hasn't thought of it, if he weren't a criminal president, you would basically reject out of hand giving anyone who has been indic

. >> i'm joined by watergate special prosecutor and joyce vance is back with me.took over after the firing, the removal of james comey. he was ousted in unusual circumstances. what do you make of that quote? >> i think it's stunning. it's not just what he says but keep in mind in march of last year "the new york times" reported that people in the obama administration were doing the same thing. everybody was concerned about preserving the evidence of what they had, the intelligence showing that the russian government and the trump campaign had conspired together. they were looking for all kinds of ways to put this into reports to make sure that nobody could actually destroy it and erase it. and what mccabe has said is pretty much the entire feeling that you get from the people who really know, that are involved with national security, have seen the intelligence reports. these are people that are so concerned that they are taking extreme efforts to try and maintain all of this evidence so that people around trump can't just come in and destroy it. >> let's hash this

. >> i want to bring in joyce vance, former u.s. attorney and professor at the university of alabama school of law and msnbc contributor. and my friend matt miller, former chief spokesman for the justice debt and msnbc security and justice analyst. we laid out a bunch of potential -- i have to remind everyone, potential violations. from what you've read about the subpoena, where do you see the focus of this investigation? >> i think it could be an incredibly big deal and tom does a really good job of laying out the point that the investigation is at. this is early days. they're gathering information. they have a basis for believing crimes have been committed. they'll take a look at what comes back and then assess whether they should move forward. we already know an important detail about this investigation from patton's plea in the district of columbia. he acknowledged he arranged for donations from ukrainian and a russian to the inaugural committee knowing that this was illegal. and it's very unlikely that he kept that knowledge to

law analyst and editor in chief of "law fair" benjamin wittes joins us and msnbc contributor joyce vance. >> the political and legal impact with benjamin, also with joyce, and emily jane fox has been reporting on cohen. what was your overall take on that remarkable -- it was just remarkable political theater. it also, though, may have been day one in a journey for donald trump, his administration and the democratically controlled house. >> well, it was an extraordinary day in america. if you sat there for seven hours glued to the tv and you watched every question, every claim, every allegation made by michael cohen, you couldn't help but think, man, we've never seen anything like this where you had someone that close to donald trump for that long who knows all the stories of donald trump's business dealings, who knows all the problems of donald trump's personal life, spilling them out not just before an oversight committee but before the krirks before the american people. joy vance, beyond the american sort of tableau we saw, what new information do you think michael cohen brought to you

attorney joyce vance as well as stu sb zaku former spokesperson of ami. nbc contributor. joyce you first here. we should say that ami believes fervently it has acted lawfully in the reporting of the story of mr. bezos and says it was in good faith negotiations to ra try to resolve all matters with does there conduct from what we know about it fit into federal extortion? >> there's really a question within a question here. the first question is, did ami do something that would violate federal extortion law. it's a very close call. there's a good argument to be made in many prosecutors are making it that the conduct could be charged. also there's the separate question though of whether ami has violate the its nonprosecution agreement. this i think is the question that presents them with more of a problem. prosecutors could stop short of charging them but find that they violated that agreement and that would of course, have legal repercussions for them. >> stu, i want you to put all this into perspective for us. we have a battle among powerful people. a heavy

joyce vance, thank you.g up, all-out assault against the emergency declarati declaration. first, "saturday night live" poking fun at the negotiations over that border wall. >> we wanted something, sure, but he gave us everything! >> ah! daddy tough, real tough. >> i can only imagine what anne coulter is saying about it. let's have a look. okay, anne coulter says the only national emergency is that our president is an idiot. what? that's not very nice i. >> was shocked when i -- when i printed that out this morning. >> seems like gloating. that's gloating. >> you're gotta. >> okay, nancy pelosi and jeff schumer, everyone. and jeff schumer, everyone. 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 nutritional drink has 20 grams of protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals. boost® high protein. be up for life. (boy) got it. (dad) it's slippery. (boy) nooooooo... (grandma) nooooooo... (dad) nooooooo... (dog) yessssss....

joyce vance, former u.s. msnbc law analyst and editor-in-chief of "law fair," and senior fellow in governs sns studies at the brookings institute. joyce, i'm sure you've gotten chains to look through these documents already. what stands out to you? >> the most having thing about this memo is it doesn't answer any of the questions we had hoped to have answered. it doesn't tell us anything about what bob mueller may have uncovered about a conspiracy with russia. it's possible that he's come up empty handed, but even if mueller is sitting on top of evidence of a conspiracy, there would have been no reason to relay that information in this memo. paul manafort is being sentenced on charges unrelated to the campaign, bank fraud, tax fraud, and his had guideline sentencing range in this case already exceeds the statutory maximum which is ten years. sometimes prosecutors include additional information about misconduct by a defendant in a sentencing memo in an effort to insure they increase the amount of time they ser

. >> matt miller, you co-wrote a piece with joyce vance "the mueller investigation has sprouted, thereint out for a, matt. >> there's obviously debate on whether the mueller probe will end. whatever happens to the mueller probe, one of the things that's become obvious over the past few months is bob mueller has spawn a number of other investigations. this new sdny investigation into the inaugural sprung then from the cohen case. the cohen investigation was oo with new one is a grandchild. we've seen other cases referred to d.c. you've seen the roger stonement. if you're the president and you're looking at this, whatever his personal liability and i think it's gray, it's now clear there were actual admitted criminals surrounding him in all the organizations in which he's been involved. so while the mueller investigation may be coming to an end soon, these other investigations are probably going to be going on until the end of his term in office. that poses grave liability for him because these investigations have a way of spawning new investigations and because they cross poll enate. so i