mr. assange to the united states.is that, yes, he did go to ecuador, yes, he did have these conversations. that was his job, he often did these back room international deals as a consultant. we don't know if there was any connection here to at the time donald trump. what does this tell you about where we are? jane? >> i like michael analogy to the mob prosecution, it tells you that the circles are closing, that one person talks about the next person talks about the next person, and who is in the center of the circle, we will just see. but again, i don't want to get ahead of what's going on with -- >> agreed, because there have been no -- actually, there has nothing that we know of that suggests that donald trump directed michael flynn to do what he did or donald trump directed paul manafort to have these talks. i hear you. >> but the story is being told through these pleadings and the legal documents that the mueller group is filing and he has personally signed a couple of the recent ones. the point being that he's re

mr. assange's presence.e six years is long enough time for a person to be incarcerated in an embassy. minister saysime she may let parliament decide whether to trigger the controversial northern ireland backstop. the prime minister is shrugging off suggestions that the government may delay a vote on her brexit deal to avoid stating defeat. the former prime minister tells bloomberg he is optimistic that all issues will be settled with the u.k. as it leaves the european union in march. >> i think the chances of a no deal are small. it is really what has happened in the past few days. parliament has taken charge of this process. there was a defeat for the government the other night which means parliament now has the right to go through all of the different options on brexit. mark: blair also says he thinks it is unlikely the general election will be called if may's deal is defeated. global news, 24 hours a day on air and on tictoc on twitter, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 c

mr. assange and never said i had. said we communicated through somebody who is a mutual friend. >> the main thing that links roger to assange with private intelligence with things that no one else seemed to know at the time is podesta, and that came from you. could you be roger's intermediary? >> i'm sure. but it was not because i talked to assange, because i figured it out on my own. i've never spoken with julian assange. i don't know him, and i have no contact. there was no third party who said roger stone got this -- >> you were making an important point tonight that julian assange, as an intermediary, the fact that there was information believed to be private, proved to be accurate, podesta's time in the barrel, that could have come from you and roger stone's mind that you would be that intermediary? >> you'll have to ask roger stone. i told roger stone, let's get this clear, in july, i was on vacation with my wife in italy, 25th anniversary. i think flying over, i figured out that assange had podesta's e-mails. i

assange back to the united states. from that piece, "if qu"in at l two meetings with mr.incoming president marino and aides discussed to rid themselves of mr. assange holed up in the ecuadorian embassy in london since 2012, in exchange for concessions like debt relief from the u.s. according to three people familiar with the talks." manafort's spokesman told nbc news manafort didn't bring it up, he merely listened and made no promises and no information that trump knew about it, but it raises questions of whether or not there was a quid pro quo. political reporter ken vogel, the great piece of reporting in "the new york times," joins us now. it's a fascinating additional dot, ken, between trump's former campaign chairman paul manafort, and julian assange, who as your colleagues and others have described as sort of the beating heart of the mueller collusion probe. >> yeah, that's right, and as you suggested there, his people say that this wasn't something that he went down there to pursue. rather it was something that came up in the context of conversations about other bus

mr. manafort his desire to remove julian assange from ecuadorian embassy. mr. manafort listened but made no promises as this was an sill lair. detailed an effort in 2017 by mr. manafort to broker assange's return to the u.s. let's bring in danny cevallos and jackie almaney. danny, good to have you with us. this news comes days after the manafort's cooperation deal with bob mueller essentially blew up saying that it was not going according to plan. what is the significance of what we are hearing today in terms of the fact that this was brought up in a conversation with paul manafort, although it happened at a time when he was not yet at least officially communicating or part of the trump team. >> in the last week or so, we've learned about a lot of things that paul manafort allegedly was involved in, whether it be travel to london, discussions with the ecuadorian president, any of those facts may have been facts that he told to the special counsel's team and he may have disemabled about, he may have been incomplete about telling the truth. those all may have bee

mr. sa . assange. said we communicated through an intermediary. >> the main thing that links him is pa disodespodesta. could you be roger's intermediary? >> sure. but it was not because i talked to assange, but because i figured it out on my own. i have never spoken to julian assange. i don't know him and i have no contact that i was an intermediary, there was no third party who said roger stone has got this. >> but you were making an important point tonight in this interview that julian assange, as an intermediary, the fact that there was information believed to be private that proved to be accurate, to testatest -- podesta's time in the barrel -- >> you'll have to ask roger stone. let's get this clear, july, i was on vacation with my wife in italy. i think flying over, i figured out that assange had podesta's e-mails. i told roger in this e-mail and subsequently i thought it was podes podesta's e-mails. this was my conclusion, my supposition. it did not come from assange, and it didn't connect back t

mr. stone publicly is that he bragged about his relationship with julian assange and wikileaks, and he knewwas next in the barrel on the russian attacks on a democratic process. some of this is obvious. those are folks i think that, working with the chairman to be adam schiff and the full committee will see where the gaps are in this investigation and move forward. >> what about something like erik prince, congressman? >> erik prince from blackwater fame refused to answer certain questions for no particular reason. when i press ed the chairman of the committee at the time, he said he's not under subpoena, and accident have to answer that. when my colleagues refuse to subpoena them, they don't have to answer questions. i suspect that would be part of the strategy. if you're going to bring someone before congress. it's not that they're before anyone in particular, everyone in that body should care that they're not required to answer questions. that can't happen if this is a government of oversight. >> there's a piece of information that is related to a blocked phone number. there's a lot that

mr. manafort did, did you meet with julian assange? it's not just about locking somebody up.t's also about national security. >> jill wine-banks and paul butler, thank you both. >>> new report on saudi backed lobbyists paying for 500 rooms in trump's hotel, more evidence after this. >>> we brought you the bombshell story, at a saudi paid lobbyists paid for 500 rooms at trump's d.c. hotels. the report will likely be of interest to people who have sued the president over the emoluments clause. foreign money flowing into the president's bank account. one of the lawsuits got a win in court when it was allowed to move forwards to dis dovery. the main plaintiff in another lawsuit. democratic senator richard blumenthal? >> my reaction, there's a despicable cruel irony in the saudis using american veterans and putting them up in trump hotels, benefiting the president. and then using them to lobby against a measure that would help the 9/11 families who are seeking to sue the saudis. so the saudis are using veterans, paying the president in violation of the emoluments clause. and that

assange himself had teased on cnn in june of 2016 ch. claims that i urged third parties to come forward, to whom mr. creditco had confirmed his role, somehow somehow constitute witness intimidation are ludicrous, urging people to exercise their first amendment rights and tell the truth in the face of a tsunami of lies being circulated and recycled by the msnbc's of this world is a complete exercise of my first amendment right and a testimony to the truth. i also entirely reject contentions that dr. jerry corsi, as suggested to him by prosecutors from the special counsel's office, that he was the source of any information pertaining to the wikileaks disclosures. in fact, dr. corsi's predictions regarding the wikileaks disclosures turned out to be entirely incorrect and the basis of speculation. my contention that dr. corsi briefed me on the poe desia brothers lucrative business dealings in ukraine and russia prior to my iconic august 21st, 2016 tweet in which i said, let's get it right this time, the podesta brothers time in the barrel will come and accurate and supported by e-mail and text message r

mr. manafort did, did you meet with julian assange? it's not just about locking somebody up. it's also about national security. >> jill wine-banks and paul butler, thank you both. >>> new report on saudi backed lobbyists paying for 500 rooms in trump's hotel, more evidence after this. make that thousands of configurations. it would keep an eye on my fleet. [ beeping ] and an eye out for danger. with active brake assist. if i built a van, i'd make it available in diesel and gas. and i'd build it right here, in south carolina. introducing the all new sprinter starting at $33,790. built in the usa. mercedes-benz. vans. born to run. for each job exxonmobil creates, many more are created in the community. because energy touches so many industries, it supports 10 million u.s. jobs. ...that's why i've got the power of 1-2-3 medicines with trelegy. the only fda-approved 3-in-1 copd treatment. ♪ trelegy. the power of 1-2-3 ♪ trelegy 1-2-3 trelegy with trelegy and the power of 1-2-3, i'm breathing better. trelegy works 3 ways to... ...open airways,... ...keep them open... ...and reduce

assange and wikileaks, including several on october 4, 2016. that was the day before roger stone's text message history indicated that mr. stone believed hacked e-mail data would be made public via wikileaks. in addition, wolf, the report finds the tactics were aimed at eroding public support for special counsel robert mueller and for former fbi director, james comey. wolf? >> very sophisticated work, in fact, by the russians. drew griffin, thank you for that reporting. our experts are here to discuss this and more. everybody stand by. we're going to have a lot to discuss, right after this. [deep breath] i receive travel rewards. i visualize travel rewards. going new places! going out for a bite! going anytime. rewarded! learn more at the explorer card dot com. ♪ ♪ this holiday season, families near you need your help. visit redcross.org now to donate. mopping robotthe from irobot. its precision jet spray and vibrating cleaning head loosen and scrub stains. all while navigating kitchens, bathrooms and those hard to reach places. you and braava jet from irobot. better together. your insurance rates skyrocket you could fix

mr. mike pompeo, your friend, says that wikileaks is a front for russian intelligence. >> that's assuming that roger stone talked to julian assanget wikileaks and had some knowledge about that. and it wasn't just simply guessing. >> but that's not what rudy guiliani said. rudy guiliani said on the sunday shows yesterday, if roger stone gave the campaign folks a heads up, it's not a crime. well, he couldn't give a heads up if he didn't have information. so it's assumed he had information. i would like to know the goalposts keep moving. at first there was no collusion, no crimes, no payments. and now -- >> we're so beyond goal posts. that whole metaphor has to be abandoned. we don't have goal posts any more. >> i, like everybody, wants to see the mueller report. it's good for america to get it out quickly. and thoroughly. >> and he'll be the ultimate arbiter, not any of us. not me, not rudy guiliani. everyone, stick around. posts targeting christians seeking sex addiction therapy. just one of the new details we're learning about how russian trolls tried to influence your vote at the direction of the kremlin. the terrifying new repo

with assange, going back to the e-mail, i think those have been mischaracterized, saying that these dumps are coming, turns out to be incorrect. they don't come in early august as predicted by mrcorsi. >> do you think that holds water? >> not at all, ari. if you look at the russia investigation, michael niflynn lied, paul manafort lied, roger stone's story has been all over the place. i don't see why we need to agree with his version. i don't think he's telling the truth. >> what about the notion that other people may have matched michael cohen's now admitted lies about trump tower and thus also lied to congress, is there anyone else that you think has that situation, or may have lied to the house or senate? >> we will know start thing january. the democrats in the house get subpoena power. we can conduct investigations and subpoena witnesses, subpoena documents. wet're going to know if people lied to congress. >> at this point, you don't have the view whether there is anyone in that group? >> not a this point. >> congressman, appreciate you joining us very much tonight. >> thank you, ari. >>> now i turn to something i said i was excited about, my interview with james comey's

assange presumably. to read very carefully that document to see just what wikileaks is accused of doing. it has already been included in the indictment of the russians who mr. mueller and his team have already indicted. where they made very clear that there were discussions post tacking by the russians of the wikileaks about the best way to make it all public and have the greatest impact on the election. that is already in the indictment. the question is, can -- did wikileaks do anything more than policy is the legal issue going to say that that is enough to strip them of what american journalists would view as their first amendment rights? >> i absolutely agree. or civiltion litigation against wikileaks poses a real threat to media freedom unless you can come up with clear ways of distinguishing what wikileaks does from what we think of as standard newsgathering tactics. we have not seen the full indictment against julian assange if it exists but we have seen to lawsuits against wikileaks. i have looked at those and it is the difference between what wikileaks did compared to what national security journalists do every day. if there is more than that, we s

wikileaks, and reasonably assange, to read very carefully that document to see just what wikileaks is accused of doing. it has already been included in the indictment of the russians who, mr. mueller and his team have already indicted where they made very clear there were discussions post hacking by the russians of the dnc with wikileaks about the best way to make it all public and have the greatest impact on the election. that is already in the indictment. the question is, did we do anything more than that or is , is that enough to strip them of what american journalists would view as their first amendment rights? >> i agree. poses a real unless you are able to come up with convincing and clear ways of distinguishing what wikileaks does from what we consider to be standard newsgathering tactics, we haven't seen the indictment against a shot -- assange, that we have seen to lawsuits against wikileaks p at i look at those and it is not clear that what they alleged to have done isn't what reporters do every >> the real difference is it would be a pervasively anti-american, which was accused in the area. i am not alone in thinking the pentagon papers case was in part won bec