mr. o'donnell. and we can see that it says. first paragraph, mr. murdoch particular came to hear your views on the u.k. economy, given her a box high level of debt, he came to see and chase. sure that apply to everybody. overall diffuser antiunion, pro-free-market. price given the scary business. he keeps saying governor mckenzie in the states keep up-to-date on the british scene. this explains remarkably frequently obtains very passages of what's happening here. it's also clear that murdoch is aware of outline terms of the line taken by his papers. however, never much doubt whether he reads them regularly. you associate yourself with that opinion? >> not entirely. i'm sure he read the newspapers. and i would be very surprised if he wasn't aware of more than an outline of the line taken by his newspapers. from all i understand, he gave a great deal of the cream of attitude to the times, quite properly in my view in "the sunday times," which is a sort of house pet. so i'd be very surprised if he was a much of where ben o'donnell suggested in his not

mr. o'donnell. we can see what it says. mr. murdoch, we are particularly keen to see your views on the british economy, given the high level of debt. overall his views are very much anti-union and free pro-markets in exchange rates. i was surprised to learn, given his business that he found the kinsey to keep up-to-date on the british scene. this explains why he frequently explained past views of what happened here. however, i very much doubt whether he reads them regularly. the you associate yourself with that opinion? to go not entirely. i am sure he read his newspapers, and i would be surprised if he was not aware that more that was outlined of the line taken by his newspapers. from all i understand, he gave a decree more latitude to "the times" than th"the sun." i would be very surprised if he were not more aware of what they were printing than was suggested in the know. we did have important things to discuss. if i can pick up some of the points he raised. on the day i became prime minister in 1990, interest rates were 14%

mr. o'donnell. and we can see what it says her first paragraph, mr. murdoch was particularly keen to hear your views on the economy given the high level of debt t. seeks the interest of the lowest possible apply to everybody. over a murdoch's views are very much antiunion, pro-free-market on exchange rates. and to learn given the worldwide scared of this business that to keep up to date it explains why murdoch frequently attains very patsies of what is happening here. it's also clear my back is aware outline terms of his papers. i very much doubt whether he reads them regularly. >> you associate yourself with that opinion? >> not entirely. i'm sure he read his newspapers and i would be very surprised if he was sent away or in more of an outline of the line taken by his newspapers. from all i understand cudahy gave a good view of latitude to the times, quite probably in my view and the sun eight times. so i would be very surprised if he wasn't much more aware of what they're printing than o'donnell suggested in his note. but we did have some important

mr. o'donnell to look at this. he did not look at other evidence. it was probably an unfortunate decision. therefore, we had to report back, basically reflected the minimum amount of information that was available to the committee, no further information that was not known in government at the time, including the home secretary's examination of this. >> to be fair, the letter that he rode back to you on september 10 simply stated the review is on the matter by the metropolitan police and subject to an inquiry. >> you are talking about the second letter. my first request was before i left office. that was a request that he answered with a memo that you have got about today's pros and cons about taking action. it was at that point that we might have looked at the other evidence available within government. that is the point i'm making. when i wrote to him in september 2010, it was because further knowledge was available. >> i am focusing on the september 2010 issue. you say that you look carefully, looking at the march 2010 consideration. we know that

mr. o'donnell to look at this. he did not look at other evidence. it was probably an unfortunate decision. therefore, we had to report back, basically reflected the minimum amount of information that was available to the committee, no further information that was not known in government at the time, including the home secretary's examination of this. >> to be fair, the letter that he rode back to you on september 10 simply stated the review is on the matter by the metropolitan police and subject to an inquiry. >> you are talking about the second letter. my first request was before i left office. that was a request that he answered with a memo that you have got about today's pros and cons about taking action. it was at that point that we might have looked at the other evidence available within government. that is the point i'm making. when i wrote to him in september 2010, it was because further knowledge was available. >> i am focusing on the september 2010 issue. you say that you look carefully, looking at the march 2010 consideration. we know that

mr. cuomo, lawrence o'donnell is setting the table potentially for a run in 2016.is getting your bon a fides ready ready. new york state had de decriminalized marijuana in 1978. the city from the 1998 went from a 2,000 to 58,000 marijuana arrests. >> no. really? >> yes. >> under bloomberg we assumed wrongly those numbers would go down. there have been around 50,000 making new york number 1 in the united states p what triggered cuomo is a 9 to 1 ratio of blacks and minorities being arrested to whites and how the police were tricking people young males mainly to pull the marijuana out of their pocket or backpack. they weren't smoking it in the street park or walking down the street. mr. kelley and new york pd police chief and mr. bloomberg for the last three years were just giving nice talk to reforming these laws. i think mr. cuomo put their two heads together and said we are going to move forward into reform, this nitwitery in new york city. >> the reform entails? >> treating the private position he thinks of marijuana as it should be, a $100 and not to arrest some

mrs. kennedy was in the back of the aircraft the entire time. kenny o'donnell. i was in the forward part of the aircraft, trying to make sure we were going to do and what to washington because the decision had been made about where the autopsy was going to be at the naval facility. with that is going to be at the walter reid army hospital. but i would be at the naval facility. a lot of decisions like that with radio traffic. for the most part, she was very occupied in the rear portion of the aircraft with the body was laid or the president and his staff, president johnson, were busy trying to arrange things with the good industry shame. >> next, was there one back here? [inaudible] >> assailing lot on by gianni nally and he got the yard to the amount of the area we were there in 1962 and permitted her to use it and she had a wonderful time on that yacht. give her a great amount of privacy to go various places. she enjoyed it very much. >> what do you think she is saying there and that shot? >> probably to keep the press away. >> was there much conversation or di

mr. holder said the american people deserve better. what is the president's reaction. >> kelly o'donnell said this is an embarrassment to the administration, i think it's an enbearsment to congress. mr. holder turned over 11,000 documents, more than 11 times testimony from the administration. they wanted a confrontation, the political theater. they ought to get to work on problems significant to the american people. >> david axelrod. good to see you. >> good to be with you. thank you. >> fourteen minutes after the hour. here is savannah. >>> tom brokaw nbc news correspondent, chuck todd nbc's chief correspondent and political director. gentlemen, good morning to both of you. >> good morning. >> chuck, i'll start with you. we followed the president's repeated attempts to sell it to the public. is this supreme court decision another opportunity to have a conversation with the american people and sell something unpopular. >> a small one. they have a small window to do this. we saw it in our own polling. there is a middle of folks in here, mostly live in the suburbs, skeptical of the bill bu

that's the story, told by a number of folks, he waited until o'donnell went to the bathroom, they had a conversation on the phone. senator kennedy, mrse deed had been done. it really set an example of racial healing across the country and it swung martin luther king's daddy from nixon to kennedy and swung the vote in such a percentage it ended up getting senator kennedy elected president. >> doing the right thing can be good politics as well. you and your brothers and sister have done so much public service. clearly this is what eunice and sar shriver taught you. what is it about your father that became such a role model? i remember, in fact, when he was running for vice president in 1972, which many would say was a fool's mission because george mcgovern, he was the seventh choice to be the running mate. >> i think it was his deep faith. i really believe he was born and raised in a belief that we ought to all try to do something for the poor and for those that are disenfranchised, people with developmental disabilities. you see those actions actions a throughout his life. i think a great hope he had of spreading hope and love and wha

mr. brown, you called for a judicial inquiry in september 2010 in the sense that i think you wrote a letter to lord o'donnell. we've got it at tab 35. >> yep. i remember. >> [inaudible] and, obviously, the context was, although you don't refer to it, was the piece in "the new york times"es which was published on the 1st of september, 2010. is that correct? >> yeah. and the report that was being done by the culture media committee. that was the prompting for asking whether something had to be done. look, we did not know about, as i said in my speech in the house of commons about this matter, we did not know about the extent of this phone hacking, and it only gradually became known to me that it could be considerably more than what had been reported than this rogue hacker or rogue reporter was not a proper defense. but as the information became available and as i realized that this was a bigger issue than people had imagined, it seemed to me we had to look at what needed to be done. now, the home secretary had looked at whether the police investigation should be extended to, or be carried out by another body.

mr. attorney general you're not a good witness. >>> that was one of the testy discussions. joining us notice is nbc news capitol hill correspondent kelly o'donnellu. >> good to see you, alex. >> tell us about the proceedings, we know there's a contentious relationship at best. tell us what went down today. >> the friction you just saw is really the culmination between the department of justice and the committee on oversight. when it comes to the issue of a very controversial practice that has since been disbanded of gun walking where the atf would allow guns u.s.-made or u.s.-owned to go into mexico with the hope of tracking them in order to lead to the arrests of car tells, and people causing a lot of damage to the relationship between the u.s. and mexico, and a lot of violence. that was the original context. the unfortunate things is those guns got into the hands of criminals and ultimately resulted in the death of a federal agent and they have not gotten the guns back. it's been a mess. the attorney general acknowledges that, it goes back years, but the real friction is the attorney general says he does not know who approved this mission. the

mr. obama met with russian president vladimir putin to discuss several issues, including the uprising in syria. nora o'donnell is traveling with the president in los cabos, mexico. nora, what do we know about putin and obama? >> reporter: well, good morning. it was their first face-to-face meeting since vladimir putin regained power, and the meeting lasted nearly two hours. as one top adviser to the president said, they started talking about syria and they didn't want to stop talking about syria. but it was so interesting, in their remarks after their meeting, the two men barely looked at each other. you could just feel sort of the tension between them. and the body language really represented how far apart the two leaders remain on the issue of syria. now, they said that they both support some political transition, but it's clear that president obama did not get an agreement from russian president putin to push bashar al assad out of power. that's what the u.s. wants. they think that's the way to end the violence in syria. and interestingly, apparently, president obama got a bit of a lecture from putin about

mr. general kens or the advice we see from lord o'donnell on the 22nd of december.ress an opinion which disclosed actual or apparent bias. do you follow that? >> i do, but what i'm putting in my evidence is what the cabinet secretary's advice was, and that key point was the point that he made, and i wanted -- i mean, it's not directly relevant to this question. i would argue, backed up by what the deputy prime minister said yesterday, when you look at how jeremy hunt did conduct the bskyb merger, that he did deal with it properly by taking independent advice and publishing independent advice at every important juncture. >> but lord o'donnell's advice, or rather a reflection of legal advice which he received on the 22nd of december, on count 25 of the addendum bundle, having taken advice and satisfied that no previous comments in which we are aware constitutes a prejudgment of the case in question or therefore disqualifying him from taking the statutory decision in that case. so the issue is looking at what he said, which might disqualify him, not how he might conduc

mr. obama met with russian president vladimir putin to discuss several issues. chief among them, the uprising in syria. norah o'donnell is traveling with the president in los cabos, mexico. what do we know about the meeting and the ultimate outcome of the meeting? >> reporter: good morning, erica. this was their first face-to-face meeting. the two leaders met for nearly two hours. that's because one top adviser to president obama said they started talking about syria and didn't want to stop talking about syria. but what was really interesting to watch their remarks to the press after their meeting. the two leaders barely look at each other. you could sense the tension. their body language revealing just how far apart these two leaders remain on syria. russia has blocked two u.n. security council resolutions. the u.s. wants russia to end their arms shipments to syria. and of course russia has not withdrawn their support for syrian president bashir al assad, even though there was some public talk at this meeting that they were in support of a political transition. the other big concern is this one shipment apparently of

lord o'donnell, and -- raised with lord o'donnell and he offered to insure we got the information, and i'm grateful to have it. >> "the new york times" piece mreron, refers to september 2010. were you made aware of it at the time or shortly thereafter? >> i can't remember the exact sequence of events that day but, yes, i was made aware of it, and i think the key point is that andy coulson directly denied and a statement was put out on his behalf by number 10 downing street about this accusation. so that, i think is pretty clear. >> although the accusation which we can't go into in any detail for obvious reasons related directly to him, didn't it? >> that's right, yes. but there was an instant and immediate denial. >> but you didn't return to him for any direct assurances, did you? >> i don't recall exactly the conversations that took lace. it was on the day -- that took place. it was on the day i moved into number 10 downing street after the birth of our daughter. so that's the memory i have from that day rather than anything around this. but i'm absolutely clear he made an outright denial and that was that. >> were you aware that in septembe

mr. brown, you called for a judicial inquiry in september 2010 in the sense that i think you wrote a letter to lord o'donnell. we've got it at tab 35. >> yep. i remember. >> [inaudible] and, obviously, the context was, although you don't refer to it, was the piece in "the new york times"es which was published on the 1st of september, 2010. is that correct? >> yeah. and the report that was being done by the culture media committee. that was the prompting for asking whether something had to be done. look, we did not know about, as i said in my speech in the house of commons about this matter, we did not know about the extent of this phone hacking, and it only gradually became known to me that it could be considerably more than what had been reported than this rogue hacker or rogue reporter was not a proper defense. but as the information became available and as i realized that this was a bigger issue than people had imagined, it seemed to me we had to look at what needed to be done. now, the home secretary had looked at whether the police investigation should be extended to, or be carried out by another body.