he is also the person who reportedly, according to the ap signed paul manafort to a $10 million a year contract for manafort to promote the interest of vladimir putin and the government in countries around the world, including the united states. they're also known to have gone in together on several big investments, including a ukrainian tv concern that they called black sea cable. it's funny even when you're talking about big corrupt bills and people who are trying to fix the system and rig the system. it's funny even in those circumstances things do sometimes still fall apart. i mean paul manafort did get paid millions of dollars from somewhere for his work on behalf of the pro putin political party, that is money he took home. we know that because he declared it formally to the u.s. government now, while investigators are breathing down his neck his glasses are fogged up and he can't see forward. so he did make dollars doing that. and the a.p. reports he did sign that contract to promote putin's interest around the world, including here. and paul manafort confirmed that he worked fo

that follows previous reporting that paul manafort's real estate transactions were being investigated by the fbi. that follows previous reporting that manafort's domestic banking records had been subpoenaed by a federal grand jury in the eastern district of virginia. that follows previous reporting from the nation of cyprus, which has been a conduit for money laundering, reporting that paul manafort's offshore banking had been requested by investigators and handed over to them. maybe the business practices and the personal finances of the trump presidential campaign chairman, maybe his money isn't any of our business. and when this all bears out we will come to realize this has all been his personal stuff and his business stuff that has nothing to do with him running the trump campaign and nothing to do with the trump campaign's relationship with russia and russia's attack on our election. that may be the case but last night, just before "the new york times" published their interview with the president, they published this report which says in the months right before paul manafort joi

and paul manafort and jared kushner and all of those russians, the parenthetical reference, paul manafortmeeting with congressional investigators. oh. which means in addition to him handling all these legal inquiries and subpoenas into his financial matters, paul manafort has also apparently been discussing things with congressional investigators. i didn't know he was talking to them. there was a period of a couple of months between when paul manafort said he would register as a foreign agent and the time when he finally did. that meant it was months after a lot of people had seemed he had done it when paul manafort finally filed as a foreign agent and declared over a two-year period he had been paid $17 million by a political party in ukraine. those numbers may be starting to look a little hinky as well. andrew cramer at "the new york times" from kiev this weekend. he said even though paul manafort and his firm were paid nearly $17 million from this political party in ukraine, he found that that political party in ukraine which supposedly paid them they said they didn't spend $17 million

as far as the hearing with trump junior and paul manafort, that is scheduled to be in public but we'llave to see. donald trump junior has indicated he wanted to testify in public. i assume if this goes forward, he will. manafort, he's known to be under investigation. it will be very interesting to see whether he invokes his fifth amendment rights as he has every right to do, so we don't hear anything about his account. >> one of the interesting things about this is that he goes before that committee, he's under oath. this is very different than talking to sean hannity. >> for all of them. lying to congress is a crime. even if jared kushner doesn't tell the truth and lies in a staff interview to congress, he could be prosecuted for that as well as the guys who testify in open session. paul manafort is under investigation for a lot of different things including money issues with his banking accounts. he can be asked about a million different things. will his lawyer let him go up there and be open to questions from any senator. it may no be on point about that meeting. the same thing with

and paul manafort. days have gone by now where they have been asked to testify before the committee. we are expecting a major announcement. are they going to do it? maybe they are going to refuse to testifying under oath next week. congressman, if that's the case, if they do refuse to testify under oath, what would your reaction to that be? >> thank you, brianna. if they refuse to testify under oath, it shows, again, that they have something to hide from the american people. and whether they voluntarily testify or not, congress has subpoena power. so, they are going to have to testify at some point. i hope that they do it voluntarily. it makes everything go much smoother. >> but what if they take the 5th amendment? essentially, getting away with not answering any questions, even if they do show up in person? >> they have a right to take the 5th amendment, and then we have the right publicly to say that they are trying to hide by taking the 5th amendment. and let me just say, we no longer have smoke here

and paul manafort asked for, do you know? >> i think it's our default proposition in the judiciary committee that these hearings should be public. the only reason not to have them be public is if we are dealing with classified information. here we are not dealing, i don't believe, with classified information. so, the public should see what's going on. the purpose, as our recent bipartisan hearing on how you do a congressional investigation in parallel with a criminal investigation showed, is that the value of a congressional investigation is that the people of our democracy can be kept up to date with what's going on and provided testimony that is under oath and, therefore, under a higher obligation of truthfulness. >> have the e-mails and the information that we have learned about this meeting contradicted any of the testimony that you've heard so far? >> we have not had them in so far so we don't have testimony yet. so, we don't have contradictions. but the public statements that have been made, particularly about the meeti

if there is one thing we know paul manafort is good at running a delegate operation. that for trump. but trump never had the faith in he had him in in like he did in cory lewandowski. manafort never clicked with him he tied trump bridled at every stage. when i mafrpt was bringing bd headlines trump zaded he had to go. >> here is the passage in which the president has to sprain that he is not a baby. i'm reading straight from the book. by the way this is pretty much what i'm about to read as you pretty much every other page of this book. there is a stunning back stage scene on every other stanl n trump who had been stewing over the times article exploded at manafort. how can anybody allow -- this is trump talking how can anybody allow of an article that says your campaign is all fed up tramp demanded to know furious at had the portrayal the aides were going on television in an effort to reach him. we all remember that. you think you've got aing to og on tv to talk to me you treat me like a baby am i like a baby to you i sit there like a little baby and watch tv and you

let me shift to paul manafort. we are learning in the last few minutes the senate judiciary after striking a deal with manafort, issued a subpoena for him to come testify before that committee tomorrow. now, it's hard for us to know exactly what's going on here, is this for real? is this showmanship? asha let me ask you, what if paul manafort doesn't show up? >> well, then the committee can hold him in contempt and he can think about not showing up while he sits in jail. that's the ultimate penalty. i think what could be happening here is a lot of pressure has been put on manafort as a result of jared kushner's statement. jared -- you know, if we take jared kushner's statement at face value, it was the three stooge's meeting with the russians. that's not true. paul manafort probably has much more information to give and now i think the pressure is on him to give more details because jared kushner claims he can't recall. the other thing that is going on in his le luck tans to appear or share the interviews is, we don

paul manafort's old purported business partner. one claim was first reported by the associated press, is the justice department allegation that dmitry furtash wasn't just trying to pay bribes in india, he was trying to pay bribes in the united states. as well as the first new claim. the second new claim that the government is making, the one that's rattling around like a ricochet inside a shooting range is newly reported tonight from nbc news, according to nbc's review of these new court filings from the justice department, the justice department is now alleging that dmitry furtash, the major funder of the pro-putin political party that paul manafort works for, the oligarch to whom paul manafort contested, but apparently very large financial dealings right up until he joined the trump campaign, dmitry furtash is not only wanted in the united states, they now say he is a high ranking figure in the russian mob. quote, the department of justice has identified a former business associate of ex-trump campaign manager paul manafort as an

paul manafort was his campaign chairman.nd then he started inching away from him in a pretty pronounced way. this is just who he is and huh he is. i think anyone is surprised by how he is treating sessions, should be surprise heed is doing it from the west wing not that he is doing it at all. >> fascinating to me that he does this from a distance. talks in front of a crowd about jeff sessions but doesn't talk to jeff sessions' face. >> actually. we don't know what their private conversations are, number one. we do know that jeff sessions, i continue to not understand to your question about what is real and what is not here, and what's known and what is not. jeff sessions offered his resignation several weeks ago. >>> the president wouldn't take it. i don't know why it is that the president is sort of tormenting him. i don't know if there is something the president has learned about where mueller is going. or if there is something else related to this investigation that concerns him. but it has heated up again. >> jeff, if, i

and paul manafort, keep in mind, paul manafort is also going to be at the senate judiciary committee hearing, which will be public, and that will be a blockbuster. you're going to have those players involved in that 2016 meeting. in fact, you know, it's interesting. they are on the second panel of the senate judiciary hearing. first of all, the committee will talk to inspectors general, the doj, and folks in charge of

that's paul manafort, the former campaign chairman, who is now at the center of these investigations on capitol hill as well as the special counsel's investigation as well. now, chuck grassley, the chairman of the senate judiciary committee, told me just moments ago that he wants to bring in paul manafort next week to testify in a public session. take a listen. >> one thing, he was present at the meeting that we've all read about in the last week, weekend news. number two, he's going to fit in well at the hearing we have on the registration -- what do you call it? federal agent registration act. okay. >> reporter: so when is that, and has he agreed to testify in open session? >> well, i don't know whether he just -- we're going to invite him, and if he doesn't invite, then under our new rules, senator feinstein and i have the power to issue a subpoena. >> reporter: so, threatening a es subpoena there and later he said that hearing is going to be next week. this is significant, because we have not heard from paul manafort in the middle as this controversy has grown, and we know that t

or paul manafort?> my understanding is that yes, there's been a fairly wide ranging document request but i don't know the details of what documents have been requested. >> if they in any way refuse, is that something also you would support subpoenaing? >> yes, it's my expectation the committee would use subpoena power if necessary to get documents relevant to the meetings and relationships that we're investigating. i think this is an important next step for us and the senate judiciary committee and important part to use congress' subpoena power. >> for donald trump jr. is the focus just that meeting we all know about last june? or is it beyond that? >> well speaking for myself, one of my main concerns is the meeting that donald trump jr. had that was initially mischaracterized as a small and brief meeting about adoption but over the next couple day ts turned out it was a much larger group, about eight people talking about potentially receiving derogatory information about secretary clinton from someone

and paul manafort knows that.hat should not -- i really feel like if this sounded now, if eric didn't know, they should have been informed. >> eric: do you want to say something? >> eboni: i think she is touching on campaign finance law. >> probably the only place where he could be accused of violating the law. >> eboni: we'll get into it later. let's start with this, it is top on the mind for a lot of americans tonight. one of the things that is required as an exchange of something of value. we cannot accept or solicit things of value. so, the big question is going to become of this opposition research, is that valuable? >> eric: if that is the standard you are going to go by, literally anything could have value. if you go off to a campaigning say, i think if you go over there, there is a good voting block over there, you might want to -- >> i think people are split on it because there hasn't been a case like this before, eboni, has there? it's always been about money. they've never looked at in terms of a conver

him for his -- the way he conducted himself in a very professional manner. >> also on the hill, paul manafortman of the trump campaign who met behind closed doors with the senate committee. manafort got a subpoena from the senate judiciary committee to appear before tomorrow. eboni, personally paul manafort is an interesting piece of this puzzle. a lot of people say trump's new to politics. paul manafort, not so new. >> yeah. it's not just you, kat. a lot of people remember an abrupt exit for paul manafort, to much to his credit turned candidate trump's campaign around and put it on a great trajectory to get him to victory. he got missing in action. so a lot of people are very curious to see what paul manafort has to say about the russia campaign relationship. >> absolutely. eric, you wouldn't have any questions for paul manafort? >> oh, yeah. if paul manafort did something that is wrong, that's fine. find out, tie up the loose ends. again, just because paul manafort may or may not have done something wrong doesn't mean trump was involved in it. you still need to tie this back to candidate do

and paul manafort knows that.hat should not -- i really feel like if this sounded now, if eric didn't know, they should have been informed. >> eric: do you want to say something? >> eboni: i think she is touching on campaign finance law. >> probably the only place where he could be accused of violating the law. >> eboni: we'll get into it later. let's start with this, it is top on the mind for a lot of americans tonight. one of the things that is required as an exchange of something of value. we cannot accept or solicit things of value. so, the big question is going to become of this opposition research, is that valuable? >> eric: if that is the standard you are going to go by, literally anything could have value. if you go off to a campaigning say, i think if you go over there, there is a good voting block over there, you might want to -- >> i think people are split on it because there hasn't been a case like this before, eboni, has there? it's always been about money. they've never looked at in terms of a conver

although paul manafort, to your point should have known better. >> manafort, at the end of the day manafort did not behave properly throughout this. i make that charge publicly or privately. he should have known better. he didn't. to certain extent all said and done paul would be into things he shouldn't be in into. obviously he will pay a price for that. trish: ed rollins good for your perspective. we'll continue the story. donald trump, jr., releasing email exchange at the center of controversy with meeting with a russian attorney. ed rollins said optics are not great. he is feeding the story, what does it mean in terms of the justice department? is he in any kind of legal jeopardy? all as we wait to hear from senate leadership on health care reform. they're coming forward. looking at live picture from capitol hill as they talk about delaying their august recess as they should. they were sent there to work, not to play. stay with us. we're back in two. at fidelity, trades are now just $4.95. we cut the price of trades to give investors even more value. and at $4.95, you can trade with a c

judiciary committee has dropped the subpoena aimed at forcing the president's former campaign chairman paul manafort to testify publicly. we are told the two sides have agreed to keep talking and manafort is no longer required to appear at an open hearing tomorrow. >>> this hour i'll talk about all those stories, much more with senator chris coons. he's a key democrat on the judiciary committee. and our correspondents and specialists are also standing by. >>> first, let's go to our senior white house correspondent jeff zeleny. jeff, we heard from the president, but the attorney general's future is still very much in question. >> reporter: wolf, there's no doubt about it. his future is in question. but the president's views of him are not. the president clearly sees this as an act of betrayal. never mind that jeff sessions was the first republican senator to sign onto his campaign. tonight the question is whether he'll be the first cabinet member to go. >>> president trump made clear today he's willing to shame attorney general jeff sessions, but estopped short of saying whether he'll fire him. >> i'

i don't see how you get a meeting with jared kushner, paul manafort and donald trump, jr. at trump tower, that is the most secure building in the world, without knowing who you're meeting with. >> jason miller, what about that? it does seem hard to imagine that somebody can get into trump tower without their name being -- i went there to do interviews. you've got to give your name in advance. >> well, to answer your most immediate question, look, this was a period in the campaign. i think i joined two weeks later. i think brian joined a month later or so, where they had not ramped up and there wasn't the level of sophistication you would expect at that point there would be for a general election candidate. i have to take a step back. there are a couple of things with all the hubbub surrounding this. if the time when don, jr. was approached here, there was zero narrative about any of this russia talk. there wasn't even a peep of it. not even the -- >> this meeting was early june. >> right, there wasn't the slight esz thiest thing. every single campaign has been approached b

and paul manafort to testimony in open hearings next week. and jared kushner, the presses's son-in-law will be interviewed. this comes after last week's revelation that kushner, manafort and trump jr. met with russians in june of 2016 to get dirt on hillary clinton. i'll joined by dick durbin on the judiciary committee. do we know if they're going to come? the president's son, the chairman of his campaign? >> no. we don't have confirmation yet. we home we don't have to go any further than an invitation but it is scheduled for wednesday morning. >> do you believe in an open hearing, you would be in a position to simply say, we have all the time in the world. tell us all the conversations you had with the russians in the last year and a half. >> it is an open format. theon thing from the independent council is to make sure the witnesses testify under oath and publicly. certainly questions can be asked on a lot of questions. last june they met with the russian lawyer and he is perhaps speaking on behalf of the russian government. there was a lure

but what about paul manafort? >> he was in the meeting, too. there's a lot of questions. >> the part of the meeting that would have triggered a warning bell is this is part of the russian government's effort to help elect donald trump. that is the part of the e-mail that someone who reads their e-mails, reads them all the way through, would have said what are you talking about and would not have let their brother-in-law, the campaign manager and other people into that room or would have at least asked what are you talking about with this effort? you would not have wanted to put yourself in had there or anyone else in there especially with this e-mail floating around and putting out there themselves, i have no idea what he was thinking. >> do you think paul manafort knew? >> i totally agree with azi. i think that's where republicans are at. they're ideallogically opposed on different sides of the aisle, but both agree that there are significant questions about this meeting. and while it's, you know, essentially paul manafort is a seasoned politi

obviously, paul manafort and donald trump jr. do not have white house roles.hner, though, was in that meeting, as well, and the white house is not commenting tonight on whether he has retained his security cleaner. there have been multiple meetings, multiple contacts now between jared kushner and russian emissaries and russian officials that he did not disclose, we know, at least on his initial application for a security clearance. if it's possible that there is still yet, that is undisclosed between him and the russians that the russians know about but he has not yet made public, that would obviously put the russians in a position to exert coercive force over him, to blackmail him, for him to try to save his skin, so they didn't tell what they knew. that's a red-hot source of concern, for anybody who has a high-ranking security clearance. somebody working as a senior white house adviser, it's just incredibly concerning. whether or not he's ever prosecuted. much more ahead tonight. stay with us. ♪ if you could book a flight, then add a hotel, or car, or activi

what did he tell you about paul manafort? this is very key. >> reporter: it is very key. rassley, the chairman of the senate judiciary committee telling me earlier today he wants manafort to appear in a public session next week. now, this is significant because the house and senate intelligence committees have been trying to get paul manafort to come before their committee. they have been exchanging records and documents, but we have been expecting that to happen in a classified setting. but chuck grassley says there is a hearing next week in which manafort would be a perfect witness and he plans to call him, even threatening subpoena power. take a listen. >> has he agreed to testify in open snegs >> i don't know whether he -- we're going to invite him. and if he does an invite, under the new rules, senator feinstein and i have the power to issue a subpoena. >> before the august recess? >> well, if it works into this next hearing, that's scheduled for next week on fara. >> reporter: now, just moments ago, jim, the senator's office actually put out a statement saying that h

paul manafort is a very wealthy man. made millions and millions of dollars and paul manafort is not working for free. if he isn't being paid by the trump campaign, one wonders who he was being paid by. you don't have this defense i don't know what was going on. paul manafort would have known what was going on. >> interesting question in the news letter. if "new york times" knows all this. what does bob mueller know? >> i expect bob mueller is one or two steps ahead of "new york times." he has access to documents that "times" doesn't. i suspect we'll see mueller pushing ahead and building his case and he is doing this in private. and i hope we don't see this reported in "new york times." media is one or two steps behind. >> holly, when we look at the e-mail story that came out overnight that potentially donald trump jr. had been notified that this was russians looking to essentially help his father. that sort of landed with an explosion, right? that's another huge piece to this story. we haven't heard the president tweet

and paul manafort's decisions here? think from one perspective they're looking at this as an opportunity to tell the story and answer allegations concerning russia and the election, but the stakes are very high here. i think paul manafort will handle himself well but donald trump jr. is not familiar with the ways of washington and congress. mika and i have sat in on many contentious hearings and she'll agree witnesses can get themselves in a lot of trouble if they're not experienced with these hearings. if he doesn't, he'll have to listen to his attorney, answer carefully, be forthcoming and not try to answer questions that are traps or questions he doesn't have an answer to. >> mika, what does this look like for republicans? the fact these two gentlemen haven't said yes yet though don junior said over and over i've said everything. if it ultimately comes down to subpoenas, republicans subpoenaing other republicans, what is that? >> right. you can see this when republican witnesses refuse a republican congress. you get

of course, because he is in the administration now and security clearances revealed that, and paul manafort. you can argue the others didn't have experience in politics or campaigns. you can't make the make that argument for manafort. the line of defense, it's always been, we never got anything of value from this meeting, which, of course, grassley and others are going to want to know, well, what happened in the case that you did receive valuable information? what will you have done then? remember, donald trump jr. will be testifying, or appearing in front of the committee presumably under only. >> look, charles krauthammer wrote an op-ed to that point. maybe they didn't get anything, but sure tried. right? let me read that. he says, had the lawyer real stuff to deliver, continue to jr. and the others isn't far deeper legal trouble. turned out to be incompetent collusion. amateur collusion. comically failed cou eed collus. e don't need a lawyer to say that democratic fiction designed to explain away a lost election is now officially dead. i mean, kellyanne conway and others trying to move p

or paul manafort?erstanding is that yes, there's been a fairly ride ranging document request but i don't know the details. the. >> if they in any way refuse, is that something also you would suppo support -- >> yes, to get document the relative to the meetings and relationships we're investigating. i think this is an important next step for us and it's important part of the intelligence committee's work as well. using congress's subpoena power. >> for donald trump jr. is the focus just that meeting we all know about last june? or is it beyond that? >> well speaking for myself, one of my main concerns is the meeting that donald trump jr. had that was initially m mischaracterized as a small brief meeting about adoption but over the next couple days turned out it was a much larger group, about eight people talking about potentially receiving derogatory information about secretary clinton from someone who represented herself as being a russian official, someone on behalf of the rougussian government. the e

paul manafort volunteered to appear before your committee earlier this year. do you think donald trump jr. should testify before congress, that jared kushner should testify before congress, that paul manafort should testify? do you want to see all of them testifying before your committee? >> all of them should and will. those three, of course, you'll recall the story that was reported about the alleged attempt by jared kushner to set up a direct line of communication perhaps at a russian diplomatic facility. again, that was a news report. but boy, we want to know about that. of course, now the president's son based on the e-mails that he released, again, this wasn't fake news, this was the president's son saying, look what i did. we want to talk to him. and paul manafort, he was the guy at the top of the ladder while all of this was happening. so we're going to want to know what he knew, whether he encouraged that and, of course, whether he told now-president, then-candidate donald trump. >>> and congressman, the chairman of the senate judiciary committee, chu

we go to paul manafort, one-time chair for the campaign team.iciary committee in a statement issued a subpoena as of last night. to compel the trump campaign chair, paul manafort, to testify at a hearing on wednesday, which would be tomorrow. part of the statement reads the following. the chair, took out of iowa. as a democrat from california. paul manafort said he will be willing to provide a single transcribed interview to congress, which would not be available to the dictionary committee member or staff. how will that be helpful, right? 's participation in wednesday hearings. what happens now? does he appear or not? does he take the fifth? do they find a way to cooperate between now and tomorrow mornin morning? this is the question now as to what happens here. as that word comes down, jared kushner should arrive any moment for his meeting with house members. we are watching all that. 9:54. >> shannon: keeping a close eye on the north. the rogue regime may carry the may carry out another missile test. urges them not to do it. china has increas

john, is paul manafort in legal trouble here?s where a witch hunt can become a witch trial. the reality is if this guy has discussions with manafort many years ago about refurbishing an iconic hotel in new york. they never did business together, they never exchange any money. it's a big zero, and now prosecutors of chicago are saying maybe he had contact with organized crime. he is not charged with that, it's never been proven. right now, it's nothing. a lot of fluff. there's nothing here. >> jon: the drake hotel was torn down in 2011. these guys were talking about buying it, but those discussions never went anywhere, does that mean that paul manafort is an associate of the sky? >> what you're asking them where a question. is he an associate or accomplic accomplice? was this a conspiracy or where they're going to collaborate question at the headline you read earlier, they sounded very anonymous manafort has been pummeled in the news media because remember, we are looking at all of us in the throes of a russian collusion investiga

why would paul manafort be there? >> having been in the headquarters many times in the campaign there was free flow of people coming and going. i could see them dropping in on it. paul manafort would not have walked out of there with information he thought was a violation of the law and not done something about it. i know that much about paul manafort. he would not have played with uranium, if you don't mind my saying, or anything nuclear. there could have been mistakes by jared and don because they were nonelected officials and nonpolitical but paul manafort would have known better and done something about it. do you really think that they would have had five people in a meeting if this was about colluding with russia? it defies logic. would donald trump really go out publicly and say i've got to do -- this is all -- this whole i gotcha now approach that the democrats have had since the investigation first started. >> last word. >> he went into a press conference during the summer, asking russia to find the other 30,

paul manafort is one of those people.le came to me and they wanted to share some negative information about my opponent, i wouldn't necessarily turn it down, but certainly no one close to a foreign government ever did that. that i think would have raised red flags for me but i certainly would have checked out who the source was and then been very careful about who met with that source. also looking back on the thing if i were involved in the meeting fully disclosed, if you have to, to get a clearance o if you're making a statement under oath what occurred. >> i want to talk a bit about this idea president trump floated out there yesterday, the united states coordinating in a cyber security joint effort with russia. he put out this tweet yesterday morning. putin and i discussed forming an impenetrable cyber security unit so that election hacking and many other negative things will be guarded. >> you saw marco rubio's response to that, right? >> yes. >> tweeted out, partnering with putin on cyber security unit is akidnap to

and warns he can subpoena paul manafort who also met with the russian lawyer.g for action against jared kushner who did the same. >>> dou

and donald trumpjnr kuschner, paul manafort and donald trump jnr turned kuschner, paul manafort andr, paul manafort and donald trump jnr turned up. they kuschner, paul manafort and donald trumpjnr turned up. they took the meeting, they were actually there, and that calls into question the suggestion collusion, conspiracy? who knows? that's exactly right. there was a willingness to entertain this proposal. in a traditional presidential campaign, this sort of approach from someone purporting to bea approach from someone purporting to be a representative of a foreign government with opposition research, that should set off all sorts of alarm bells in a campaign. it would require notifying the fbi, for instance. it didn't happen in this case. they seemed willing, donald trumpjnr in case. they seemed willing, donald trump jnr in particular, case. they seemed willing, donald trumpjnr in particular, seemed willing to hear them out. he claims its traditional opposition research but it isn't traditional, even for an untraditional presidential campaign, the way the trump one was run. we've go

i will say i blame paul manafort for all of this. he is one of the worst people that work in politics. i said that who is managing the campaign to lead donald trump, jr., and jared kushner come into a meeting with this person is beyond incompetent and i'm sure his head will roll for this. >> melissa: if i had a father who was running for election and somebody reached out to me and said, i have very valuable information that will hurt the opponent, i would take it. >> meghan: hundreds of people have said that to me and my entire life. at rallies, and events, at dinner, at starbucks. i have information on x, i have information on why. it still happens to me and my father is not running for office right now. what's different as it came from a russian government official and what's different to me, i don't know how their campaign was run. it's highly unusual for the son or daughter of a candidate to be put in a compromising position because there are a lot of crazy people out there who want to put them in compromising positions. >> melis

her to approach the president of ukraine to ask if he would be willing to take a question about paul manafortther words, get it out there in the ether, the paul man ford ties. so there is some collusion. the dnc was working with her, they wanted to carry a message or get a request to the ukrainian embassy, so there is a direct link. >> there is no doubt, you are right. if we are to believe chalupa at her word, and this was indicated in dan merica's reporting, that the dnc was interested in finding a question to get asked, but i don't know that is entirely comparable to the information coming in to trump tower to help donald trump's campaign, but you are right, there is a connection between this woman's work at the dnc and her connections at the ukrainian embassy. what is unclear is whether or not that really had any election impact whatsoever. we don't know that, quite frankly, on the russian side as well. >> thanks so much for sifting through it all with us and for the reporting on this. obviously we'll continue to follow all of these threads. david chalian, thank you. the white house is try

and paul manafort in that room? >> the statute is pretty clear that it's a federal crime to solicit a campaign contribution from a foreign source. it's pretty clear that anything of value can count as a campaign contribution and certainly opposition research is something that's routinely paid for in the political world, and this could be something of value. certainly the e-mail suggests they thought it might be quite valuable. so the question really is was there a solicitation of such a contribution in that meeting? and i assume the denial will be that, you know, we just took the meeting. we never actually asked for the contribution. but a lot depends on what went on in that meeting. i think you've got at least enough there where there's going to need to be a criminal investigation of this. and what that means is there's going to have to be testimony taken. then, lawrence, it really loops back to what you've been talking about, which is the question of false statements because there will be more testimony here. and

we knew paul manafort had connections to russians. but mike pence, mike flynn, jeff sessions, jared kushner, now donald trump jr. at some point there may be no fire, howard, but this room is getting real smoky. >> it is. because what it indicates about the atmosphere at trump tower, and i was there, i had a couple of interviews with people there, and so i had some sense of it. not only was it chaotic, and not only was it divided, where you had the lewin dow ski camp and manafort camp and so forth, however, some of those arguments may still be continuing, i think that's what sarah huckabee sanders was referring to in the briefing today, not only was it divided and chaotic, the default setting was any friend of russia is a friend of ours. and sort of the atmosphere there was, somehow, as we're learning in greater depth, that, you know, we have friends over there. we have friends on that side. let's hear what they have to say. even if we don't know the name of the person coming in. >> so, peter, let's just -- look, it's fair, and enough

the campaign chair paul manafort and son-in-law jared kushner joining the meeting.h legal hot water and donald trump jr. is in now, it's impossible to believe the president himself was unaware of this apparent effort by the russian government that was known to others in the trump campaign, it's impossible to believe that the president himself did not know about this, and now you assume donald trump jr. has to answer questions under oath, not just before congress but also in front of a grand jury or in an interview with bob mueller's investigative team and asked about conversations he may have had with his father in the months after this meeting. even if the president didn't know about this meeting itself. it's impossible to think for all the months during the campaign as the e-mails were being leaked out by russians there wasn't at some point a conversation where the son revealed to the fall he knew of a russian government plot to help the trump campaign. >> i want to show you part of donald trump jr.'s political defense. this is something he tweeted on monday. ever

and paul manafort.ator diane feinstein, the top democrat on that committee, telling me earlier today that they have actually discussed this with bob mueller, the special counsel's office, who has essentially given them a green light to seek public testimony for both paul manafort and donald trump, jr. when they want to. so, the question will be will those two men agree to come before the committee. and if they don't, will they face subpoenas? because senator chuck grassley, the republican chairman of the committee, has threatened subpoenas if they do not agree. the third individual bob mueller also cleared, glenn simpson who is in charge of that research firm. bob mueller saying that committee can also look and talk to him in a public session. so, look for all this to take place in a matter of the coming weeks or days. >> looks like pretty good cooperation through the special counsel robert mueller and the senate. thanks very much, manu raju on capitol hill. i want to go back to senator chris coons. >>>

and paul manafort agree to testify next week in the russia investigation. chuck grassley is threatening to subpoena the president's son and former campaign chairman if he doesn't get a response from them by tomorrow evening. we are covering those stories and more with our guests including senator amy cloeb achar. she is a democrat on the judiciary committee, and our correspondents and specialists are also standing by. we'll have more on o.j. simpson's parole ahead. right now let's go to cnn justice correspondent jessica schneider. white house claims mr. trump has confidence in jeff sessions but the interview tells a different story. >> that's right, the white house put it this way at the briefing today. they said the president was disappointed in sessions' decisions to recuse himself from the russia investigation but the president still has confidence in the attorney general. it was quite a different tone than president trump took inside the oval office for that "new york times" article where he slammed sessions and put his anger on the record. tonight atto

and controversial meeting between donald trumpjunior and paul manafort and a russian lawyer.democrat on the intelligence to midi has closed all of this disturbing and is wondering why it has taken so long for all of the facts to come out. it seems every day there is some new revelation. quite disturbing indeed. what more do we know now of this previously undisclosed meeting between presidents trump and vladimir putin at the g20? between presidents trump and vladimir putin at the 620? the previously undisclosed meeting between president trump and president vladimir putin first broke. he said the meeting occurred on the sidelines of a state dinner for the heads of state and spouses. it lasted about one hour and only the translator was present. now the white house has pushed back and said it was a brief meeting and the rural reason only the translator was present was because each couple was only allowed one translator and president trump's translator only spoke japanese. they also spoke back and said that the insinuation that the white house has tried to hide a second meeting is

i asked jared kushner and paul manafort to stop by. we primarily discussed a program about the adoption of russian children. but after revelations from the times sunday, that the meeting was facilitated primarily on the promise of dirt on hillary clinton, donald trump, jr. issued a subsequent statement. i was asked to have a meeting by an acquaintance i knew from the 2013 miss universe pageant with an individual who i was told might have information helpful to the campaign. the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to russia were funding the democratic national committee and supporting ms. clinton. it quickly became clear she had no meaningful information. my father knew nothing of the meeting or these events. monday morning trump, jr. retweeted a "the new york times" story, raising questions about his two separate accounts. no inconsistency in statements, meeting ended up being primarily about adoptions. in response to further ques, i simply provided more details. the man who set up the meeting is rob gold s

paul manafort working as the campaign manager at the time. don junior requested they attend this meeting. all of this coming after president trump spoke out about that meeting with vladimir putin in an early morning tweet storm, but the president refused to make clear whether he believed putin's hacking denials saying he's given his opinion on that matter, the problem is he gave three different opinions this week, all in the same press conference about it. take a look. >> i think it was russia. >> i think it was probably other people and/or countries. nobody really knows. nobody really knows for sure. >> white house chief of staff reince priebus went directly on the record saying the president doesn't believe putin. >> the president absolutely did not believe the denial of president putin. what the president did is he immediately came into the meeting, talked about russian meddling in the u.s. election, went after that issue at least two separate times. >> so the president provided more details of his meeting and they were full of contradicti