to put up a case against roger stone and i'm not going to have it, roger is my mentor, and he's likeily to me and i'm not going to do it. >> and sam nunberg argued that stone got himself into this mess. >> i said to roger, you're giving yourself a lot of exposure, claiming you're in communication with julians assange. >> did mueller ask you about trump's communication with julian assange? >> which brings us to question two, why did roger stone promote wikileaksing in 2016 but trump the can bat touted wikileaks more than 20 times during the campaign. >> he is a courageous journalist who has an incredible track record for authenticity. say this about julian assange, i reject the idea that he's a russian asset. i reject the idea that wikileaks is a russian front. >> and the person who made this documentary i just excerpted said that stone was trying to arrange a personal visit to assange during the campaign. >> in july and in june of 2016, we -- he told us that he was trying to meet with julian assange, we spoke with him about the possibility of bringing our crew to london to film them

but he has tossed things around. >> roger stone is a rather canny spin master. d we have not had any communications with him whatsoever. >> in that exchange, you mentioned him and assange says he doesn't have direct communication. the allegation from mr. stone is that you are the intermediary, between assange and him. >> it depends on what you mean by a back channel. i think roger stone has downgraded my participation as a back channel into someone who has confirmed. first he said he had direct communications withes ago sang, and you he's downgraded that and it's to the point where i confirmed. i had assange on three times and we had a lot of conversations, i did his show and i have no idea some of the things i may have said to him, but certainly did not pass any information from julian assange to roger stone. >> you flatly deny that stone allegation? i want to dig more into that, because before we go deep into that, because you're not only here to talk about roger stone, your relationship with assange, which is no newsworthy, i want to play a little bit of julia

roger stone distanced himself. >> roger stone is president trump's boy. so the question is trump was involved in the strategic release of the e-mails, stone is talking to wikileaks about the e-mails. >> roger stone would protect him. if they're both pretending they're not friends with each other and he was fired together, roger stone would protect donald trump. >> wouldn't he be purgering himself? >> of course. >> the crime is a conspiracy to

roger stone? roger's my mentor. i e-mail, ari, with roger, 15 times a day, okay? and we had a big disagreement during 2016, because once again, as you know, and i've been honest about this. i wanted trump to lose. i didn't care if trump lost. i thought it would be funny. >> why won't you hand it over? >> because i talked to them. i've spent money on an attorney. i've cooperated with them. and when i got something like this, and then they wanted me to go to the grand jury next friday, and i believe they're trying to start a case against roger, and the reason i believe that is corre that is correct, ari. >> you are holding a subpoena from bob mueller's office. >> by the way -- >> just so we have the facts, that's what you're holding. >> yes, it's a requirement. >> to get documents on those people and for to you go in the grand jury room. why do you think after you did the other interview do they want to make you go in the grand jury room? >> because they're trying to set up a perjury case against roger, and i'm not going to have it. he is like family to me, and i'm

you basically added to the public record, i will read to you roger stone's rebuttal to what you said show last night. he says, basically, you offer no proof other than your memory, never happened. your response? >> you know, i was surprised by roger's facebook post for a couple of reasons. first of all, even in that facebook post, he said our film is great, he has never questioned the validity or the accuracy of our film making even to did. and the interview we do in our film where we ask him about assange that was filmed in august of 2016 and in june of 2016 was when julian assange said publicly that he had more hillary clinton emails that he intended to release and after that, roger took, obviously, great interest in these emails because roger wanted to destroy hillary clinton and so in early august, late july, we were talking about the idea of going to film roger were he to meet with assange in london and as far as we know that never took place. and so i didn't even say anything that is contradicted what roger has said publicly. >> what do you mean london? you were taking preparat

he'll get to roger stone.hese guys are a bunch of sleez balls they'll probably try to lie. they'll be under oath and bob mueller will talk to them on due course on his own schedule. but these guys have a reputation for dirty tricks. and i have to say they make the other guys look like choir boys. these people are not honest. but bob mueller will be dealing with them. >> thank you both very much. i appreciate it. >>> next we have breaking news this hour, this, a middle east expert specialist with ties to donald trump team, a man of trystry, cooperating with the mueller probe. what does he know? and what is he telling mueller? and former double agent from russia believed to be poisoned found on a bench along with his daughter. who wanted this em dead? [burke] at farmers, we've seen almost everything so we know how to cover almost anything. even a "red-hot mascot." eis em dead? mis em dead? s em de? ? ? ? ? [crowd 1] hey, you're on fire! [mascot] you bet i am! [crowd 2] dude, you're on fire! [mascot] oh, yeah! [c

he is a fan of roger stone. very close to roger stone. think he was sort of lashing out here saying i am not going to participate, i gave five and a half hours of interviews to the fbi and they know everything they need to know. obviously the fbi, the special counsel will have something to say about that. there's also a question of whether, i don't know, was he looking at an e-mail, he wouldn't tell me this, was he looking at something incriminating that was in the e-mail? we don't know the answer to that. maybe, maybe the special counsel does because he has the e-mails. >> he wants to have his cake and eat it too. he came out today to say look, i am not a snitch, but at the same time distance himself from president trump. he is trying to play both sides. >> as you point out, jeffrey, he already spent five and a half hours answering questions from mueller's team. >> right. i would hesitate before assuming there was any grand strategy to what sam nunberg has been doing. i mean, he seemed like to use a technical term, a whack job for most o

he's saying roger stone is a mentor. roger stone is my friend.fy, or i'm not going to go in front of this grand jury. i'll go to jail before i give up my friend, roger stone. knowing that roger stone and paul manafort are past business partners, it shows the scope of -- possibly the scope of where mueller is going in this investigation, away from donald trump and back to paul manafort and possibly roger stone. >> maria, talk of defying a subpoena is one thing. then going on national television multiple times to argue about it is another. where do you see this going from here? >> i completely agree with you. this was a complete political debacle today, and sadly a personal one for sam nunberg. but a political debacle for trump and his team. the reason i say that is because, yes, they are going to try to defile his credibility, and sam himself has not done himself any favors with his credibility in terms of his history and even in terms of what he did today. but let's remember mueller wants him to testify before the grand jury. that is not somethin

i'm not going to give them every e-mail i had with steve bannon and roger stone. i communicated with them every day. i'm not going to testify against roger. roger did not do anything. roger was treated terribly by donald trump. >> and he's one of donald trump's oldest advisers. >> yeah, but trump is the most disloyal person you're ever going to meet. they definitely had -- they definitely had roger stone's. mails. they asked me questions about roger stone's e-mail -- they asked you questions about roger and me that they would only have had roger's e-mails. i'm worried that they're trying to make a case against roger, that they're maneuvering -- >> and what would that case be built on? >> i have no idea. i have no idea. >> would it relate to wikileaks? >> i can tell you once again -- >> would it relate to wikileaks? >> it could relate to wikileaks. >> roger stone says nunberg was not speak at his behest or direction but stone's relationship with trump, candidate trump and president trump are likely to be of interest to the special counsel. sam nunberg's reappeated d

and how that relates to roger stone. >> so sam worked for roger stone. they both worked for the donald trump campaign. early on in the beginning months of the campaign, and they both got let go relatively early. sam is a long-time gop analyst, a strategizer -- strategist, i should say -- not strategizer. any way, a long time gop strategist. he is not fringe, but that is best word to describe him. >> he is a unique operator. >> he operates with reporters in a way that a lot of people don't. >> a new york character. he was involved in getting donald trump prepared to announce -- he was going to run for president. getting him to hold the positions that he got. sam talks about how immigration was his policy. he talked about how the wall was his idea. he talked about why they decided to run on an immigration platform. he talked about in this interview, trying to tell donald trump that being on the side of russia wasn't necessarily the best thing for a gop primary. but at the same time, a gop primary would side with vladimir putin over siding with obama. he ta

he worked really closely were roger stone, who he said was his mentor. and sam would arrange his schedule, his campaign appearances and so forth around the country before he launched his campaign. then when he launched his campaign in 2015, nunberg very soon thereafter had a falling out. he was forced out by corey lewandowski, the campaign manager at the time, in part because of racially charged facebook posts found on nunberg's facebook account. it was a pretty clean break from the trump operation and nunberg has not been in the president's good graces since then. he's had a couple conversations with trump, but there was a lawsuit at one point and the white house staff really have attacked his credibility and see him as very much a fringe figure in the trump orbit today. >> john heilemann, a friend of mine says there's been a market reduction in graffiti in public because it's all gone to twitter. something just north of 20% of americans are on it, there's no barrier to entry, there's no filter on what you can say about people. i'm going to show you som

, you sure have unleashed an idea in the cable court of public opinion that maybe roger stone, your buddy, has something to hide. >> if he was trying to protect stone, i think he had precisely the opposite effect today. his conversation with ari melber was meandering, he was all over the place. he seemed to contradict himself at times. but one focus that was clear was that he was concerned about stone and some sort of a risk of committing perjury or other sorts of charges and that his goal was to protect his friend and mentor from that. if the court of public opinion was voting on roger stone tonight it, probably would be a bad outcome. >> jill, you and phillip don't do analysis but please come close. what does this say about the people drawn to the orbit of donald trump? >> yeah. sam is one of the people who was there in the very early days, roger stone, too. when you watch sam doing his whole cable news show after show, how much it felt like roger stone and donald trump, who used to call in from one cable show to the next. talking to him tonight, sam really kind of seemed proud of

. >> roger stone is like a surrogate -- he's like my father. >> you feel loyal to him? d i'm not going to go in there for them to set up a case against roger. >> sam nunberg alternating from insisting that his friend roger stone has done absolutely nothing wrong to then insisting that the special prosecutor wants to use sam nunberg's testimony to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that roger stone did something wrong. >> why do you think after you did the other interview do they want to make you go in the grand jury room. >> they're trying to set up a perjury case against roger stone and i'm not going to have it. roger is my mentor, like family to me and i'm not going to do it. >> we've known for a couple years now we have no idea what's happening next in trump world and we have known we don't know what's going to happen next in the trump presidency. but we have developed expectations of what kind of things could happen next, a sudden retirement or quitting the white house. but none of us could have predicted that a trump operative could spend a day on live television invit

the two he seems to be close the and stayed close to are roger stone and steve bannon. if you listen to him, he doesn't like the others, he throws the names around but throws the two. especially stone who was his mentor. he doesn't want to spend the 80 hours or maybe there's something in there that he doesn't want to share that might be trouble for stone or bannon. you can't just defy a subpoena because it takes too much time. >> you two stick around. that interview went a little long. stay with us. we have more on the breaking news when we come back. touch is how we communicate with those we love, but does psoriasis ever get in the way? embrace the chance of 100% clear skin with taltz. for people with moderate to severe psoriasis, up to 90% had a significant improvement of their psoriasis plaques. with taltz, 4 out of 10 even achieved completely clear skin. don't use if you're allergic to taltz. before starting, you should be checked for tuberculosis. taltz may increase risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection, s

mean i think that's still the story that we're working here. >> and he says he wants to protect roger stone, his mentor. and he is not doing roger stony favors blurting out he may have lied about it. stone hasn't talked to the special counsel. he has only talked to congress. but telling the special counsel, signaling that hey, all these things that roger stone has said before may have been untruthful, coming from someone who claims to talk to roger stone more than a dozen times a day, not all that helpful to roger stone. helpful to the special counsel and people in that office. and i just think sam nunberg, this is a guy, all reporters have talked to, anybody covering trump, we've all talked to him dozens of times. and you take what he says with a grain of salt. he is not in the inner circle. everything he hears is second or third hand. >> is he a kato kalin type? >> he has people compared today in the full nunberg to the o.j. chase and watching this sort of thing that you're stunned to see going on for hours and hours. >> he is not that shy. as i mentioned, nunberg also said that donald tr

>> because they're trying to set up a perjury case against roger stone and i won't have it. is my mentor. roger is like family to me. roger stone is like my father. >> you feel loyalty him. >> and i'm not going go in there for them to set up a case against roger. >> are you worried about getting arrested? >> i think it would be funny if they arrested me. >> you're held in contempt of court. wouldn't you have higher legal bills. >> it would be funny if they wanted to arrest me because i don't want to spend 80 hours going over e-mails i had with steve bannon and roger stone. >> john heilemann, i want to explain to people that are -- well, let me bring in joyce here. joyce, just because -- i brought this up yesterday and i just -- i knew people would say oh, it's a witch-hunt that bob mueller is asking for this information, all of these e-mails. this is the first thing any lawyer does in a civil case, in a criminal case. it's called discovery and you mediately a clean swp. you want all the e-mails, you want all the text messages, all communications on all devices pertaining to t

but why do so many roads seem to lead to roger stone? the subpoena which i discussed last night. after all the things nunberg said, his insistence defending stone was striking, one of the closest advisers to trump, stone, a self-proclaimed dirty trickster has long pushed the limits in politics and argued a kind of equivalence for gutter politics. >> one man's dirty trick is another man's political civic action. everything i've ever done has been legal. pol takes ain't bean bag and losers don't legislate. >> he was a loyal nixon operative, worked for reagan and ran the consulting firm with you see it there, paul manafort. when trump first flirted running for president in 2000, roger stone was there and he was there when trump began running this time. while he did leave the formal campaign, he was an outside ally attacking opponents from cruz to clinton, creating organizing groups to try to help trump at the convention as well as the general election. what's proven most controversial and of interest to mueller was the support for julian ass

roger stone said this. i was briefly part of the trump campaign and have been the president's friend and advisor for decades and would expect that mueller's team would at some point ask for any documents or e-mails sent or written by me, but let me reiterate, i have no knowledge or involvement in russian collusion or any other inappropriate act. >> what say you? >> he strikes me as somebody who stayed too late at an academy award party last night. these stramts completely bizarre. when you receive a grand jury subpoena, it is a good sign in some respects. it means you're probably not the target of the investigation. if they're targeting you, previous to advise you of your right to remain silent and give you a whole host of warnings before they call and you there's a justice department policy against calling targets into the grand jury. it is unfair to them. they should take the fifth amendment. it is a good sign. but secondly, if you defy a grand jury subpoena, it is a very serious thing. you're almost auto

he was particularly outraged because of roger stone. because he's very close with roger stone. he's also close with steve bannon. and he believes they're really looking closely at roger stone's relationship with julian assange. he is kind of outraged by that. it doesn't make any sense to me that he wouldn't want to comply. >> what does this tell us about the mueller probe? >> that it is going down consequential lines of inquiry. whether he gets there, that's another question. you have questions that the illegaliality of it. that was part of story last week. on the question of collusion. the president, his allies, they want that question to disappear into the ether. he said at some point he doesn't believe they colluded. at other points, he told jake attempter that he believes carter page colluded. he believes roger stone colluded. the words made the former campaign aide, a witness to the special counsel, saying trump may have done something with the russians. that's not comment from a left wing commentator. he is now being interviewed and called before a grand jury. >> but a gu

a real protege of roger stone. people dismiss stone. he's flamboyant, color fful, los the media, says outrageous things. stone is the kind of character that would have done things to cross lines, others we don't like that much, would be a little bit balking at. nunberg, he knows if he has to testify to certain things he might cause trouble for stone who he generally is loyal to and when they call stone up, you're one step from trump. >> i talkeded ed tto a number prosecutors who said by invoking stone, talking also about the meeting at trump tower and don jr. it opens up a new line potentially of questions for mueller and his team that may or may not have been there before. in some ways he's now further exposed himself. >> well, "fire and fury" did the same thing and this interview last night exposed sam nunberg to more questions from adam schiff who now wants him to testify. and i use the term, gangsters. these are political gangster tactics. on campaigns, they're called black ops or they're tricksters. that description -- >> who was s

given what he said yesterday, does that help roger stone? does it hurt roger stone? is there any credence to this idea that sam -- i mean, is it okay -- i don't know. what's the question? if he feels that way, can anybody point to him and say, i believe him the way that i believe susan? >> well, look, i don't think it matters what he thinks, quite honestly. i mean, i want to make one small point, which is, there are people all over the country in high-profile, low-profile, small, big cases who have to comply with subpoenas and have to talk about people who they're friends, have to give testimony against relatives. it's painful. it's hard. but that's how our justice system works. and that's what mueller and his team are thinking right now, not how does sam feel about this. i understand that it has a dramatic appeal and i thought your interview of him was incredible, the way you let him talk and then drew him out at the right moments. i mean, i was, mouth open the whole time and i'm not saying he shouldn't have been interviewed or shouldn't have talked, but in terms of

they wanted every e-mail i had with roger stone and with steve bannon. what does bob mueller need to see my e-mails when i send roger and steve clips and we talk about how much we hate people? >> sam, he doesn't have to tell you why, he just has to say do it. he also called the whole investigation a witch-hunt. but then, then, he seemed to contradict himself by saying he thinks mueller might have the goods on the president. >> do you think they have something on the president? >> i think they may. >> what? >> i think he may have done something during the election but i don't know that. >> i think they may. that doesn't sound like a witch-hunt. white house press secretary sarah huckabee sanders fired back with this. >> as we've said many times before, there was no collusion with the trump campaign. anything further on what his actions are, he hasn't worked at the white house, so i certainly can't speak to him or the lack of knowledge that he clearly has. >> but he did work with the campaign. as did paul manafort, rick gates, carter page. he said no collusi

that trump campaign associates or people connected with the campaign or informal advisers like roger stoneill be asked about. >> the stone/assange thread is one we followed throughout, natasha. are there others that jumped out at you from the document from the house democrats? >> yeah, one of the big things in there was a guy named john who did some social media work for the trump campaign and no one could figure out what he was getting paid to do. he was paid by kind of a private venture capital company venture capital company that like there was no reason for that kind of transaction to have happened. and he was a flynn guy. you know, really no one was able to figure out why he was there. and so the fact that his name is on the list kind of raises questions whether he was potentially -- he's potentially being looked at for potentially organizing some kind of social media campaign with the russians or orchestrating something on that end. but there were a number of interesting -- there were a number of associates of the nra on the list, as well. you know, just in terms of people who were c

is there any evidence that roger stone knew who he was communicating with? >> well, a lot of things about roger stone's presentations about his interactions with guccifer 2.0 are really questionable. they're probably going to come under increasing scrutiny in recent weeks. i can't tell you that stone knowledgeably knowingly wittingly communicated with a russian intelligence officer, but it's very, very curious about why stone got into contact with guccifer 2.0 and it's also an open question whether stone has disclosed all of these dms, all of the communications with guccifer 2.0. you'll recall as the house intelligence committee was essentially bifurcaing forever more on the russia inquiry, the democrats on that committee during internal meetings raised the point that they had not subpoenaed and acquired through subpoena from the logs of organizations like twitter which would have the actual communications on their servers, the actual records of these communications so at this point the disclosure he's made, you have to sort of wonder how selective it is. >>

roger stone can handle roger stone. he kept trying to make it about roj state's attornger stone. gure, this mentor. he's willing the fall on the swords for roger. >> i've covered roger over the years. he's very loyal to his people and who gives a great deal of loyalty. i can understand sam nunberg's affection for roger stone. this is not a game about who you like and who you're loyal to. this is grand jury subpoena. this is a criminal investigation. people are put in awkward positions by grand jury subpoenas all the time. unless it's your wife or your husband where you have a privilege, you don't have a privilege -- there's no such thing as a mentor privilege. you have to testify even if it's unpleasant. >> what's the purpose of if they have done the interview and very professional, he's talked to them. he moved from complete defiance to it's a 50/50 if i appear. this is a moving target. the point is what is the purpose that mueller would have if he's already done an interview of him appearing in front of grand>> t. and when you have your case ripen so when you are ready to take a

roger stone posted a new video right there on instagram while smoking a cigar with his grandson. former protege sam nunberg. stone said those associates who called him a liar, they are actually the liars. he was responding to some of this. >> i think he's trying to ingratiate himself back with trump. the minute he told me he had met with assange i assumed he was lying. > i know assange well. i can tell you assange never had conversations with roger stone or an intermediate zpli what was roger stone doing talking to gus fer 2.0, communicating with him on a regular basis, communicating claiming to communicate with julian assange repeated times and backing off it. >> two of the people you saw there in those interviews are people who are in this wider trump or little bit once friends with roger stone. nunberg, his protege, creditdy cois the man stone claimed was his link to assange. the important point is not that this whole crew is getting messy. it's that mueller is bearing down on the linksings to russia, guccifer, and wikileaks and news is breaking about that line of questioning

i'm not saying roger stone is guilty, roger stone was involved. but that general area of questioning seems to be something that's on mueller's plate right now. >> anne, i should also point out i think one of the other reasons about sam nunberg being let go by the campaign was there were some controversial facebook postings he had made. >> that's right. that's right. >> racist postings on facebook that were unearthed. >> that's right. i didn't -- that's right. >> anne, how much does nunberg's public behavior tonight impact what the special counsel does next? do you back off, let this play out? do you nip whatever this is in the bud? obviously he's very publicly challenging the special counsel to do something. >> yeah, i think he is very publicly challenging the special counsel. it's also very clear they have interviewed him. they did a lengthy interview by his account, and now they've asked him to come to the grand jury, which means they believe he has both documents and oral testimony to give. so they want him in the witness box in the grand jury

that i've had with steve bannon and with roger stone? y does bob mueller need to see my e-mails when i send roger and steve clips and we talk about how much we hate people? >> sam, you were on the campaign early on. you were there when donald trump was deciding to announce he wanted to run for president. >> donald trump did not collude with the russians! it is the biggest joke, to ever think donald trump colluded with the russians. i can tell you, donald trump, when he was involved in conservative politics, did not halt his business, okay? donald trump did not want to attack hillary clinton early on in the campaign. he only wanted to attack jeb bush, because it wasn't going to be -- it wasn't going to be good for him, and had he not won the primary, he was probably going to endorse hillary clinton. >> sam, you were on this campaign -- >> i am not going to go over my e-mails, i'm not going to spend 80 hours because a bunch of fbi agents and a bunch of u.s. attorneys want me to -- to harass me. and you know, here's the thing. they've gone o

what did roger stone know? it was literally, did you enter the building which makes me think they know he did enter the building because one lass to assume they were watching it and someone else entered the building and had a meeting with assuage and they're trying to figure out what he knows. he claims -- he said something publically that he did not enter the building. we will question his credibility. it was that one sentence that i think there's a lot of meaning behind. it was so specific about a visit to julian assuage. >> it was roger stone, michael, who claimed multiple times that he had contact with julian assuage and seemed to know ahead of time about the hack of the dnc and john podesta. he denied both. do you think stone is key to making the collusion case? >> i think he certainly may be a part of it. let me tell you these interviews and investigations, certainly when we talk about malloch or stone, these things don't happen just sort of willy dilly, off the cuff. they basically have some idea where t

but you do believe roger stone met with wiki sfleeks. >> no. old me he did. >> what did he tell you. >> i was trying to reach roger. we can talk 15 times a week or cannot reach him for two weeks. i said where have you been? he said i met with julian assange. >> now he says he was joking. here is what roger stone says about this this week to "the washington post." >> i wish him no ill will, sam can man eye cli and persistently call you. >> true, by the way. >> stone said recalling nunberg had called him on a friday to ask about his plans for the weekend. i said i think i'll go to london and meet with assange. the idea i would meet with him is ridiculous on its face. >> alisyn, in "the washington post" story, i did not come out and contact josh foss si and say i want to broadcast to the world. josh said they had somebody on background that said roger had told them he had met with julian assange, but roger's quote was directly discussing -- >> i know. i get it. >> i just want to explain that. >> you weren't the source on that. i get it. however, he

roger stone is like a surrogate father. he is like my father. >> you feel loyal to him. >> and i'm not going to go in there for them to set up case against roger. roger did not do anything. >> okay. we're going to parse that. this comes directly after nbc news and axios both reported that an anonymous witness was recently subpoenaed for campaign documents going back to october 1, 2015, anything having to do with either the president or a long list of former campaign and senior aides. nunberg told katy tur he made up his mind, get this, not to comply with the subpoena while he was in the middle of reviewing the requested documents, though he denied having found something he didn't want the special counsel to see. >> did you find an e-mail in the last 24 hours that made you worried, an e-mail you didn't want to hand over? >> not at all. >> a text message you didn't want to hand over. >> did somebody put that question into your ear? >> no. that's a question came up with off the top of my head. >> it's a very good question. no.

business activities would come under scrutiny. >> congressman, what do you make of that defense by roger stoneve heard about the time in the barrel, how bhoe podesta is getting his turn based upon what looked to be earlier knowledge by stone of what the russians hacked and who they're going to hurt with it. now he's saying i was talking about something es. now we're getting reporting he did in fact get advance word about wikileaks and what they're getting from the russians. what do you make of all this in terms of collusion? >> what roger stone has said before is his whole strategy is deny, deny, deny. and indeed, that's a strategy that president trump also adopts. he repeated no collusion, no collusion, no collusion as a mantra. he credits roy moore when roy moore says i didn't do it. he credits rob porter when porter says i didn't do it. if you deny, you'll be fine in the president's world and in roger stone's. you're a loser if you admit to anything. we as a committee can't take roger stone's word for things. we need to get from twitter because we can't be confident weigh get them from roge

, the founder of wikileaks and then a "washington post" report came out saying that roger stone apparentlyd associates he has been in touch with julian assange and want on to say in the spring of 2016 stone apparently was telling people that he knew that wikileaks had these stolen e-mails that were going to be a problem for top democrats like john podesta who was then the campaign chairman for hillary clinton. of course this is before these e-mails came out publicly. now, roger stone responded in a statement and here is a portion of what he says in denying wrongdoing, saying, there is no evidence i participated in or have any knowledge of any collusion with the russians to affect the 2016 elections. stone goes on to say, i had no advanced notice of the content, source, or timing of the wikileaks publication of any material. and, wolf, we should note that wikileaks has said it has never been in contact with roger stone but obviously this is something that mueller is looking into. >> yes, he is. sara. thank you. >>> let's dig deep we are former u.s. attorney, our cnn legal analyst preet bhar

one, a guy named roger stone, former adviser to donald trump during the campaign. ortedly talked to founder of wikileaks. he said the founder told stone the websites had received e-mails, one of course, john podesta. this happened before wikileaks did anything with those messages. wikilea wikileaks published them in the final days of campaign. this report was catching the eyes of investigations with bob puler. one of the investigations are now over. surprisingly, there's no evidence of collusion between russia and the trump campaign. it did surprise democrats on the committee. some of them learned about the finings either through twitter or on cable. the 150 page draft report will be given over to his democratic colleagues, they'll have a chance to look and comment. with us carrol lining, one of the reporters behind the roger stone piece. also joinings, joyce vanessa. tim and the rest of the gang still with us herism big group with michael and michael as well. >> so, what our team basically broke this morning was that two different people that we've interviewed said

take a listen to trump advisor roger stone's associate roger credco, and he's denying giving the information that roger claims. >> a torrent of clinton email documents came out on august 8. are you saying by reference of this timeline that that's not something stone could have gotten from you at that time? >> you're going to two a tricky dick nixon on me, i'm going to come back and go some impressions on you. >> are you buying time or are you telling me that that was a lie. >> roger stone is a trickster. roger stone moves around and says a lot of different things. i think his memory is selective. >> randy, i got to stop you, you just said he moves around. >> yes. >> you're moving around, i read you the statement, is it true or false. i'll read it again. >> go ahead and read it again. >> from the end of july through august, through the end of september, julian assange said it was about to public this material on the democrats which randy described as devastating to hillary. is that true or false. >> that's false. i think roger stone has selective memory right here. >> joyce, tie it all togeth

nunberg has called roger stone a mentor, a father figure. and so the question will be just how much of these details did roger stone share with his mentee? >> as you are probably aware, yahoo! news is reporting that the obama national security staffers were ordered by susan rice to stop developing options to retaliate against russia's election interference. you worked for the nsc, you worked for president obama at the time. any truth to that? >> well, craig, i obviously can't speak to any covert measures, specific covert measures in development or may have been taken, but i would remind you of what the obama administration said at the end of december 2016 when he announced the punitive measures against vladimir putin. we announced a whole series of steps from sanctions to releasing some of the forensics data of these hacks to removing russian spies, to closing compounds. and we also says there were measures both announced and unannounced that would be part of this package. so -- but beyond that, craig, i don't think you'll find anyone who is

one of the people you would look at communications, sam nunberg and roger stone i would imagine, just speculation, they would be texting or e-mailing each other multiple times a day for all of 2015 and all of 2016. those people are extraordinarily close. and stone, sam nunberg you might want to laugh off as not a central player. roger stone might be a central player in the question of collusion with russia, might be. >> we don't have any sense. we always talk about russian collusion as though it happened in the past. the truth is this is the most sort of pro-putin administration in modern american history. we don't have evidence these contacts aren't ongoing. it's possible he's protecting something more current because, you're right, why give up don junior and jared who were in that meeting in trump tower. i mean, maybe -- we know that donald trump doesn't quit people after he fires them. maybe there's a more recent communication that they're protecting. >> there could very well be. in fact, there is reason to believe if collusion existed, it is still ongoing in the form of doing abso

he doesn't want to see anything bad happen to roger stone and what roger stone had been up to and had been up to during the campaign, his contacts potentially with wikileaks and so on is important to the mueller investigation. and that is something they would want to talk to him about. if you listen to what sam nunberg had to say, it is obvious that he said i don't want to talk. and then gave these reasons as to why the mueller team wants to talk to him. he is essentially making the argument for the mueller team to talk to him. >> jim acosta appreciate it. i want to play you a sampling of what he said today. bear in mind, he is actually an attorney. >> it is surprising news here that you are not going to comply with the subpoena from the special counsel, can you tell us why? >> because was absolutely ridiculous. what they requested from me i was trying to do for the last two days. they wanted every communication that i had with roger stone and steve bannon who i talked to secretly. they asked for communication with carter page. are y do you think i would ever talk to that moron? >> wh

trump and roger stone.don't want to know anything from me, because i wouldn't know anything about obstruction of justice. i wouldn't know anything. th it's been public through adam schiff and everybody else, they want to know the relationship roger had with julian assange. >> we can put up some of the key names. cohen, stone, bannon, manafort. did they ask you about each of those people? >> no, they did not. >> they didn't ask you about roger stone? >> excuse me, they asked me about roger stone, obviously, i didn't have a very close relationship with steve bannon, and my relationship with michael which i consider, i said to them, it's privileged, because he's a lawyer and i'm a lawyer. so i can't disclose things like that to them. >> one interesting thing about roger stone. everybody's trying to figure out, did he hurt himself by bragging too much about things he didn't do or did he disclose things that he did do. and we know that you are loyal to him, and you don't think i did anything wrong. in fairness t

to get to roger stone.'s clear from nunberg's statement that he would do anything for roger stone. and roger stump was donald trump's closest advisor and stone was also paul manafort's partner back in the day. so stone, manafort, flynn, it strikes me that he's made quite a lot of are grprogress. >> you know if you look at what paul manafort was doing, he was working with roger stone taking all foreign clients that literally no one else would take. as a person who openly bragged about his link to julian assange, who's now caught up in the potential russian plot. take a look. >> first of all, i think julian assange is a hero. i think he's taking on the deep state, both republican and democrat. i expect you're going to see more from mr. assange, who again i think is a hero. we have a mutual acquaintance who is a fine gentleman. i happen to be one that thinks that assange is a hero. >> so wikileaks, one of the crimes was obviously stealing emails from the dna, tony podesta, stone may have had some knowledge abo

tom, let's start with roger stone. be incorrect in assuming that he now seems to be a focus of mueller's investigation? >> well, katy, i'm not sure focus may not be the exact right word, but we know that he is getting some attention from bob mueller and that's what sam nunberg said to us yesterday on the record. he was asked questions about roger's professed contacts with julian assange and wikileaks, before those now-famous, infamous e-mails were leaked to the public through weeikileaks. >> so rogerstone stone is kind complicated character. he says one thing and claims a moment later he never said that thing or he was joking when he said that thing or lying when he said that thing. it's got to be something that's tough for investigators to nail it down. what are your hearing, not only from sam nunberg, but from your other source about what assange was claiming he did and -- i'm sorry, what stone was claiming he did and when he did it. >> well, it is a challenge to investigators. it's a challenge to reporters, as well.

he's close to roger stone. and he says he's motivated -- >> there was a serious element to this, which was mueller is asking about roger stone and hacked e-mails. the 13 defended case that was indicted a couple weeks ago was the case about russian manipulation of social media. mueller has done nothing yet about the hacked e-mails. he hasn't charged any russians. he hasn't charged any americans. i think the fact that he wants to talk to nunberg now about stone and hacked e-mails suggests mueller is moving on to a possible case against someone and not necessarily stone to be sure but against the people who hacked john podesta's e-mails and hacked the dnc e-mails and that would be very significant. >> you see the focus there because he's asking for is this correspondence. >> correct. >> that's an important point. the white house can credibly say, look, he never worked here. he only worked on the campaign early on and is a stone prodigy. the play is what does roger stone know? roger stone has been connected with wi

and now they're turning to roger stone, one headline from vice nice reads why roger stone could be mueller'sarget. here to respond himself, republican strategist, he got a full feature for himself on netflix, roger stone. how are you, sir? >> thanks for having me, sean. >> sean: appreciate you being back. let's start with sam nunberg. a protege of yours. i thought he was exploited by the media. he didn't seem right. what is your thoughts of him? >> watching that interview is across between howard beal and networks saying i'm mad and an andy kauffman routine. sam is a talented guy. he's dealing with his own demons, clearly. but he's not speaking at my behest or with any direction. on the heels of his interviews, vice, msnbc and others say my indictment is eminent because i received hacked material from wikileaks or julian assange and gave it to the trump campaign and donald trump. the problem with that sean is, i received -- never received anything whatsoever. let me be clear. i had no advance notice of content, source or exact timing of wikileaks disclosures regarding the dnc or hillary clin

they want me to have -- when they want me to come in to a grand jury for them to insinuate that roger stone was colluding with julian assange. roger is my mentor and like family to me. i'm not going to do it. >> what has happened in the last 24 hours that made you change your mind on this? >> when i was going over everything today, when i look at the -- the subpoena, this is ridiculous. should i spend 50 hours gooding over all ov ov over all -- going over all of my mails with roger and steve bannon. and then they wanted maie-mails had with hope hicks, with cory lewandowski. are you giving me a break? you know what they asked, which is ridiculous to me. they asked things like did you hear people speaking russian in the trump office? >> who. >> katy, i did not hear people speaking russian in the trump office, okay. that is ridiculous. >> are you worried about getting arrested? >> i think it would be funny if they arrested me. >> he sent the subpoena and in it mueller asked for all documents related to steve bannon, hope hicks, cory lewandowski, paul manafort, keith schiller, roger stone and t

up a perjury case against roger stone. roger is my mentor. roger is like family to me. i'm not going to do it. i'm not going to do it. roger did not talk, roger may have lied about it but roger did not talk -- >> are you basing that? >> i'm not going to go in there for them to set up a case against roger. he didn't do anything. >> roger is trained under richard nixon who has a tattoo of nixon's face on his back. that's a real -- that's roger stone. it was stone who connected paul manafort to the trump campaign which is an interesting detail given all that we know. during that campaign stone raised a lot of questions when he communicate online with russian cutouts and appeared to predict the hack of john podesta. this is what he tweeted in august 2016. "trust me, it will soon be to podesta's time in the barrel." later days before wikileaks released the podesta e-mails stone had a lot to say about its head julian assanging. > an intermediary met with him in london recently who is a friend of mine and a friend of his. a believ