refined racism precisely so people like sarah jones can say racist things and still get jobs at the new york times would the new york times be so forgiving if white was replaced with black new york times i am an older white guy and you find it ok with sarah jong inflammatory racist comments to be just fine shame on your double standard. sour understands that this type of french rick is not acceptable of the times and we are confident that she will be an important for us for the editorial board moving forward. its rector of the blockbuster guardians of the galaxy movies james dunn was just fired after offensive tweets dating from two thousand and eight i guess. today a.b.c. stepped up did the right thing canceling the hit reboot of roseanne after the star of the show roseanne barr doing something so abort i wish i didn't have to repeat it. all you have to do is take these tweets that she said and change it to tino change it to black or even just say when men in the place of whites and people would have burned the new york. times down all over the fact that they were defending her behavior of course

would the new york times be so forgiving if white was replaced with black new york times i am an older white guy and you find it ok with sarah jong inflammatory racist comments to be just fine shame on your double standard. sour on the stance that this type of rhetoric is not acceptable of the times and we are confident that she will be an important force for the editorial board moving forward. it's rector of the blockbuster guardians of the galaxy movies james dunn was just fired after offensive tweets dating from two thousand and eight i guess. today a.b.c. stepped up did the right thing canceling the hit reboot of roseanne after the star of the show roseanne barr doing something so for i wish i didn't have to repeat it . all you have to do is take these tweets that she said and change it to no change it to black or even just say when men in the place of whites and people would have burned the new york. times down all over the fact that they were defending her behavior of course there's a double standard what i'm asking for is not that we burn any buildings down not that we f

the right hotel for you. tripadvisor. >>> good day to you. i'm richard lui at msnbc headquarters in new york city. we'll start this hour with breaking news from "the new york times robert mueller's obstruction inquiry into president trump. white house counsel don mcghan has reportedly been cooperating extensively in the special counsel investigation. we just learned this from "the new york times" within the last three hours. in this report, mcgann was centrally involved, they are reporting, in the president's attempts to fire mueller. and now investigators are focusing on trump's comments and actions during the firing of former fbi director james comey and his repeated attacks against attorney general jeff sessions for his recusal from the russia investigation. but trump's former lead counsel in the russia probe, john dowd, in reaction to this report saying this -- the "times" report is, quote, complete fiction while claiming

jodi kantor has been covering weinstein for "the new york times" and is a cbs news contributor. >> she did not comment on "the new york times" story, and so i think people today felt very much like -- you were so vocal, such a proponent of me too. how do you address this seeming contradiction. >> the degree of hypocrisy that this development demonstrates is beyond stunning. >> reporter: ben brafman is harvey weinstein's attorney. weinstein denies assaulting argento. do you think this calls into the question the validity of what asia argento said happened to her? >> my guess is no law enforcement agency and no legitimate media outlet will ever again take her seriously. >> reporter: we reached out to argento's attorney and have not heard back. the x-factor show in italy is considering dropping argento from that show. they say, if they can confirm "the new york times" report and weinstein accuser and actor rose mcgown tweeted that she was heartbroken over the story about argento. jeff? >> jericka duncan with the latest interview with weinstein's attorney, thanks. >>> coming up next, a pri

judge jeanine: sarah jeong, the woman from the "new york times," and the "new york times" dug up theireels in. she hates whites, she hates men. the excuse and the "times" bought it, she said i feel like i have been harassed. >> this is how liberal ideology gets ingrained in our culture through our education system and the media. roseanne lost her show. lost her show. but the "new york times" is standing by this woman. by the way, these tweets go back to 2013. this is five years of virulently racist tweets. they are standing by her because they say she is an asian-american woman so by default she is a victim of racism. the white people she made the tweets about, they deserve it. judge jeanine: when you say five years, the "new york times" says they are old tweets. 2015 is old? what are you up to next. >> we have big things planned for the walkaway campaign. i would like to you have me back on your show so i can announce it. judge jeanine: that's a good tease. we'll be right back, everybody. welcome! hi there. so, what do you look for in a vehicle? sleek designs. performance. dependabili

the government. michael cohen in new york and now don mcgann, white house counsel. >> i want to read this for the benefit of our viewers, the statement from john dowd to "the new york timesory on mcgann. it says, "former outside attorney for the president, john dowd, called the reporting of "the new york times" about the extent and scope of don mcgann's cooperation with the office of the special counsel complete fiction. dowd says mcgann was a strong witness for the president." ken, go ahead. >> yeah, right. in other words, he's saying what mcgann told mueller was favorable and was good for the president. obviously, we don't know exactly what he told mueller, but according to "the new york times" reporting, he described many of these incidents "the times" and others have reported about that trump was privately demanding that mcgann help him file mueller and jeff sessions, that mcgann refused to carry out those orders because he thought it was improper and would get the president in trouble. that tends to show a state of mind of a president trying to make this russia investigation go away, and that goes to the heart of this whole question of obstruction of justice. now, a

people were familiar of the conversation held at "the new york times." jected and she said she was able to face the criticism. what's going on in the west wing? is it just what we hear from her spokesperson which is that she does what she wants to do. she picks her topic and picks her time and she does it. >> what's going is a good question of what's going on in the west wing. i think what the spokesperson says is right, melania trump is fully aware that she's going to get some criticism or some raised eye brows at the east for choosing this topic. she's her own person and she has chosen it for a reason. she's focused on children but it is hard not to just juxtapose the two sides and what her husband does on a daily hourly basis. this is something of day-to-day at the white house where there is a lot of time to follow which is the east wing and this particular presidency and the west wing keeps you by busy of a power of 400. having said that, is there any sense that she's having any impact. look, i think it is tough for any first lady. they may get some l

those questions arose this week regarding "the new york times" new hire, sarah jeong, a 30-year-old technology writer being hired for their prestigious editorial board. typically i would go to the times for my read in, but there was nothing as to what prompted jeong to write hatred for white people, the police, et cetera, et cetera. that's something i prompted on twitter this prompted someone else to say what else do you need to know. she tweeted "f" the police multiple times. the president re-tweeted the drudge report which calls her out. one time she said "f" the police she included a clip of an animated film she was walking in which dog raccoons with magical testicles, i kid you not, have a standoff with cops. i might question her taste in film, but does that mitigate the comment on police? no outlet is in a better police to tell us that than the times. hopefully they'll be more forthcoming. what do we know any sarah jeong? on paper she sounds impressive, a senior writer at the verge and wrote the book "the internet of garbage" and the online harassment and the difficulty f of -- and she wa

down "the new york times" story. according to our sources this led to the president privately fuming wondering allowed if mcgann himself had been a leak that led to that original "new york times" story. so the fact that trump's personal attorney rudy giuliani is blame being team mueller is ironic. >> again, the former lead attorney saying that "new york times" report was fiction it appears based on your reporting that is not the case. darlene, just to get everything on the record. there is so much to get on the record so far. the accusation mccarthyism against mueller from the president. well, that's just another example of the president. you've seen him all week tweeting about the investigation trying to undercut the special counsel robert mueller. he had a lot of tweets early this week about bruce orr, a justice department official. this is the individual the president said day or two ago that he may revoke his security clearance there are tweets over the weekend about the rigged witch hunt and now today you have hi

in a follow up report after its original story "the new york times" reported that president trump's lawyers don't know how much don mcgahn told the special prosecutors. mr. trump's lawyers realized on saturday they had not been provided a full accounting after "the new york times" published an article describing mcgahn's cooperati cooperation. mr. trump's lawyers never asked for a complete description of what mr. mcgahn had said, according to a person close to the president. yesterday in what was for reasons we will get to later rudy giuliani's most spectacularly ridiculous tv interview ever, giuliani actually admitted that the trump lawyers do not know everything don mcgahn told the special prosecutor. >> we have a good sense, obviously, of what mr. mcgahn testified to. i can figure it out. >> how do you say that, good sense? have you debriefed him? >> no, no. but mr. dowd has a good sense of it. he talked to them at the time. >> the times reports that rudy giuliani refused to follow trump's orders on television yesterday. the article sent out of a scramble on saturday. the president seque

the "new york times" reporting he's clearly -- "the new york times" reporting clearly has gotten him fired up. what's he saying this morning? >> that's right, chris. this "new york times" reporting has certainly struck a nerve. the president says he has nothing to hide. the president is now adding this tweet to the collection. he says, where's the collusion? when there was no collusion, they say there was obstruction of a phony crime that never existed. if you say anything bad about the rigged witch hunt, they scream obstruction. the president is drawing a tricky line on the russia investigation. collaborating with and conspiracy to break the law certainly is a crime. back on this mcgahn issue, the president's early outside team of attorneys believes if anything it was a mistake to think cooperating with the special counsel team would quickly bring this investigation to a close. remember, the president's first outside team of attorneys, ty cobb and john dowd. so they made no effort to keep him from those interviews. mcgahn who represents the office of the presidency and not donald tru

change it to black or even just say when men in the place of whites and people would have burned the new york. times down all over the fact that they were defending her behavior of course there's a double standard what i'm asking for is not that we burn any buildings down not that we fire everyone but that we come to terms with a neutral standard that everyone can adhere to and that everyone can comply with what she said shouldn't be allowed merely because the targeted group is the racial majority we should never be encouraging people and certainly not at the wall at the new york times to use racial categorizations as a basis for casting aspersions we should never do that black white or brown. trying to says it will impose we're telling a story tariffs on u.s. imports if washington goes ahead with threats to ramp up duties on chinese goods and threaten to tariffs market the second round of the ongoing trade dispute between the two countries the customs tenor of commission of the state council decided to slap an additional tariff of fifteen or twenty five percent on one hundred twenty eight items of

at this point the president's legal team has not responded to "the new york times" report. sarah sanders says shethey're n concern. but rudy giuliani put out this tweet an hour ago that doesn't talk specifically about "the new york times" report. but julian says, quote, time for the mueller investigation to file a report. we will release oushrs. the president had nothing to do with the russians and didn't obstruct an investigation. 1.4 million documents and 32 witnesses know witnesses, no privilege raised. they want this investigation to wrap up. one more point i will make is i've been in contact with someone that has direct knowledge of the mcgahn legal strategy is it relates to all of this. and that person said they would not agree with the insinuation in "the new york times" report that somehow mcgahn was providing incriminating information about donald trump. they say that he was just telling the truth as he was required to do. so there's a lot of moving parts to this story and we're still waiting for the president himself to respond to what the "new york times" is repor

"the 11th hour" gets under way on a thursday night. >>> and good evening once again from our nbc news headquarters here in new york. day 581 of the trump administration, and just tonight a short time ago, in fact, new legal troubles potentially for the president on a new front. we'll let "the new york times" tell it. quote, the manhattan district attorney's office is considering pursuing criminal charges against the trump organization and two senior company officials in connection with michael cohen's hush money payment to an adult film actress, according to two officials with knowledge of the matter. a state investigation would center on how the company accounted for its reimbursements to mr. cohen for the $130,000 he paid to the actress, stephanie clifford, who has said she had an affair with president trump, closed quote. mostly along those same lines a big story today had to do with a long time friend of the president who has apparently turned on him. "the wall street journal" broke the news that the publisher of the national enquirer, david peck pecker, has been granted immunity by federal prosecutors for information on michael cohen. a person familiar with the mat harz c er

has the new york times reached out to you about that -- the new york times editorial board will die. has the new york times reached out to you about that? ann: no, i invited them to a book party. there are one or two good reporters at the new york times, but there are enough who are not and certainly the editorial most recent addition, a woman who has dedicated all of her free time to cheering for the genocide of white men. that is going a long way to making the media look objective and fair, new york times. good job. host: we're talking with ann is "futile."book we're taking your calls. sawer: the first thing i when trump was elected, i was watching on several networks and i had a feeling we were going to get to this point when i saw don lemon in his words say if trump was elected, there is no way to polish this turned, i've never seen this -- to polish this turd, i have never seen this kind of disrespect. after $17 million, we come up ad discover that there may be small infraction, may not be an infraction, there is no russian collusion we have not proven russian collusion. we're ti

the racial majority we should never be encouraging people and certainly not at the wall at the new york times to use racial categorizations as a basis for casting aspersions we should never do that black white or brown so briefly why do you think the new york times decided not to fire junk despite the public outcry. it appears and that's why i said i'd love to hear from ms york john herself it appears that the target of her comments it was ok because they were white americans only thing i know is that she says these were just jokes i don't believe that you could use those same comments and joke about women or joke about blacks or joke about any other group and have it be seen as ok because you're just joking we shouldn being gauging in rhetoric where you cast aspersions or you group people according to race that shouldn't happen the new york times ought to be trying to set an example when daniela bloomberg blumberg wrote a piece for the business insider defending the right of a straight actress to play a transgendered person she was actually fired her piece was removed and she was encouraged

those days "the new york times" when they took on the cia.they have the exact opposite view of the cia. they buried the story. first thing i did was run through the files. it would be sure to run despite to run this by helme the head of the cia. you've got to be kidding. this is in the 60s before i was there. i saw that. in other words, they pay, they paid obeisance to the leadership. it feels -- i don't know how i can say this in simple words. it's an american paper. and i always thought it should be a world paper. do we do this to america? that some of the instinctive is getting. people talk about the problem i had change in culture. i said that was the issue. they decided they would go after president and without going and checking my story but the head of the cia, i had to go with what i had. so what happened here, this is a day later, saturday. 4:30, 5:00, the first edition that's going to ship abroad. i went home and slept a couple hours. i came back and it wasn't. this was december 21. this is "the new york times" taking on the cia on

the united states into israel. a lot of news tonight. we still have a lot to get to. joining us now with reaction, the author of the number one "new york times" best seller, the russian hoax in the illicits scheme to? to my clear hillaryth clinton, gregg jarrett and the author of why we fight, fox news national security strategist dr. sebastian gorka.n doctor, let me start with you, let's start with the big latest lie of thehe media. they all went with it, they never did their research and they all basically like sheep follow each other. >> it's remarkable, sean. it shows you how they have nothing. let's be very clear, hopefully they are taking notes. there is no crime to meet with a foreign national to obtain opposition research. especially when it turns out that that individual took that meeting under false pretenses. however, it is a crime, it is a crime, to engage somebody at the cost of millions of dollars who is not a foreign registeredd agent but at the same time as a former intelligence officer, that's christopher steele, and to use his russian propaganda material as the grounds for a surveillance warrant in a fisa court. greg can gi

idea that the media doesn't like you, isn't this proof that, in fact, that is the case, that the "new york timeseted hundreds of tweets, like not just a handful like this, would get hired at the "new york times" of all places? i think it kind of reenforces, sadly, donald trump's message. >> i've got to take a break. but i want to continue this. we're going to go on. but this is the thing. you don't have to respond by twitter. it always gets you in trouble because there's no context. if you're going to do something like that, then you write an article where there's context, where you can respond to people and it's just not sitting out there like that. and i do have to say, matt, i think it's a very good point, if i saw something like that from you i would say, you know what, i'm not sure matt should be working here anymore and you probably would not be working here anymore. who gets to decide what's racist or not? we'll talk about that after the break. and whiskers on kittens ♪ ♪ bright copper kettles and warm woolen mittens ♪ ♪ brown paper packages tied up with strings ♪ ♪ these are a few of my

dave. >> we will have david sang everybody from "the new york times" to -- sanger from "the new york ss this. >>> and he e-mail sent by the make trump america great committee demanding a petition for the national anthem to be broadcast on espn. the president says if america is too offensive for anyone in our country, then what are they doing in america. the president has targeted nfl players for kneeling during the national anthem. other networks have not generally aired the anthem and showing commercials instead. >>> "the new york times" reports that education secretary betsy devos is considering an unprecedented move. allowing states to use federal funds to buy firearms. taxpayer dollars to arm teachers. it reverses a long standing government policy not to pay. it is looking into a loophole looking to increase academic opportunities. it does not bar weapons purchases. >> in march, congress passed a school safety bill, but prohibited the use of the money for firearms. education department spokesman said they are constantly considering policy issues. >>> hurricane lane barrelling towa

and i want to go on to this woman with "the new york times," going on the editorial board of "the nework times." sarah jeong, most journalists operate under the guidance of the editorial board. and this woman is anti-cop, antiwhite, she is anti-men. everything that she says is explosive and her tweets. and to get to "the new york times" is supporting her on the editorial board. so, has a great lady flipped hep lid? what are they doing? >> it is a little bit shocking that the bias of this writer would be so flagrant and blatant, usually they try to hide it a little bit better. i'm surprised she still has a job only because you cannot say on the one hand that this is an opinion writer just expressing her opinion, on the other hand we can sitit here and come up wh 12, 15, 20 instances where people lost their jobs, frankly less than that. and everybody knows it. i want to shine a light in case the viewers missed it. a writer at politico who i knew yearso ago, pulling for the "miami herald," and the tribune years ago, i knew him years y ao in florida, now reporting for ", you put them all

year i believe in may of that george soros invested $3 million into the new york company, and a couple months later "the new york timesished a glittering profile of him. i used to freelance at "the new york times" and i'm very familiar with the ethics policy. i used to live in fear of their ethics policy because it's very intense and dramatic, especially with a conflict of interest and their sections on public neutrality when it came to political issues. this is clearly not the paper i knew. and i was so shocked and they may either want to be a globalist operation where they've decided to make a business decision to just be a left-wing tabloid, like "huffington post" ." and the glittering jewel of american journalism, because it was completely out the window. and i think we should be worried about that. >> tucker: speaking of new york city going crazy, new york is naming a street after a dictator who committed racial genocide. for real, why is the city council suddenly endorsing this? it's 2018. we have details coming up. use car insurance? -oh. -well, what if i showed you this? -[ laughing ] ho-ho-ho! -wow. -it's a c

would the new york times be so forgiving if white was replaced with black new york times i am an older white guy and you find it ok with sarah jong inflammatory racist comments to be just fine shame on your double standards. sarah and the stance that this type of rhetoric is not acceptable of the times and we are confident that she will be an important voice for the editorial board moving forward. its rector of the blockbuster guardians of the galaxy movies james dunn was just fired after offensive tweets dating from two thousand and eight i guess. today a.b.c. stepped up did the right thing canceling the hit reboot of roseanne after the star of the show roseanne barr doing something so boring i wish i didn't have to repeat it. all you have to do is take these tweets that she said and change it to no change it to black or even just say when men in the place of whites and people would have burned the new york. times down over the fact that they were defending her behavior of course there's a double standard what i'm asking for is not that we burn any buildings down not that we f

the new york times -- ed: the new york times claimed that. >> the new york times was duped by fbi officialsvestigation and to wire tap the trump campaign and so the new york times is either stupid or -- rachel: a follow-up from that report every day it seems like they have another bombshell that means nothing and they keep thinking they are bringing it down it doesn't work. ed: this morning brennan was on meet the press breaking a few moments ago on a related topic of weaponizing intelligence and john brennan given your knowledge of the law as you apply it here, with the mueller investigation john brennan is claiming he may file legal action against the president of the united states to stop him from stripping his security clearance and the others that might be stripped this week we keep hearing about was james comey or andrew mccabe or others do you think there could be legal action to say the president is sewing his reputation somehow and he doesn't have this authority or will this go nowhere? >> security clearance is not a right and therefore it's not a deprivation of right to revoke it.

go to shipstation.com/tv and get two months free. >>> "the new york times" is trying to diffuse the uproarreated with the hiring of their new writer sarah chung. she calls it countertrolling, they call it racism. what is it? i'm bringing in matt lewis and simone sanders. and a former director of communications for super track. glad to have you all this evening. simone, this is some of sarah's tweets critics say are offensive, many dating back five years, one tweet she wrote that couldn't enjoy the show "breaking bad" because the premise is just -- and here's what she says, the premise is just white people being miserable. and that it must be so boring to be white. she also tweeted, can't cancel white people and oh man it's kind of sick how much joy i get out of being cruel to old white men. white people have stopped breeding, you'll all go extinct soon. my plan all along. dumb f-ing white people with their opinions like dogs -- on fire hydrants. you say they're not racist? >> no, i don't think sarah's tweets are racist. first of all, i think it's important to note that these tweets were du

the feeling "new york times" wrote a story that made it seem like the white house counsel to rebuild e president when in fact it is just the opposite. "the new york times" that they stand by the support of the pulitzer prize-winning journalist who wrote it. the investigation confirmed to fox news that spoke to the muller team at length on three different occasions. the report in "the new york times" includes a lot of detail about the meetings and the strategy and thinking surrounding it. the interview added up to more than three hours and gave a clear view of the president's most intimate moments with his lawyers. moments like a firing of james comey, the former fbi are. he allowed all others to testify the times reporting doesn't contradict that. the cooperation began because that is what the president's first legal chain wanted. president trump wanting mcgann to speak openly seemed odd to mr. mcgann and his team. he feared that mr. trump was setting up mr. mcgann to take the blame for any possible legal acts of destruction and devise their own strategy to do as much as possible. rud

jody canton has been covering weinstein for "the new york times" and is a cbs news contributor. >> she did not comment on "the new york times" story. so i think people today felt very much like, you were so vocal, you were such a proponent of "me too," how do you address this seeming contradiction? >> reporter: ben brafman is harvey weinstein's attorney. weinstein denies assaulting argento. >> the degree of hypocrisy that this development demonstrates is beyond stunning. >> reporter: do you think these allegations call into question the validity of what asia argento said happened to her? >> my guess is that no law enforcement agency and no legitimate media outlet will ever again take her seriously. >> reporter: we reached out to argento's attorney and have not heard back. the "x factor" show in italy is considering dropping argento from that show. they say, if they can confirm "the new york times" report and weinstein accuser and actor rose mcgowan tweeted today that she was "heartbroken" over the story about argento. jeff? >> glor: all right, jericka duncan with the late interview wit

the "new york times" report about white house attorney don mcgaughan tahn talking to inves. what it means for the white house. >>> new voices criticizing president trump for revoking the security clearance of a former cia chief. reaction from john brennan. >>> we begin with a live picture of the white house. the president lashing out over a new report by the "new york times," that white house top attorney, don mcgahn, has cooperated extensively with the mueller investigation. the president has been on a tweet storm this morning, invoking mccarthyism and attacking one of the key figures in the watergate investigation. meanwhile, omarosa manigault-newman revealing new details about her cooperation with mueller's investigations, and making this shocking allegation against the president in regard to race relations. >> i believe he wants to start a race war in this country. >> here to talk about all this, nbc white house correspondent kelly o'donnell. she's in new jersey where the president is spending the weekend. democratic strategist danielle mills. consulta consultant, singlet

"the new york times" finding out about it, writing a story about it, and then the president ordering tell "the new york times" it didn't happen only for mcgahn to say, no, it did happen i can't say that. when you take those circumstances and say mcgahn told the special prosecutor that, what does that mean for the investigation? what does that mean for robert mueller? is it a silver bullet for obstruction? could it lead to a silver bullet? >> you've named four particular instances and i would say four times zero is zero. not one of those four instances separately or together would constitute obstruction. the real key is does mueller have something that is -- that constitutes classic obstruction, which is hush money, paying somebody to tell a lie or to not testify at all. you know, explicitly dangling a pardon in exchange for somebody testifying the right way. all those classic things, which is what -- destruction of evidence, which is what nixon and watergate was about. if mueller has something like that, all of these other statements and things that president trump did would be evide

"the new york times" published a glittering profile of him. freelance atfi "the new york times," and i am very familiar with their ethics policy. i used to live inn fear of their ethics policy, which is very intense and dramatic, especially their conflicts of interest. there are sections of public neutrality when it came to political issues. this is clearly not the paper i knew. i was so shocked when i heard about the george soros injection into the company and maybe that is what we are seeing here. they just want to be either a george soros operation, globalist operation, or they've decided to make a business decisionsi to just be a left-wig tabloid like "huffington post." they are -- they can no longer call themselves the paper of record. they are certainly no longer the glittering jewel of american journalism. that is completely out the window. >> tucker: pick the race gap like this, really long-term consequences that are starting to worry me. i think we should be worried. chadwick, thank you for your insights into that. i appreciate it. >>

" magazine that is the entire magazine come only the second time in "new york times" history that one article covers the entire magazine. the issue? climate change. stay with us. ♪ [music break] amy: this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with nermeen shaikh. nermeen: with unprecedented fires, floods, and heat waves sweeping the globe, 2018 is on track to be the fourth hottest year on record. the regions most affected by the disastrous effects of global warming are overwhelmingly not the countries that have contributed the most to climate change. according to the 2018 global ninete risk index, the leas countries most affected by climate change in the past 20 years are developing nations, including hunter is, haiti, burma, and bangladesh. text andy reports " contribute less than 1% of the world's greenhouse gases blamed , yetausing global warming its 200 million people are among the world's most vulnerable victims of the growing consequences of climate change." the indian government says more than 500 people have died as a result of floo

they've been printed in the "new york times." ey are available for the whole country to read showing that they were specifically told not only was she a russian attorney, but the point of the meeting was part of the russian government's effort to support and assist donald trump and the campaign. rudy giuliani, the former u.s. attorney, has just been reduced to lying on national television to try to avoid the obvious conclusion that that meeting did, in fact, constitute a conspiracy against the united states and to violate the campaign finance laws. >> okay. you've answered every question i would have had on that. i want to get to the "new york times" report about white house counsel don mcgahn doing those 30 hours of volunteer interviews with the white house counsel in october of last year. it's being called extraordinary. what is your take on it? >> i'm not sure it's extraordinary. i don't think it's surprising that mueller would want to speak to mcgahn and would want to learn about those conversations that took place before the

ozzie, with the comparisons to nixon, "the new york times" reporting don mcgahn said he wants to avoid john dean's fate. he was traveling on air force one when he was campaigning in ohio. is there a sense in the white house of those wrapped up in the investigation they are worried as much as don mcgahn is? >> president trump has his history of hiring people, firing them, bringing them back into the circle and having this sort of murky relationship with people, they come in, they come out. people who are afraid of donald trump, but work for him, are trying to protect themselves and protect him out of a bizarre sense of loyalty. people around them are having infighting. the sense of how this investigation is going on and bringing more people in. everyone is trying to protect themselves. they have this ongoing relationship with the president who has his history of keeping people in his orbit, even after he terminated them. >> right. i would agree with everything that was said there, but i think, very quickly, i think the situation is different. i don't think she turned against the preside

going back to the other point about how this sort of all began according to "the new york times" withon mcgahn, he became suspicious allegedly after hearing, overhearing or hearing "the new york times" report that one of the reporters had overheard two of the president's lawyers speaking very loudly at a restaurant about the investigation, about how they differed with don mcgahn on their views as to how the president should proceed and mcgahn is suspicious saying maybe the president's trying to throw me under the bus and thus begins this 30 hours worth of testimony and cooperation. >> you know, they almost give too much credit in both directions in my opinion. the gesture of i let the white house counsel speak is a farce to me. you don't let the white house counsel do anything, mr. president. in terms of i spoke as a willing person, don mcgahn, had no choice. an exercise in futility to try to battle out in the court for a subpoena for the special counsel. >> didn't have privilege but what about executive privilege? >> that's the next point. what might be a reason to protect him? you w

the fact of what happened in this meeting between president trump and the new york times. o do we trust answer who do we believe is telling the truth. the president of the united states or the "new york times." howie: if it's the epa or hhs. both leaders who were fired. it'it's -- jim acosta says the president is whipping up violence against him. john kelly is still alive and walking around howie: anyone following the media coverage of john kelly would have been convinced the white house chief of staff was toast, he was history. i am told the president asked kelly what they were going to do about the stories and asked if he would stay on for the rest of the first term and he said yes. what does that say about this media drum beat based on named sources. the a.p., it's leading trump staffers to believe kelly is work on borrowed time. abc, the president has once again started contemplating his possible replacements. >> a source telling cnn the president is talking to friends about possible replacements for john kelly. >> white house chief of staff john kelly may be ready to l

the "new york times" is suggesting don mcghan, the president's white house counsel is cooperating withhe special counsel mueller suggesting the "new york times" suggesting that he's being teeed up to take a fall for the president. what do you think of this? >> you are right the article could sound stwhait. but the reality is the president encouraged all the people who testified to tell the truth. to take as long as they needed to to do that. as long as they did, they would have no problem with the president or us. we have no reason to bleach don mcghan didn't do that. as john dowd, the president's lawyer said, don mcghan was the strongest witness for the president. meaning he completely gave testimony that said that the president didn't do anything wrong, which the president didn't do anything wrong. judge jeanine: who would plant a story or suggestion or create an effort to legitimize a claim mcghan is trying to take the fall. does it tell you that the "new york times" is making stuff up and is fake news? does it tell you that mueller is starting to panic and starting to get mcghan to

the style contributed to outlets like the new york times, new yorker, wall street journal, new york times book review is evident in his new book as well, "when einstein walked with godel" in the presence of which hold says his ideal form is a cocktail party chat which shows in his writing here and why does the world exist and stop me if you've heard this: a philosophy of historyand jokes . all his books are built for pleasure so throughout the 20 years of essays collected in this book, he keeps on tackling incentives whether it's in the form of fractals, string theory and richard dawkins issues with god or the nature of time itself so join me in the honor of welcoming jim holt to politics and prose. [applause] >> thank you for that generous introduction. i'm happy to be here and to see such a nice turnout. are there any string the risks in the audience? there were a couple of string theorists when i spoke at the harvard bookstore and they were formidable in presenting string theory against my criticism . in this book i tried to canvass what i consider to be the most profound and most beau

most of the media has always been liberal. ime new york times -- i am the new york times most loyal reader. made thosewould have first six paragraphs the first for a rough, but essentially i will get facts. you cannot turn to the gold standard of journalism and expect to get facts. we need to destroy the media and rebuild it among more ethical lines which is one thing we may get out of donald trump. host: if you destroy the media, what does that mean for you? media,we still have a just an ethical media. they would tell the truth. it would not be fake news. they would not be sending away citizens in a democracy that needs facts with a false story. host: on the conclusion that -- a delusional,e may be chemotherapy for the country. you vomit, your hair falls out, your hair falls out, but it kills cancer cells and you live. the presidency may be an -- gosant thing to do -- through but everyone on the new york times editorial board will die. host: have you heard from them? guest: many are my friends and there are one or two good reporters on the new

. >>> the executive editors of the new york times and "washington post" join david axelrod for "the ax files." see you in an hour. >>> tonight, on the axe files, the celebrated executive editors of the "new york times" and "the washington post", on the unprecedented challenges of covering the trump presidency. >> let me ask you bluntly, do you think the president habitually lies? >> well, you know -- >> coping with trump's attacks on the free press. >> we have a lot of fake news back there. >> he doesn't want the press to be an arbiter. he doesn't want scientists to be the arbiter. he wants himself and his white house to be the arbiter of fact. >> their storiied careers with headlines that changed history. >> i want this to be in my obituary. >> welcome to "the axe files." >> i figured i would introduce you. welcome to the constitution center in philly. we chose this place not just because it's roughly halfway between your two cities, but because of what the constitution means and the meaning of that first amendment. you are the editors of two of the most influential papers in this cou

. >> they were not thinking about the new york times. the press in england and the united states was that this was partisan. it was as if every party had its own cable network not unlike the internet in many ways. there were lots of attacks that would be picked up and republished around the country. let's not let the narcissism of the president blind us to the fact that we have been here before. part of the way that we came out of it and that became the oxygen as opposed to the stifling force was that there were so many. i think that we lament that we had a common culture and common understanding around about 1965. with all respect all of the big reporters and the common culture gave us vietnam. they gave us a cause to write a book about how everyone got it so wrong. i would urge a sense of proportion and perspective. everyone gets up every day whether you are the president or citizen and tries to get it right. sometimes you get it right and sometimes you get it wrong. the great grandson of our beloved prime minister. only half of you sho