he wrote an op-ed in "the washington post" called an imposition mission. best advice i could have given general i don't know f. kelly has beenover sustain by events, don't take the job. he just signed up for what may be truly an impossible mission, bringing discipline, order and strategic locus to the chaos that is the trump white house." he is supposedly everyone's boss, that includes jared kushner and ivanka trump. puts out a tweet, could have been a language issue but puts out a tweet saying "i look forward in working with the general." she doesn't work with him. she supposedly works for him. how does a general keep the president's kids from walking in and out of the oval office? >> that's a challenge for any chief of staff, chief javelin catcher, as the job has been called, and thanks, jane, to your kind words, but it's also gatekeeper, a recent book by chris whipple about that. you have to maintain some order and discipline and that includes who can go in the oval office and not. but chris, you cannot cut off communication from the president. so i thi

and "the washington post" has multiple sources. when describing how the most inexperienced communication staff in history, quote, advocated for a more transparent approach. "the washington post" quotes, people with knowledge of the conversati conversations. this is a day one disaster for the new white house chief of staff whose job it is to plug those leaks. that's job one. that's what the president wants from him the most. and it is another disastrous story for the white house, showing the president trying to cover up the truth of what happened in his son and son-in-law's meeting with the russians at trump tower during the presidential campaign. an unnamed presidential adviser in "the washington post" story said, quote, now someone can claim he's the one who attempted to mislead. someone can argue the president is saying he doesn't want you to say the whole truth. "the washington post" article then says, although misleading the public or the news media is not a crime, advisers to trump and his family told "the washington post" that

but "the washington post" says it was the president who wrote it. presumably, they have some basis for writing that, because "the washington post" is a respectful newspaper with an excellent record, especially on this particular subject. so i'm not, i don't think i view this story, i don't think it's accurate to say i view this story as in any way exculpatory. it calls for more investigation, it calls for people to be questioned under oath about how this statement was constructed and whether the people who knew that it was false were involved in making this statement. >> it does seem that if you have people willing to leak to "the washington post" the details of what happened, that those same people when talking to a special counsel, will probably tell the truth to the special counsel, in order to protect themselves, i would assume. >> if they haven't already. >> i think it's always difficult to assume the motives or assume who told the truth or assume not. i mean i don't -- >> exactly. >> i mean there were obviously a lot of internal rivalries here,

>>> well the breaking news tonight a report in the "washington post". e president himself dictated the misleading statement about donald trump jr.'s meeting with the russian lawyer. the "washington post" is reporting when the story first broke, the president's advisers wanted to tell the truth in case full details came out. but according the post the president decided to go a different direction. he dictated the statement claiming the meeting was about russian adoption. earlier i spoke with one of the reporters breaking the story tom hamburger. >> so the phrase dictate is one that my colleagues phil rucker and ashley parker who, as you know, cover the white house full-time, picked up from their sources. what we understand is that this was really a decision led by the president and that the statement that was ultimately issued is one that he decided and is often his way. you know he is not an emailer. he suggested the language in the statement that was ultimately used and ultimately released to "the new york times." and to a certain extent had to be walke

according to the "washington post." the ic intelligence community assesses north korea has produced nuclear weapons for ballistic missile delivery to include delivery by icbm-class missiles. what's your reaction when you hear this report? >> well, this compresses the u.s. decision cycle down to almost nothing. everybody was hoping that these two technologies of the north koreans worked on, the missile technology, we could observe closely. we gather information on the capability. more difficult, assess the capability to develop this miniaturized nuclear warhead, which is the second piece of it. when you marry those two technologies, then you have a real capability. it appears that if this is true, the north koreans have achieved that capability. whereas, we thought in the past we had some time to let diplomacy work and the economic sanctions work. that decision cycle has almost collapsed, and now we're farrised with a north korea that could potentially launch a missile in a very short period of time. and as barbara was te

so that is what the white house official was telling "the washington post." and, of course, this is a pardon that has gotten a lot of attention. we don't want to get the reason for that to be lost in the controversy now over the process the president went through with the pardon. this was a case sheriff arpaio was convicted of contempt for ignoring a court order to stop racial profiling, stopping latinos on the mere thinking that they might be undocumented immigrants. that's what this is all stemming from. that is one of the reasons there is so much harsh blowback not including from the arizona republic newspaper which in an editorial said this is a slap in the face of latinos. let's go ahead and play what sheriff arpaio said after he learned of the pardon. >> he's a big supporter of law enforcement. i know it came from his heart. two years ago i supported him first rally. and i always said, regardless of pardon or no pardon, i'll be with him till the end. and i say that. so i'm really happy with all the support i received across the nation, arizona, for this

let's bring in peter finn, national security editor for "the washington post. lot of observers say that kim jong un has been acting more belligerent of late. maybe the fact that he has apparently succeeded in mating nuclear miniaturized nuclear weapons to a missile is part of the reason why? >> yeah. i think he is becoming more confident about his capabilities both his ability to launch an intercontinental ballistic missile and now as we are reporting that they have miniaturized missile that they can mount on a missile. those are two very significant developments. they have come at a faster pace than i think most people anticipated. so that may account for some of his confidence. >> jon: you had three reporters on this story. i know you were the editor. when you read what they came up with from the defense intelligence agency, i mean, was it one of those smack your head kind of moments and say holy cow, this is a game changer? >> yeah. i mean, it's a startling ominous development. and i think it reduces the time frame for the leadership of the united states, ja

the "washington post" says the initial strategy from advisers from are the president's advisers was toth. to be very forthcoming. instead, according to the "washington post," the president reportedly intervened and dictated the statement himself claiming the meeting was about russian adoption. back with the panel joining us on the phone is senior legal analyst jeffrey toobin. just from a legal standpoint, is there anything that should concern the president about this story? >> absolutely. you know, it's been clear for some time that the mueller investigation is looking at the issue of obstruction of justice. and if in fact, the president put out an intentionally false story about his relationship with russia, you know, broadly defined in terms of his son's activity, that would be a piece of evidence that could support a charge of obstruction of justice. that alone is not enough to make a case, but if you were to combine it with firing james comey and you know, the other parts of the investigation, it certainly would be a relevant piece of evidence. as i say, it's not enough on its own.

"the washington post" is reporting that when the story broke, the president's advisers talked about how president trump, junior should respond. the strategy wastruthful. according to "the washington post," that plan changed because the president himself personally dictated the statement claiming that the meeting was about the adoption of russian children. as we know, that statement turned out to be false. as e-mails released by trump, junior showed, the meeting actually was an offer to give the trump team damaging information about hillary clinton as part of the russian government effort to help the trump campaign. back now with the panel. so david, this is pretty significant. "the new york times" had previously reported that trump advisers were meeting on their way back, i believe it was on air force one, sort of put their heads together to craft a statement and the president signed off about it. "the washington post," based on their source saying that the president himself dictated what the response was. and the response, what was so inadequate about it is it had to be corrected then

this news coming to us from "the washington post." on successfully produced a miniature nuclear warhead that can fit inside of its missiles. fox news analyst, general jack keane joins us now. what does this mean? help me interpret "the washington post" headline for all of us. what does it mean to our country? >> well, first of all let's accept the fact it is true. we don't know that for a fact but it is likely true and likely obviously our administration is very much aware of this. they have had this knowledge for some time. it was on the table in their discussions with the chinese and russians about the economic sanctions they were able to successfully get through to the u.n. credit to them. what it means is, north korea has made another step towards nuclearizing icbms capable of reaching the united states. the chinese and north koreans i believe have always made the same calculation based on historical fact that if they nuclearize icbms, putting american people at risk, the united states would never conduct regime change in north kor

this report is coming from "the washington post" right now. the dell of emac development means that north korea is even closer to becoming a true nuclear power. the u.s. finding last month that kim jong-un controls up to 60 nuclear weapons and that north korea is getting closer to building a ballistic missile that could strike cities on the u.s. mainland. if this turns out to be true, north korea is a lot further along than researchers had once thought. we are going to bring you more on this as it becomes available. this is a huge deal because even in just the last few hours, people have been saying what they are missing is that miniaturized warhead to go inside and now we are hearing this report they may have it. >> jon: you have to have a smaller weapon that is able to fit inside the nose cone. to be able to deliver it to. if they have in fact as "the washington post" is saying managed to successfully miniaturize a weapon, that is a game changer because it means that basically the united states is in potential danger and they don't necessaril

"the washington post" reporting that president trump personally dictated his son's misleading initial statement about the reason for the june 2016 meeting with a russian lawyer. it all happened on air force one while the president was returning from the g20 summit last month. "the post" says president trump overruled his advisers who were advocating for full transparency, directing the statement to describe the focus of the meeting being about adoption of russian children. trump jr.'s own emails released days later show that the meeting was actually about providing the trump campaign with incriminating information on hillary clinton from the russian government, it remains unclear if president trump knew this at the time. "the washington post" reports that white house advisers now worry that the president's direct involvement leaves him needlessly vulnerable to allegations of a coverup. >> i wasn't involved in the statement drafting at all nor was the president. i'm assuming that was between mr. donald trump jr., between don jr. and his lawyer. >> reporter: after vehemently denying tha

of amazon and he's also the owner of the washington post so on officially the cia is a funder of the washington post what do you play implying that because of the bezos approved policy that won't let washed. critique advertisers that somehow that means they're not going to be critical of the cia i mean have some more faith than wash. ok first stop doing that and secondly i'm not implying that they won't criticize the guy i'm saying that i said that i said i just said it i don't know why there we already know that outlets like the post in the new york times routinely report you know or not to miss leaks that they're fed from intelligence community that are often later found out to be inaccurate wm d. now even a journalist who works for the post with good intentions and integrity can't call that out without risking terminations said no no they have no he there's a safeguard in place with this new policy there's a clause that encourages employees to snitch on one another if you have any reason to believe that an employee may be in violation of the post social media policy you should cont

"the washington post is reporting u.s. telligence officials admit it brings kim jong un one step closer to becoming a full-fledged nuclear power. this comes as rex tillerson is in asia pressing for more help in dealing with the rogue regime. meanwhile ambassador nikki haley praised russia and china at the u.n. for their help. >> i think that with china we basically said enough talk. we're done. and you have the ability to control 90% of their trade and you can't make excuses anymore. to their credit, they stepped up. we did some heavy negotiations. we got them there. russia, i think they wanted to delay it initially. i don't think that's what they wanted but we got them there and as long as they were there, that's what matters. >> harris: as the hard facts come in, let's go to senior foreign affairs correspondent greg palkot with more. greg? >> gregg: harris, it is an alarming report coming from "the washington post and at least one of my valued sources on the subject of north korea thinks that it is true. let's go through

in the "washington post" story that hasn't abated.i the washington post had people obviously on the planewith trump. the most damaging leaks are er coming from the intelligence community where you're seeing a lot of information that is being rather strategically released to the media. those are the ones most likely to be prosecuted because you'ree dealing with national security l type of information. as to the white house, that's clearly the mandate of general kelly, to get those leakers. that's tough, though. because, you know, this city, you know, floats on a rolling sea of leaks.. that's always been the case. cas it also has reporters who are trained to be able to get leaks. and so since the white house "ts a ton of calls all of the time fromwa reporters, you can' use a pen register to simply say well, you got a call from the washington post because the person says yeah, and so did my dog.nd inter i mean, everyone in washington gets calls from reporters. so it requires something that's difficult and it would be tappi interesting to see what sessions says. unless you're going tough do r

let's go live free action now political analysts go but dr welcome to the program let's just go but first we can do this washington post article suggesting that neo nazis are looking at russia for inspiration how solid is that argument even. well the article in the washington post like articles other than this subject every day in the post as in the other main mainstream the newspaper of record in the us the new york times they daily are publishing material that is derogatory of russia that is slandering russia that is presenting russia in the worst possible light so when i was asked to comment on this article in the washington post today i was wondering what's new and what am i going to say but i have to admit that reading the article for early and carefully i don't something that your commentator overlooked and that is that basically the journalist responsible for this article was giving his editors the finger because the implication of the of the headline is that russia is justly seen as a center of white supremacy by american neo nazis the in the middle of the article is a paragraph which undermines totally such a

"the washington post" is reporting that president trump asked attorney general jeff sessions about closing the case against political ali, sheriff joe arpaio, the man the president pardoned last evening. >>> at first the disaster in texas, and dire warnings of potential floods to come. tropical storm stalled on shore within range of the flood-prone city of houston. up to two feet of rain in some areas before this all over. the monster storm has already left behind a wide swath of destruction in rock port, texas. some homes and businesses are piles of debris now and more severe weather is expected soon. this video shows a large funnel cloud rolling through a neighborhood in cyprus, texas. new reaction from president trump tweeting wonderful coordination between federal, state and local governments in the great stephie texas, team work. record setting rainfall, unquote. we checked with the weather center, no records set just yet. 75% of the rain is yet to come. let's get started with our special coverage of the disaster in texas. we've been showing you the devastation out of rock-port, texas

but it's very consistent with the character of the man that i know. >> the reporting from "the washington post" that was just breaking that president trump actually dictated john junior's misleading statement on his meeting with russian lawyer, i'm wondering if true, this is "the washington post" reporting based on multiple sources, how daping is it for the president? it's certainly something special counsel bob mueller would be looking into. >> sure. a leave your legal experred to comment on that might mean to former director mueller's investigation. i was watching the breaking news and the thought occurred to knee when i was a military attache

here is a little bit more of the reporting from "the washington post." trump say say is increeingly acting as his own lawyer, publicist and strategist, often ignoring the recommendations of the people he hired. he doesn't think he is in any legal jeopardy. he really views this as a political problem he is going to solve by himself. robert mueller, the special counsel white house preserve, all documents relating to that meeting, any disclosures about the june 2016 meeting. so again to you, dylan, either there is one thousand or so coincidences out there involving russia, or there are some serious legal questions, which are seem to be developing here. >> and of course there are serious legal questions developing here. but that is up to mueller to do his legwork and do the work it takes, take the time it takes to do it. and until that's done, you know, like john says, these stories will sort of come up. and then they will fizzle out. but i think the larger point there about the president sort of not trusting his advisers, not trusting anyone but himself, we

greg miller, "the washington post" reporter, who broke the story, joins me from washington.a former advisor to mitt romney and paul ryan, also an official in george w. bush's administration. i'm pleased to have both on the program. greg, first of all, what was the first reaction you had when you discovered these transcripts, when you realized you had access to them, what they said? >> so, you know, we'd written stories earlier in the year, about this sort of readouts from the calls. we'd gotten word that they were chaotic and tense and heated. we sort of knew that going in. to me the thing that jumped out right away was reading through the mexico call, and what a sort of distance there was between what trump has said publicly about mexico, i'm going to build a wall and mexico's going to pay for it, and what he was telling the mexico president in his very first call as president that went completely in the opposite direction. >> charlie: basically what did he say in the call to the president of mexico? >> i mean, the call amounts to an attempt to enlist the mexican president

the constitution and create a video. georgejonathan turley, washington law school professor one to talk about the latest the investigations and let's start with the latest. "washington post" front page is that the rning president crafted donald trump, statement on his russian contract on the sideline of the and there was a strategy that was agreed upon, according to the reporting from "washington post" reporters that they would get ahead of the truth.and tell the that was strategy change by the president in that he within the president changed the plan, flying home from germany 8th aboard air force one, trump jr. said he and the lawyers primarily discussed adoption of russian children. the "washington post" saying the inner-circle fear now the president has put circle in his inner legal jeopardy, what is your take? uest: first of all, releasing misleading statements is not itself a crime, otherwise half of washington would be in jail. but it does create certain legal issues for the president that decided to do this, there was a special counsel in looking at obstruction, there were allegations the president had ut pressure on cabinet officials to terminate the independent

up next, why the secret service is leaving its command post now inside trump tower. the new reporting from "the washington post" tonight when we continue. booking a flight at the last minute doesn't have to be expensive. just go to priceline. it's the best place to book a flight a few days before my trip and still save up to 40%. just tap and go. and while i'm gone i can even check on my baby with this doggie cam. oh jack, you're such a good boy. no, jack, what are you doing? bad dog! and if you need to get back home, like right now, priceline has you covered. yet up 90% fall short in getting key nutrients from food alone. let's do more. add one a day women's complete with key nutrients we may need. plus it supports bone health with calcium and vitamin d. one a day women's in gummies and tablets. over the course of 9 days sthe walks 26.2 miles,. that's a marathon. because he chooses to walk whenever he can. and he does it with support from dr. scholl's. only dr. scholl's has massaging gel insoles that provide all-day comfort to keep him feeling more energized. so he even has the energy to take the long wa

a brand new report out of the washington post. they appear to have received a lengthy transcript of the first call president trump had as president with the mexican president obviously talking about the border wall he promised so much during his campaign. the a few of the highlight the here. he begged the president of next conot to keep saying to the press, we will not pay for the wall. the president said according to this transcript, we will work it out in the formula somehow. it will come out in the wash. that's okay but you can't say that to the press. he also said this is the least important thing we're talking about but political icily the most important. >> the president of mexico in that conversation noted it is very important to us in mexico. it is scheduled to the dignity of the nation of mexico right now. so the facts inside this phone call, interesting in and of themselves and then, also interesting, the fact that this entire transcript is now in the hands of "the washington post." >> 52 pages. >> we want to talk about a

that was until this report from the washington post. trump dictated son's misleading statement on meeting with russian lawyer. sarah huckabee sanders just finished the briefing that katie was presiding over just a few minutes ago. here's what sarah huckabee sanders had to say about it. >> look, the statement that don jr. issued is true. there's no inaccuracy in the statement. the president weighed in as any father would based on the limited information that he had. this is all discussion of no consequence. there was no follow-up. it was disclosed to the proper parties which is how the washington post found out about it. the democrats want to use it as a pr stunt and are doing everything to keep the story alive and in the papers. the president, the american people, they voted america first, not russia first and that's the focus of our administration. >> let's start with one of the journalists who broke this story. tom hamburger. how do you respond to this? when the story came out we sought response from various people who said this is fak

but the basis of that "washington post" report, whatever the intel was that was the basis for the washington post story, it has not come to light. we had vague assurances from the director of intelligence and from the cia that there may be vague agreement within the intelligence community on this issue, but there's been no publication of any findings. there's been no formal assessment that we know has been made of these matters. we certainly don't know of anyone that's been made public. we haven't heard of one being provided in a classified setting. no other intelligence agencies other than the one, the defense intelligence agency, the dia, has apparently done a report on this issue. and so, point of order, right. these last three days of literally nuclear brinksmanship, as far as we can tell, the proximate cause of this, what set it all off is one newspaper report of a single agency's reported conclusion, which has not been bolstered by other sources, that doesn't reflect any sort of formal stated view of the intelligence community. and you know that one agency that supposedly produced this

the n post" says the president dictated. joining us now republican senator ron johnson of wisconsin. what do you make of this washington post report in light of the fact that the president's attorney said right on this show he had no role in drafting that statement. now "the washington post" said he dictated it? >> good morning, chris. i'm not involved in any investigations. so i'll leave those capable individuals and committees to get to the nine nal facts of these things. we need to find out what the facts are. whether we need to take any additional action but i'm not going to comment until we have their reports. >> not concerned by that report? >> chris, there's so much out there being talked about right now. pretty interesting article who funded the russian dossier on trump. i don't have any information on that. i think you could do all kinds of reporting. what i'm focusing on is how do we fix the messes, obamacare, get tax relief to the american taxpayer. the how do we grow the economy so we have greater opportunities for americans. >> disfunction in the white house and how we are led matters though, right? one of

stuart: collusion between reporters specifically the washington post specifically the washington postury the story, push it away. >> collusion by itself is only a crime in antitrust, however, this is if true and proven blatant dishonesty on the part of the media. stuart: let's backtrack a second in the tarmac and i believe it was phoenix, arizona, loretta lynch at that time was on her private jet and along came bill clinton, the two had a meeting on the tarmac in loretta lynch's jet and they -- they said that it was a 40-minute meeting, they said they discussed grandchildren and golf as i recall and this was at the time when -- ashley: lynch's department was investigating hillary clinton. stuart: that's right. >> the house judiciary committee doesn't believe it which is why last week they sent a letter signed by 20 members on the judiciary committee demanding that a second special counsel be appointed to investigate lynch and comey and hillary clinton and all of it wrapped around this and many other contacts between the three. stuart: what i'm picking up here is the washington post, w

the. >> hmm. >> "the washington post" says he was. the and if he was, and jay sekulow lied -- >> you can probably put it on a list of i like to use the word lies. other people say misstatements or fibs. we've seen in the first six months of this presidency, the problem right now, though, is that for the president's base, morally, they don't hear necessarily that we are seeing lies like this. the they think we as the main stream media are going after them. they think that the republican party, the establishment doesn't like donald trump so they're not going to support him. at some point, though, i do think there's going to be a deterioration when they realize that the president's not able to deliver on his promises because he can't deliver by himself. he needs the republican congress to help him and he does need the support of the american people. when the deterioration gets to the point where these people aren't seeing results, that's when he's in trouble. >> i also think the timing of the story is important. the you cannot ignore the

breaking news from the washington post minutes ago. from the infamous 2016 meeting at trump tower in which don junior was told co-get information on hient hillary clinton via the russian government. president trump deck tated his son's misleading statement on meeting with the russian lawyer. joining me now, phillip rucker, who just broke that story for the washington post. phillip, my understanding is the original plan when the first news of the meeting broke is for don junior to get out ahead of it and issue a statement that wouldn't be contradicted and the president intervened to do what? >> that's right, chris. advisers around the president and around donald trump junior thought he should offer a fairly full and complete statement acknowledging what happened in that meeting and what happened is the president overruled them. he took matters into his own hands. almost acting as his family's own lawyer strategist publicist and decided to offer a statement that was misleading at best. and did not include the complete information which as

the west wing. joining me now from washington is dan balz, the chief correspondent for "the washington post." r incredible week. >> absolutely. this was-- this was supposed to be the quiet week, the calming week. and there may be a little use under general kelly.white but these transcripts have exploded. i mean, we had so many readers on these transcripts this morning when they first broke, remarkable reporting by my colleague greg miller who has been a stalwart throughout the year as part of our national security team. the portrayal of the new president, as you said, being unhappy, concerned about his own image, talking at cross-purposes of leaders of two allies, of neighboring mexico and australia. they are remarkable documents of what the trump presidency started as and for so long, has continued as. >> rose: take me through what you found remarkable about these documents. >> well, on the call with the mexican president i think what was so fascinating was trump's recognition that his promise that not only would he build the wall but that mexico would pay for it was something that was never

. >>> the breaking news this morning, a new report "the washington post" revealing the private conversations of president trump. revealing conversations with world leaders, awkward conversations with world leaders. >> and conversations that call into question his most famous campaign promises and his z ability to delivery on them. the leak comes a day before attorney general jeff sessions is due to announce a crackdown on leaks. let's go to greg miller, the reporter who broke the story. long, 52-page tran self-incriminate you obtained in january. what are the key point that is stand out? >> the pain one to me is the contradiction of trump's public decision on mexico and making mexico pay for the wall and what he says to the president of mexico that there's no way for him to do that and trying to enlist the mexican president to stop saying mexico won't pay because it's a big political problem. there are broader things with the calls. these are really acrimonious conversations that affect the lives of thousands, if not millions of immigrants around the world. there's no discussion of their pli

blustered her way through the objections about a meticulous story by the "washington post." >> the statement that don junior issued is true. there is no inaccuracy in the statement. the president weighed in as any father would based on the limited information that he had. this is all discussion, frankly, of no consequence. there was no follow-up. it was dises closed to the proper parties. which is now the "new york times" found out about it to begin with. >> can you talk about the degree to which the president weighed in. >> he weighed in, offered suggestion like any father would do. >> sanders responding to reporting in the "washington post" detailing how press staffers originally proposed dealing with an inquiry about don junior's meeting attra trum tower with russians to get dirt on hillary clinton. the "washington post" reports the strategy the advisers agreed should be for don junior to release a statement to get ahead of the story. they wanted to be truthful so the account do not be repudiated later if full details emerged. within hours of the president's direction the plan changed. fl

i understand that she said he didn't dictate and that's their answer to "the washington post." en she said that the statement that you just read that was given to "the new york times," donald trump jr.'s statement. >> the statement was true on adoption. >> completely true, totally factual. that is a sin of omission. she's not acknowledging the reality of what we've all learned since then. donald trump jr. admits, president trump admits, that oppo research on hillary clinton was part of this, there was a set-up for this meeting where donald trump jr. knew that it was the russian government's desire to affect the election, all of that was present. so, to just say that that statement was 100% contract and correct when we know it is not the full story, is, again, it's like, am i not supposed to believe my lying eyes? i don't understand who she's trying to convince that that was a full and accurate statement. >> jeff zeleny, let me pivot to you at the white house and to chalian's point, we've heard out of the president's own mouth, both when he was with macron in france and at the "n

this is all coming from the "washington post" today. dent trump personally dictated his son's misleading statement, the very first one he are released about what happened during this now infamous trump tower meeting with a russian lawyer. don junior's initial statement to "the new york times" went like this. "we primarily discussed a program about the adoption of russian children that was active and popular with american families years ago and was since ended by the russian government. but it was not a campaign issue at the time and there was no follow-up." well, obviously, that was, at best, completely misleading and not truthful. why? because don junior's own e-mails showed that he went to the meeting for information that could damage hillary clinton and thus help his father's campaign, information sold to him as coming from the russian government. let's begin with one of the reporters who broke this story from "the washington post" today, she is carol lining. thank you so much for being with me. a lot of takeaways. first, it seems to

when we come back, an in-depth report by the "washington post" how the president's washington, d.c. hotel could be profiting from his presidency. when a fire is going on, you're not thinking clearly, so they called the fire department for us. i could hear crackling in the walls. my mind went totally blank. all i remember saying was, "my boyfriend's beating me" and she took it from there. and all of this occurred in four minutes or less. i am grateful we all made it out safely. people you don't know care about you. it's kind of one of those things where you can't even thank somebody. to protect what you love, call 1-800-adt-cares wise man, i'm nervous about affecting my good credit score. i see you've planted an uncertainty tree. chop that thing down. the clarity you seek... lies within the creditwise app from capital one. creditwise helps you protect your credit. and it's completely free for everyone. it's free for everyone? do hawks use the stars to navigate? i don't know. aw, i thought you did. i don't know either. either way it's free for everyone. cool. what's in your wallet? an

let's say paul manafort as "the washington post" is saying and sam is discussing. what might be that fish to flip or however the analogy goes? which person you might be looking at that could be closer to president trump, and perhaps the special counsel has their eye on as well. at this point, it is speculation, but that's not stopping as you know, brian, folks in washington, from buzzing about it. >> absolutely, and paul, so often when you are on as a former fed yourself, we ask you to express to our audience in no uncertain terms the awesome power of the federal government, and the almost limitless resources that mr. mueller and his at last count, 16 very able co-counsel have. >> and brian, i don't feel sorry for my of these guys because if these allegations are correct, they have conspired to subvert democracy, and obstruct justice. at the same time, nobody wants to be the subject of your own special investigation by 16 of the best prosecutors in the country, accompanied by many amazing fbi agents. paul manafort, they are not only looking at him with regard to col

now, transcripts of some of the conversations have been published by the washington post. they make interesting reading. venezuela's chief prosecutor opens an investigation into claims of fraud during the weekend's election of a new assembly. the head of the libyan national army warns italian ships that approach libyan waters without permission that they'll be repelled. and in the past few minutes, paris st germain have confirmed the signing of brazilian striker neymar ona signing of brazilian striker neymar on a five year contract. hello and welcome to outside source. the washington post has released transcripts of conversations between donald trump and other world leaders from days after he became president. the first is between the president and mexico's leader enrique pena nieto. trade, the war on drugs, and of course, the wall — all feature heavily in the exchange. mr trump spent his campaign promising that mexico would pay for a wall on the america's southern border. but in the transcript he says... he goes on to say... let's go over to our washington correspondent. h

does it say to you the fact that the transcripts of these phone conversations were leaked to the "washington post"? i'm sure they were classified. how much does the president need to have candid conversations with world leaders without those world leaders being afraid the transcripts would show up in the "washington post" or other publications? this is a serious development. you are a former cia director. >> i'm very concerned about leaks like that that take place because those conversations should be able to occur between the president and those leaders. he ought to be able to have some room to make the kind of comments that he needs to make without it splashing all over the news. i would be very concerned that those kinds of leaks are taking place in this administration. it just means that john kelly as chief of staff has his work cut out for him in terms of changing the atmosphere of the white house so that whoever within the white house or administration feels free to leak that kind of information would have at least a little more loyalty to both the president and to the administration. >> i

sunday at "the washington post" is reporting. secretary of state rex tillerson is in asia talk about this very issue. he was in thailand, malaysia, philippines earlier in the week. and throughout the we can. all of what the administration cause is pressure campaign to diplomatically and economically isolate north korea to force it to surrender its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile program. secretary of state rex tillerson was in thailand earlier today. that is where he began the day. thailand, according to state department officials is a country that has not only a visa process that is very easy, a little too forgiving. it allows north korean businesses to set up essentially sham companies there. it also has diplomatic relations with north korea. they have an embassy there. so that u.s. secretary of state was trying to push them specifically to reign in those practice and isolate and freeze out north korea. on top of that, part of this is also china. ten accounts for 90% of north koreans trade. the u.s. has put china into exi

. >> this grand jury is the single biggest threat trump has ever faced or someone named trump or married to a trump. howie: a "washington post" report that don, jr. was behind the meeting. >> he's clearly focused on covering for his son. it certainly tells bob mueller this guy is into a cover-up. >> washington post reporting the president was personally involved in his son's reaction to the meeting. >> why should anyone believe him on the big stuff, the things that do matter. >> if i have a have a president who lies about the boy scouts or to destroy isis, i'll take the liar. howie: we hear part of anthony scaramucci's call to a reporter. jim acosta lectures a top white house official over a new policy on illegal immigration. >> it looks like you are trying to evening near the racial and ethnic flow of people into this country. >> that's one of the most of outrageous, insulting, foolish, and ignorant things you have ever said. howie: i'm howrt kurtz and this -- i'm howard kurtz and this is "mediabuzz." it was four weeks ago the "new york times" disclosed donald jr. held a meeting to obtain negative research on hillary clinto

the meeting had primarily been a russian adoption program subject. this was later shown to be misleading. joining me now from washington is philip rucker, the white house bureau chief and analyst -- at the washington postnd analyst for msnbc news. phil, tell me for those who did not read the story, who did not get their daily briefing from the "washington post," how the story has developed. mr. rucker: we are talking about the meeting donald trump jr. had with the russian lawyer back in 2016 during the campaign. the news of that meeting broken times"e in "the new york a few weeks ago at the beginning of july. and the story that we detailed in the post yesterday is that president trump personally overruled the advice of his attorneys and his advisers to dictate a statement that would be issued in the name of his run to mislead the public. to intentionally conceal key facts about that meeting in an attempt to spin the story in a sort of less damaging way. that is a new revelation. charlie: is it illegal or otherwise to do that? mr. rucker: no. it is not illegal to deceive the public. it is not illegal to lie to a newspaper. but it raises problems because in thell happening context of robert mueller's spe

this is according to the story in "the washington post" from last night. we know that later on that came to not be true, this meeting was more about that donald trump jr. was under the impression that he was meeting with a russian government attorney who had incriminating information about hillary clinton. the subject line of the e-mails was literally russia, clinton, private and confidential. we later found out that was not true. the trump lawyer, jay sekulow is saying this revelation as the president personally dictated this statement is not relevant. let's put his statement on the screen saying, apart from being of no consequence, the characterizations are misinformed, inaccurate and not pertinent. this is the lawyer that went on television two times after this came out to strongly deny the president had any role in drafting this donald jr. statement. >> all right. i think we have one question we want to get to you about general john kelly and his role inside the white house. what are you learning about whether or not the situation is getting buttoned up

who is inspiring the divided sides in american society these days and now a new article in the washington post suggests that the far right is being guided by a russian influence going to go the story. russia is used to being blamed for all things sinister in this world if it's not hacking someone that it's being labeled authoritarian or just flat out criminals but few have stooped to suggest russia backs nazis until now the washington post claiming the nation that lost more than twenty seven million people fighting fascist germany with every family losing loved ones is a source of inspiration for america's neo nazis now you'd hope such offensive claims would be backed up by undeniable facts but sadly you'd be wrong the article kicks off with a couple of flashy quotes one from a former k.k.k. imperial wizard who calls moscow a key to white survival and then a white supremacist richard spencer for whom the kremlin stands as the most powerful white power in the world which yes sounds bad but these men will use anything to promote their agenda so how is that russia's fault when white nationalists

"the washington post" said based on their sources that he dictated it. mean, i'm just trying to imagine like in a meeting when the president of the united states says oh, he throws in his ideas into the group think of the meeting. i would think his ideas would tend to dominate any discussion of what the statement should be. it's not like they're all just spitballing and somebody is going to say no, mr. president, that's not good idea. >> reporter: his ideas certainly carry more weight. and this was all happening on air force one on july 8, flying back from germany. a lot of top advisers, including jared kushner, ivanka trump, others were in the president's office on air force one talking about all this. but the reason this matters is we heard senator lindsey graham, republican of south carolina, he's one of the republicans leading this investigation, he said look, every time they change their story, it makes us not believe them. so today, anderson, is a development that we'll remember going forward for the first time the white house saying the president w