and wikileaks.ainly seemed like an interesting coincidence. >> later he denied speaking with assange directly or colluding with the russians. and vladimir putin laughed at the idea of russian involvement in an issue of the bloomberg news. >> no, i don't know anything about that. >> i did have a very visceral feeling in the pit of my stomach that i thought this was a really serious thing. an assault on the very heart of our democracy and that's one of the reasons i felt so strongly about putting out the statement we did in october. >> on october 7th, one month and one day before the election, u.s. intelligence agencies publicly named and shamed russia. their statement read quote the u.s. intelligence community is confident that they directed the recent compromises of emails from u.s. persons and institutions. coming up the release of stolen emails accelerate. >> emails, emails, emails. if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis like me, and you're talking to your rheumatologist about a medic

new wikileaks documents show hillary clinton sided with russia. that sounds like collusion as her husband was making paid speeches in moscow. president clinton received half a million dollars from a russian financial firm for a 2010 appearance while hillary was opposing sanctions as secretary of state. that's close to collusion. it's got to be. don't you think? that's been so ignored again. troubling, don't you think? the clinton campaign boasted about killing a bloomberg news report highlighting the connection. we contacted bloomberg and they

then use talking to julian as sang from wikileaks.at the wikileaks is going to make a bigger splash than just putting them out there on a website. >> yeah. >> and we clearly know that gus i fer is a russian hacker based on what we've heard from the american intelligence agencies. >> hold it right there. i want to get ron in this. he's presenting the case that he would lay out. there's some hard ed and there's also evidence that don junior was open to information from the russian government. but the rest as of now the timeline, it's a suspicious fiem line according to a lot of people, but it's still very circumstantial. do you think that you could prosecute a case? >> not today. i think, like ken suspect saying, i think you have to start with some suppositions. let's start with the supposition or the hypothesis that the trump campaign actually did get something of value. well, what is that? and i think that it's going to be incumbent on the congressional committees and on bob mueller and his team to start looking at the data, looking n

we know that the russians and guccifer and wikileaks were involved in this. their argument is that they believe the trump campaign and, in particular, one individual were involved, and they've got lots of meetings and lots of information. and now, of course, their case was strengthened this past weekend with the release of the e-mail showing that senior officials of the campaign were willing to discuss getting help from the russians. so they have, i think, a solid basis for going pard aforward a seeking more information through the discovery process. >> walter dellinger, forming acting solicitor general, thank you very much for helping us understand this, sir. i did not really get the voter intimidation part of this before you walked us through it here. that's a very important part of the premise for this. appreciate you being here tonight, sir. thank you. >> thank you. >> all right. we'll be right back. stay with us. lilly. she pretty much lives in her favorite princess dress. but once a week i let her play sheriff so i can wash it. i use tide to get out tho

november 4th, trump says, "boy, i love reading those wikileaks." wow. >> when you put it all together like that, certainly starts looking like something, stephanie. joining us jane harmon director and president of the woodrow wilson center, former nine-term member of congress. good to see you again. thank you for being with us. this business of undisclosed meetings. jared kushner now on his third meeting. the number of people associated with donald trump who took meetings that were previously undisclosed. you've been involved in foreign affairs you're entire career. what is one supposed to make of all this. >> well, what's one supposed to make of that time line you just read. my answer to that is a time line is not an indictment but it's a good thing we have a special counsel looking at all this. i'm going to wait to conclude what it means until i hear from bob mueller. but on this point, if you're a candidate for office, and i certainly was many times, donald trump was not, but he was the presumptive nominee, as you just said, you have to be caref

wikileaks was not a thing when i was in government before. so my observations of it have been solely through like any american watching the news media in bits and pieces. >> i recommend you been in the private sector so you not up to speed with all these issues yet. is it your senses you are arriving to lead a critical agency that is a part of the intelligence committee probably law-enforcement agency but it has the national security division and many other relationships, is it your view that we are currently adequately investing in the cyber challenges were time? >> i don't think i know enough to make a responsible evaluation of resources. what i can tell you is my senses as much is everybody's talking about the threats of the sort that you are describing, i have a sense that we are just scratching the surface of how great the threats are or at least how great they are about to be before we blink and wake up. that is really based on what limited information and conversations i've had with people but my sense is one of the biggest change so s

but wikileaks was not a thing when i was in government before. so my observations of it have been solely through, like any american, watching the news media in bits and pieces. >> i recognize that you have been in the private sector so you're not up to speed on all of these issues yet, but is it your sense as you're arriving to lead the critical agency that is a part of the intelligence committee, it's a broadly a law enforcement agency that has a lot of divisions and lots of the other ic relationships. is it true that we are adequately investing in the challenges of our time. >> i don't know that i know enough to make a responsibility evaluation of the resources, what i can tell you is that my sense is that as much as everybody is talking about the threats, of the sort that you're describing, i have the sense that we are just scratching the surface of how grave the threats really are. or at least how grave the threats are about to be before we blink and wake up. now that's really based on what limited conversations i have had with people. but my

but i'm -- wikileaks was not a thing when i was in government before. so my observations of it have been solely through, like any american, watching the news media in bits and pieces. >> i recognize that you've been in the private sector, so you're not up to speed on all of these issues yet. but is it your sense as you're arriving to lead a critical agency that is a part of the intelligence community, it's broadly law enforcement agency, but obviously has the national security division, and you have lots of other ic relationships. is it your view that we are currently adequately investing in the cyber challenges of our time? >> well, senator, i don't think i know enough to be able to make a really responsible evaluation of the resources. what i can tell you is that my sense is that as much as everybody is talking about the threats of the sort that you're describing, i have the sense that we are just scratching the surface of how grave the threats really are. or at least how grave the threats are about to be before we blink and wake up. now, that's reall

. >> now these wikileak releases have rocked the campaign. >> wikileaks has released what appears to be transcripts of paid speeches by hillary clinton to goldman sachs. >> reporter: hacked emails became anti-clinton talking points. and many of those talking points were spread online by russian trolls believed to work in this st. petersburg building. 42-year-old marat mindiyarov used to be one of those trolls. >> reporter: everyday, mindiyarov would get a document that instructed him what to write. on christmas eve, 2014 he was told to "create a negative attitude about obama's foreign policy." so he posted photos comparing obama to hitler, portraying the u.s. as a fish about to eat the planet and an eagle sharpening his talons. he posted under the headline "can the u.s. take russia out?" on 50 websites in 23 cities. and fellow trolls "kiril ivashkin" "gennady orlov" "mike brandon" expressed the exact same thought. 600 posts from 70 fake accounts in 12 hours. just one battalion in a sock puppet army manufactured by a handful of trolls. how many identities will the workers be expected

her latest film "risk," which looks at wikileaks and julian assange, premieres this saturday >> it's a bit surprising that i do documentaries because i consider myself to be a really shy person. there's something about the documentary form that i guess it sort of-- it kind of gives you an invitation maybe to go places you wouldn't go, otherwise to take risks you wouldn't take otherwise. my filmmaking is kind of comes in a tradition of observational cinema or cinema vÉrite, where legendary founders of it, d. a. pennebaker, albert maysles, frederick wiseman, they capture human stories, they capture drama, and they capture history as it unfolds, when you talk to people and who they tell you who they are is oftentimes different than act- than their actions, so i'm interested in people's actions and choices, so, for instance, sitting in a hotel room with edward snowden as he's making this monumental decision to leak this information, is an example of the type of cinema like, that i'm interested in doing. the last two films i've done," citizen four" and "risk", i became a participant, ther

wikileaks was not a thing when i was in government before. my observations of it have been solely through, like any american, watching the news media in bits and pieces. >> i recognize you have been in the private sector so you are not up to speed on all of these issues yet. is it your sense as you are arriving to lead a critical agency that is a part of the intelligence community, broadly a law enforcement agency but also has the national security division and lots of other icy relationships, is it your view that we are currently adequately investing in the challenges of our time? >> senator, i don't the guy know enough to be able to make a responsible evaluation of the resources. but i can tell you is my sense is that as much as everybody is talking about the threats of the sort you are describing, i have the sense that we are just scratching the surface of how grave the threats really are. or at least how grave the threats are about to be before we blink and wake up. that is based on what limited information i have had, my sense is one of

the wikileaks dump. that was russia.p was designed to focus the election on that set of issues. >> trish: that didn't change the election. >> mo: it's much ado about nothing, but the press was certainly obsessed with it. just as they were obsessed with a lot of things. my point is, this is my point. all of these things, and an election as close as this one was, and it was very close. >> dagen: she expected women to vote for her simile because she was a woman and no lady in this country is buying that. >> abby: seen people take responsibility is so refreshing. at one point the -- >> mo: let's talk about russia and comey, but let's also talk about where her campaign failed to connect because that will be the blueprint moving forward. this before the mainstream media back on the attack. it shows justin trudeau and asking why can't he be our president? that magazine has a rather selective memory when it comes to the obama administration scandals. with the bias ever end? ♪ you don't let anything keep you sidelined. that's why

remember wikileaks? if you are really interested int election interference, why didn't you care that a congressional investigation found in 2014 that an israeli politicalam group used a $300,00 dobama state department grant o create a political apparatus to try to defeat our ally, our friend, the israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu? or how about the wikileaks email? a campaign ad talking about a chinese ambassador wanting to have a private off the record meeting. do you members of this corrupt media even know about these stories? since you are so interested in prosecuting people and accusing themn of crimes, let's talk abot real crimes that have been committed that you in the media so often ignore. hillary clinton, let's see. we know she mishandled and destroyed top-secret special access government information. what about a real russian collusion conspiracy? the uranium one deal. secretary of state hillary clinton, she signed off on giving up to 20% of america's uranium to vladimir putin and the ru

the way we use google is figuring out for instance what was the effect of wikileaks during the final month of the campaign? did that harm hillary clinton. what i have found using that data was that in fact there seems to be some correlation when people decided they were going to vote for donald trump and when searches for wikileaks jumped up. if anything, if you look at the national poll it might be a stronger correlation when james comey decided to send his letter to congress. i don't think wikileaks got past that much in terms of was that the biggest factor i think people were more concentrated on comey but the google data perhaps suggested otherwise. that goes back again to the question of where americans being asked about wikileaks and their polling, perhaps not as much as you might've thought. one of the things i think survey data is more difficult to get a is wire people voting the way they are? survey data polls very good at predicting his going to win and who's going to lose regardless of what people might argue. what they're not as good at is assigning reasons why that's occ

each of these plaintiffs had their personal information from dnc records exposed on wikileaks, includingly personal stuff, sexual or y orientation and social security numbers. each of these plaintiffs recounts suffering personal harm as a result of that exposure. they allege not just that they were harmed by russian government hackers stealing their information, the important part here is that they're alleging specifically that members of the trump campaign conspired with the russians to release the information that the russians had hacked. "defendants agreed with each other and with other parties, including russian government officials and wikileaks, to publicly disclose on the internet private e-mail communications stolen or hacked from the dnc for the purpose of influencing the election." this is a lawsuit not against russia but against the trump campaign for helping russia. which means this lawsuit, among other things, this is a carefully constructed lawsuit, this may end up being a new way, a whole new avenue by which we might learn through the discovery process whether the trump ca

we also know that a few weeks after this, july 22, i believe, wikileaks drops its first dump of data from the dnc. you have this coalescing of events that could be causal or coincidenceal of a meeting with a person who has data, and wikileaks all occurring within a few weeks of one another. potentially, there's significance there in that the fbi and special counsel mueller will want to look at it. on the other hand, potentially, and just coincidence and not much of anything. >> i apologize for stepping on you there. >> okay. i'm sorry. >> let me bring in lynn sweet and earlier this year going back to the time line and this information that's coming out in drips and drab, lynn, president trump said no one on his campaign met with russia. last night his son admit that he and others did meet with the russian lawyer and it was about adoption and the original purpose of the meeting wasn't about adoption, but about information that would be helpful to his dad's campaign and perhaps damaging to hillary clinton. what do you make of that? >> well, i make of it that this is slop owe the part o

in wikipedia that did not come out because of trump -- >> wikileaks. >> wikileaks, he excuse me.t we're hearing from the democrats is a violation of treason. there's no treason there. i haven't seen anybody make a credible case about that. >> what do you think about the e-mails? >> the e-mails would bother me, understand that, but however, if somebody comes up to me and they did repeatedly -- i was on the ballot 15 times -- people would always come up to you and say, i have something on your opponent. that is as routine as answering the phone in an election. i will say this. most of the time nothing comes of it. you listen because, okay, if hillary clinton was involved in criminal activities, i want to know about it, it might do me some good. if somebody said something like that, you would pick up the phone and call the fbi. adam schiff said they should call the fbi because somebody said that? that's ridiculous. >> i could see that if it was georgia in the united states, not georgia in europe. >> somebody is talking about the crown prosecutor when there is no such thing in russia

the problem i have with the democrats and republicans is spying,the nsa wikileaks, debbie washington schulz, loretta lynch -- we do not trust our government anymore. we do not trust you. you are a hack, a loser. goodbye. there is aink similar feeling for multiple people, just that they do not trust people and washington. they want to see changes to both the system and to the people here to make sure that it is being responsive to their needs. i think that goes across the political spectrum, left to right. host: as part of the package of the survey, you highlight some of these legislators that exist within these various groups. to start with the thriving group, you highlight two, a republican from new jersey, erik paulsen, republican from minnesota. individualthose legislators? what does it say about the communities? guest: it was to show that you have to have a diversity of different kinds of people in any these places.n erik paulsen is not the same kind of representative as mark meadows from north carolina. they have different folks they are appealing to, and that is why they are wi

the discussion so let me give the introduction on this one with "the new york times" because of wikileaks e-mail show the e-mail from john podesta. >> added even hear about that before all of this and calling himself political pac -- pac. >> so then is hired by "the new york times" and when he is hired you say "the washington post" and nothing to post -- but nothing to boast has stories but no mention of the recent controversy surrounding them. and then to read this passage from december 2016 so they can even undergo curtailment as part of the wikileaks emails john predestinate those face-to-face with an e-mail after sustaining criticism with his draft with the clinton campaign last about of situation. that they have various policies but then i write those do not share editorial content. so when you said did not discuss. >> but in the article i was referring to. >> but you said that but there was an article. >> so you found one that did and the others?. >> you said the articles on the promotion. but you did not mention the controversy. now you are saying that you did not mention the contr

wikileaks suggested they did not get the emails from russia.ut what we are suppose to be believing now. if you look at the email -- lou: we are supposed to believe that donald trump and his campaign organization excluded with the russians. even though we don't have a scintilla of evidence to that effect and even though we have mountains of evidence to the fact that the clintons and the russians worked hand in glove whether it's uranium ore or presidential speeches being paid for to the tune of half a million dollarsn an hour in moscow. >> you have millions of dollars flowing into the clinton foundation. while agitating against the sanctions move. and while promoting -- from the same entity that was promoting the uranium one stock which was spiraling out of control downward at the time clinton was making his speech. going back to what are we suppose to be concerned about, according to the donald trump, jr. email the russians wanted to talk -- the russians were completing with trump to talk about the collusion with clinton because they had dirt o

remember wikileaks? if you are really interested in election interference, why didn't you care that a congressional investigation found in 2014 that an israeli political group used a $300,000 obama state department grant to create a political apparatus to try to defeat our ally, our friend, the israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu? or how about the wikileaks email? a campaign ad talking about a chinese ambassador wanting to have a private off the record meeting. do you members of this corrupt media even know about these stories? since you are so interested in prosecuting people and accusing them of crimes, let's talk about real crimes that have been committed that you in the media so often ignore. hillary clinton, let's see. we know she mishandled and destroyed top-secret special access government information. what about a real russian collusion conspiracy? the uranium one deal. at secretary of state hillary clinton, she signed off on giving up to 20% of america's uranium to vladimir putin and the r

"new york times", you were not happy with the wikileaks e-mail showing at one point he sent the draft of a story to john podesta >> guest: i hadn't heard of him before all this time quoting on the e-mails. puts the colin a political hack and so he then, but then he gets hired by "the news york times," right? when he gets hired by "the news york times" i write a piece of the "washington post" michael caddyer ron writes stories without omitting any mention of the recent controversy surrounding them. if you read this passage from my blogpost of december 2015 in "the news york times" you may enter go curtailment as part of the wikileaks e-mails obtained of the clinton campaign chairman john podesta face-to-face with an e-mail he sent to podesta seeking to check his reporting. after sustaining criticism that the e-mail piper clearance of the trap of the clinton campaign he tweeted nobody controls my stories but me. i asked him about the situation and i'm paraphrasing but i asked about the situation said their publications of various policy sample at here by the policies of my publication a

what was wikileaks source?veryone had assumed that it was the russians who hacked the dnc and gave wikileaks the information. >> sean: he told me it was not russia. wiki-leaks hasn't been proven wrong in 11 years. >> now you have a possible suspect. the corrupt it guy arrested at the airport trying to leave. charged with stealing million dollars. what if he was the source to wiki leaks. >> sean: i think it's deeper than that. my theory is maybe debbie schultz didn't want to be exposed so they smashed the hard drives. >> of course. >> sean: she knows she colluded against bernie sanders. >> that's the easy part. what if they were the source for wiki leaks? what if the whole of russia-gate hingeses on this investigation. this guy whose passport has been seized and he has an ankle monitor on. what if this investigation really shows who is the source of that leak? >> sean: i talked about this all day. if you can prove disgruntled democrats were the leakers and not the russians, doesn't that blow the whole thing out

one, if wikileaks was just interested in getting the informs out, they probably wouldn't print friday night to do it but it it in the wake of the access hollywood tape release. and secondly, if they cared about transparency they would have put them all out at once. instead they dribbled them out over the course of the last 30 days of the campaign or to keep the topic of e-mails. there wasn't anything particularly sexy in my e-mails, by by the way. but to keep the topic of e-mails alive. that's why it is critical that intelligence committee investigations go on and that robert mueller is friday to do a full and thorough investigation of what happened, why it happened, were there contacts? and i think that most importantly, why do they keep not telling the truth about it? that may be the ultimate vulnerability. which is they can't seem to get a straight story out. >> right. all right, john podesta, thanks for joining me. >> okay, thanks, chris. >> joined by former assistant water gate investigator. nick, let me start with you as former water gate investigator. hearing this information a

remember wikileaks? cnn is out in front for most of this stuff. here is the most overlooked aspect. when fake news suits their purpose and their goals, they propagandize. check out this headline from "the washington times." rowan scarborough, well-known, he's talking about the fake, the discredited -- remember christopher steele? the dossier on president trump? he pointed out that the sources included a senior russian foreign ministry figure. a top level russia intelligence messenger. a senior russian government official and a senior kremlin official. they were spreading information directly sourced to the highest level of the russian government. instead ofed stopping all of this -- the dossier was passed aroundis for months and months, eventually published by buzzfeed, routinely cited by democrats who repeated the false claimsy to attack president trump. that was about the ritz-carlton and hookers and i won't go any further. it led to an investigation. the group behind this phony dossier, fusion gps. there are several ties to the democrats,s including clinton allies. the double sta

you went after wikileaks, and you did it at csis. is there anything more we can and must do? because i think really we're putting the country at risk, putting sources and messages which we help create years ago, do you have any further comments on this culture of leakage that has to stop at some point. [applause] >> charlie, there's always more you can do. one of the first things i did is the head of counterintelligence now reports directly to me. it was intended to make sure that i was personally part of making sure we were doing cia well but i wanted to make sure everyone in the organizationunderstood that it was an enormous priority. we have to get that right. and i think we can. there are things we can do inside our open buildings and in our screening process that will decrease the likelihood we have a threat from inside. and then, too, things we can do to make sure that othersaren't stealing our secrets from outside and we have an obligation to do that. it's enormously frustrating to read things in the press you now ought not be there and i hope it's the case thisgovernm

remember wikileaks? they exposed this unholy alliance between the clinton campaign and the press. there was a highly orchestrated plot between the clinton campaign, the media. why? they wanted hillary elected. the evidences overwhelming incontro varietyible. remember cnn? oh, yes, fake news. remember they gave the clinton debate team questions ahead of time. bernie sanders was railroaded, and it was a rigged prime minister. this is why that clinton was given a free pass by the media despite a mountain of evidence of felonies, crimes, wrongdoing, inexcusable behavior, and it's why now the media refuses to even cover massive scandals that you, the american people, need to know about. they don't care to search for answers. they're not looking for the truth. they have political, ideological interests, and of course that's advancing that radical all left wing agenda and hurting president trump. just take a look at this disgusting display from democrats earlier today. some of them, they've been doing this since november 9th, talking about the president, impeachment. watch this. >> so ma

>> well, you know, i believe that wikileaks -- i have always believed that wikileaks has had some connectionrussia. it's not clear if they did this time. we didn't get a chance to look at the server, they wouldn't give the server to the fbi or homeland security. i always thought they were getting their materials in the past from russia. but, as a matter of fact it doesn't take co-for the trumcrumpcampaign to mess with elections. we mess with elections. of the funny thing is i was sent in 1994 to russia by the clinton administration to get involved in their election. >> tucker: seeking what outcome? >> the re-election of boris yeltsin. >> tucker: how did that work for russia the re-election of boris yeltsin. >> not very well. when i met him he was a lion but when he left he was a souse. >> tucker: you think it was likely that they were involved. >> i think it is likely the russian government was trying get involved in the american elections because they get involved in the elections of all major elections just like we do. we may not hack, we may, i don't know, i can tell you as a fact as some

and julian assange had said the leeker of the wikileaks of the d.n.c. e-mails was not russia. it was to get a reward for the catcher of the murder of seth ridge who was a disgruntled d.n.c. staffer that was in favor of bernie sanders. host: that story has been strongly disputed and there's no evidence to draw the connection. even fox news has retracted some f its reporting on that. caller: well that this fact and it's been fought by the establishment. and russia did not hack. it was a. story concocted by john podesta and they're feeding the story to the washington and "new york times" where he worked. host: so you don't trust the intelligence community that said russia was involved in the election. caller: they're all a bunch of obama lackeys who all supported obama. all easy to guys need to go to prison. they're just corrupt as hell. and trims trying to straighten things out that i fear for his life. i fear for all our lives because he has been attacked from all sides, the intelligence, the people that were appointed by balm for eight years and the -- obama for eight years an

carol: like wikileaks.a. >> wikipedia. >> linux. >> there is many ways of reaching out to the crowd and people are still inventing them. and they are powered by the fact that we now have a digital network that connects not millions, but billions of brains on the planet in a way we've never been connected before. the leading entrepreneurs and leading businesses have found a new way to tap into that expertise. carol: but have they? i think of traditional companies we cover that have been around for decades, for more than 100 years, great brand names trying to figure out how to compete in this marketplace. those are the ones that need to tap into this. >> that is exactly right. one of the things we know from business history is when a really profound technology shift happens, the expertise and knowledge that you build of the -- that you build up in the old regime are no longer assets and could become handicaps in the new world enabled by a new generation of technology. we believe we are rapidly heading into th

the power of the trump campaign, you know questions about how the wikileaks got out and where they got these thing. this one e-mail is horrible because it's proof of attempted collusion and we have all the other thing surrounding it filling in the details. >> that's the end of conversation. thanks gentlemen. >>> sources in the trump team is paralyzed by controversy. what role is the family playing? we'll take a closer look. it's balanced... it's easy-drinking... it's refreshing... ♪ if you've got the time ♪ it's what american lager was born to be. ♪ we've got the beer. ♪ welcome to the high life. ♪ miller beer. (hard exhalation) honey? can we do this tomorrow? (grunts of effort) can we do this tomorrow? if you have heart failure symptoms, your risk of hospitalization could increase, making tomorrow uncertain. but entresto is a medicine that was proven, in the largest heart failure study ever, to help more people stay alive and out of the hospital than a leading heart failure medicine. women who are pregnant must not take entresto. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't tak

did the russians get advice about how to use wikileaks with republicans associated with the campaign is of interest now the prosecutors. and it's a question -- >> and especially with the time line tightened with all the things that happened in june, they've now learned about this meeting at the beginning of june. and suddenly everything stacks up with wikileaks announcements yrg everything. >> one of the remarkable thing about trump's victory was he won spending less money that be hillary clinton. the notion here is that a lot of messaging was done by bots. the u.s. government thinks it's russians. how did the russians know what to do? how did they become experts in the targeting of voters? it's imprecise, but you want to send messages that depress vote for hillary clinton or vote for trump. and this story suggests what we've been hearing for some time. they're looking at the possibility that there was some level of coordination between republicans and russians about how to target them. that could have take an lot of forms. >> it could be a very, very precise operation. i remember ev

wikileaks began releasing stolen e-mails.he russian government lawyer, denied that she ever promised compromising information about clinton or that she worked for the kremlin. i do ndo not represent interest of any one else except myself in the situation today. trump jr. posted the e-mails to be transparent. but "the new york times" says he released them only after hits reporters told him, that they had obtained the messages. today, white house spokeswoman, sarah huckabee sanders read a staemt from the president praising his son. >> my son is a high quality person. and i >> trump jr. said again today the lawyer had no information to provide and wanted to talk about adoption policy. but that topic is never mentioned in those e-mails. we are going to be discussing all of the things that have taken place with the clintons. i think you are going to find it informative and very, very interesting. that was candidate trump in 2016. two days before his son, don jr. met with the russian lawyer at trump tower. no one knows what mr. tru

the story from mcclatchey today that powered the trump campaign, where wikileaks got out, all these thingsorrible because it's proof positive of at least attempted collusion, and then we have all the things surrounding it that fill in the details that i think are going to start unfold more and more devastatingly in the weeks ahead. >> thank you, gentlemen, i appreciate it. >>> coming up, sources on the trump team are paralyzed by controversy. what role is the trump team playing? we'll take a closer look. it's in our nature to need each other. ♪ termites, we're on the move.24/7. roger. hey rick, all good? oh yeah, we're good. we're good. termites never stop trying to get in, we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home. if you have moderate to severe ulcerative colitis or crohn's, and your symptoms have left you with the same view, it may be time for a different perspective. if other treatments haven't worked well enough, ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works by focusing right in the gi-tract to

wikileaks helped donald trump. it helped the presidential campaign.elligence community believes they got the e-mail from russia. russia or somebody who was affiliated with the top level people in russia. they said we have e-mails that will hurt them and help you. what we need to find out, did it actually happen? was this campaign actually informed before hand that they had e-mails from john modesta and would they release they will. all we have is that be done jr. was excited and thrilled at least by the idea that there could be information throughout that would hurt hillary clinton and help his dad. >> we know some back ground too. >> we know there was discussion about sanctions. they had the meetings with kislyak and lavrov. and all the time they're talking about relieving sanctions, they're rooting for the russians to go after hillary. there's a lot of collusion out here. and for months, donald trump kept denying the russians were involved. he did it in the the debates. all that time, his people around him knew that the russians were after hillary a

we know the dirt on hillary clinton was pushed into wikileaks. we node that deal was upheld, vladimir putin is rightly upset that the trump teams are a part of the deal is not being upheld, which is relieveing the sanctions, that's obviously what was going on here. anybody that denies that is a fool. >> steve, let me ask you about the quo. when you look at this, at least the people in the meeting, maybe people are lying or not, who knows. at this point we know they have all said is the quote didn't happen in the meeting. they didn't get this amazing dirt on hillary clinton. is that significant to you? does it indicate they doesn't have it or they weren't acting on behalf of the russian government. or the russian deposit was hading back for later. what does that say to you that the quo wasn't there? >> the first part is it is much less importance that should attach to the quo. there have been a lot of analogies in terms of well, if somebody is trying to brake into your house, they're unsuccessful at it. is it still a crime? look, they took the mee

roger stone, gusafer feeding information to wikileaks who then was being amplified by roger stone who was also on the campaign. all these things point to some level of cooperation and collusion. how far it goes? this is why we have special counsel now. >>> stand by. we have lots of questions on this, more about the russian investigation. we'll be back in a few moments. here ya go. awesome, thank you. thank you. that's... not your car. your car's ready! wrong car... this is not your car? i would love to take it, but no. oh, i'm so sorry about that. you guys wanna check it out? it's someone else's car... this is beautiful. what is this? it's the all-new chevy equinox. this feels like a luxury suv. i love this little 360, how do they even do that? i made a bad decision on my last car purchase. well, your car's here. bummer... bummer. wah-wah. i'm ready for an upgrade. (laughter) jack knocked over a candlestick, onto the shag carpeting... ...and his pants ignited into flames, causing him to stop, drop and roll. luckily jack recently had geico help him with renters insurance. because all h

russian government hacked john podesta and the dnc's gmail's and just to be did what they got to wikileaksdid the trump campaign participate in that crime either by working with the russians before the hack or working with them after the hack on how to get the information distributed in a way that would most hurt the democrats? that to me is the core question that has been at the center of this controversy from the beginning. we still don't have evidence the trumump administration participated in that part of the crime. hopefully, we will learn one way or the other in a sober, rational, comprehensive way, not through bits and pieces being leaked by anonymous sources, but by an investigation length forth the case in a way we can all see the evidence. amy: glenn, we will continue this discussion after the breakfast of coming up, how the intercepts company is helping support the legal defense for the alleged nsa whistleblower reality winner. stay with us. ♪ [music break] amy: this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with nermeen shaikh. a shout out t