that contributes to ra symptoms. humira has been clinically studied for over 20 years. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. ready for a new chapter? talk to your rheumatologist about humira. this is humira at work.

. >> what does that mean for the white house? we have new reaction and details. another wrinkle in the probe. another former campaign adviser who visited russia meets behind closed doors with a senate panel. >> if that isn't a case for impeaching or removing a dangerous president, ten what has our government become? >> if you have not seen this commercial yet, you may see it soon. ly talk with the billionaire why he is spending millions building a case for impeachment. what are his expectations. the author of a book on jfk calls it chilling documents to be emerged on the killing of the president. will you want to hear what that is coming up next.

we begin in breaking news on the mueller investigation, the council reportedly filed his first set of charges, although at this point it is unclear precisely what they are. they are a part of sealed documents, which could be revealed as soon as monday. then at that point lasted more . paige will return thursday. he will meet with house intel members also scheduled behind closed doors. we are covering this breaking

story with kelly o'donnell and danny savalas and josh gir stein. kelly, can we expect any official reaction to this news? >> reporter: so far we have not. i've reached out to white house officials. no comment at this point. there are a lot of questions here. we don't know who would be the subject of such an indictment, what the charges would be. there are some big holes in this so far. but it is a certainly notable report from cnn. it could suggest a big new chaptner what has been a sprawling russia investigation. also no comment from the office of the special council, robert mueller, who has been leading this investigation for months and working with a grand jury who has been conducting its work behind closed doors in secret. >> this morning what could be a major step forward in special council robert mueller's investigation. cnn is reporting that a grand jury on friday approved the

first charges in the probe and that anyone targeted could be forced to surrender as soon as monday. nbc news has been unable to confirm the report. mueller, a former fbi director, was appointed last may to look into whether the trump campaign colluded with russia to influence the 2016 election. mueller's team has also been investigating former lobbying by former trump campaign chairman paul manafort and former national security adviser michael flynn among other, manafort and flynn's lawyers have denied any wrongdoing, be every the news broke, president trump tweeted on friday, it is now commonly agreed, after many months of costly looking, that there was no collusion between russia and trump, was collusion with hc, meaning hillary clinton. president trump's press secretary sarah sanders agreed. >> there is still no evidence of collusion between the president and anyone. all of your news organizations have spent probably a lot of money on this as well, which we would consider probably a pretty

big waste. >> reporter: but the investigation by the special council and congress is going full steam. friday, former adviser met with committee staffers for more than five hours. plus nbc news learned congressional investigators questioned president trump's former personal attorney michael cohen earlier this week over a failed plan to open a new tower in moscow. both cohen and paige insist they are being smeared by false allegations, as to the trump claims, it's the clinton campaign that colluded with russians. >> i think we are starting to now see all of the things that the democrats had accused this president of doing, they were actually guilty of themselves. >> reporter: now, there sarah sanders is referring to something that has been commonly called the steel e dossier. the washington beacon paid for some of that research in the

"never trump phase" later and notably the dnc and the clinton campaign also paid to support that research again opposition research, standard in a campaign, but this steele dossier with some very unflattering things about donald trump that have not been substantiated certainly got a lot of attention over the last several months. so it's a new development that has a tie to the clinton campaign and that conservative media outlet. >> okay. thank you, kelly for that joining me now, msnbc legal annist danny savalas. welcome to you. let's talk about the indictment in terms of overall what it means for the investigation, how big a development might this be? what is the significance of it being sealed? >> reporter: the rules allow for sealing of an indictment in very specific situations. there's a lot of talk about maybe it's sealed so that they can go after other defendants or maybe turn defendants against each other. but the reality is, the rule is very specific, and it relates to

custody, indictments are sealed, so that a prospective defendant doesn't flee or have notice of the indictment so that they would want to flee. so they're really about making an arrest. if an indictment is sealed, it's supposed to be so that an arrest can be made. over the years, however, courts and especially prosecutors have tried to expand that rule, so that they can go avco defendants or possibly seal an indictment just to keep their investigation secret for a little bit longer, but that is simply not what the rule says and the defense bar, like me, usually takes the position that that's not the correct application of the rule. so the reality is a sealed indictment tells us at according to rules that we will see an arrest very, very soon. >> so then, how quickly do things move forward from that time if terms of the time line

overall? doesn't a sealed indictment, doesn't that benefit the prosecutors? it gives more time, right? >> a sealed indictment absolutely benefits prosecutors for several reasons, first and one of the most important reasons, it hits the pause button on the statute of limitations. in fact the statute can run, if the indictment was sealed before the statute ran, then they can effectively delay or overcome the statute of limitations and by that, the prosecutors. and that's why judges should hold prosecutors to their very specific reason and make sure they follow the rules for the reason why they're sealing the indictment. so in sealed indictments absolutely enure to the benefit of prosecutors, keeping things secret and allowing them to continue their investigation, which flies in the face of the longstanding rule that court proceedings should be public. >> who do you think mueller is going after with this indictment?

could it be a name we have not heard before? and i'm just going to remind our viewers, the five names we have heard with regard to being interviewed or testifying at all, palm manafort, michael flynn, charlotteer paige, jared kushner, donald trump jr.? could it be someone other than that? >> reporter: you are asking me to handy happen this one, with caveats, this is conjecture. if you look at the low hanging fruit, very easy to violate lobbying laws the registration laws that may have been violated, and there you may have your answer. some of the lower level defendants. maybe not lower level in terms of profile, maybe very high profile. but some of the early defendants that were investigated. remember, paul manafort, they executed a no knock warrant. no knock warrants are really executed whether at fisa court or federal court when we think that evidence is going to disappear. so, you transfer that to the

fact that we now have a sealed indictment, maybe that tells us something about the defendant that they're seeking to arrest, that it's somebody they think either will abscond or maybe as we saw earlier maybe destroy evidence, but again conjecture. all of us, both prosecutors and defense attorneys are just conjectureing at this time. >> absolutely. how about the president or deputy attorney general rod rosenstein, would they have known about the before handz? >> the rules have other parts about seeming indictments, conducting -- sealing indictments, handling investigations, they have a lot to do vis-a-vis rosenstein, it's probably he briefed him, but rosenstein cannot demand mueller keep him up to date with every facet of the investigation. we can reasonably expect mueller did brief him gave him advance

notice so that he knew this was coming. >> thank you very much for weighing in on that, we appreciate it meantime, politico is saying a pesh testified last week before federal grand jury team, joining me the author josh burstein senior reporter at politico. before we get to your latest article about that realtor, what went through your mind when you heard about a possible indictment in this investigation? >> i wasn't terrible yes surprised. we have been hearing a lot of footsteps for the last couple of months as danny mentioned during that raid conducted on paul manafort's home in late july, pretty much since then, there have been rumblings when it meets, it has been meeting traditionally on friday, so it's not terribly surprising, when we get this report it would come out on a friday evening. we have been waiting for some action of this sort frankly for

the last two weeks. so it didn't shock me. >> okay. so who do you think realistically thinking would be first in the firing line? i am also looking at your report that manafort's realtor had to testify be every the grand jury this week? >> reporter: right, certainly there is a lot of urgency the story at politico talked about the testimony by his realtor. look at the time line under which all this went down. two weeks ago the realtor was called to appear before the grand jury, that's two fridays ago. he said he didn't want to appear, he had some confidentiality rules in virginia. they went to the judge. the judge took up the issue the following tuesday, the realtor was ordered to report last friday. so this is moving at quite an aggressive pace. you think about how things linger on in the court system and in the stleem, sometimes for years and years. this matter was resolved in a matter of days. the guy was put in front of the grand jury last friday. so you wonder if prosecutors

aren't trying to push something to some kind of a conclusion? >> why would mueller's team want to hear from manafort's realtor? can a deal with tied to the 2016 election? >> reporter: well, there have been a lot of reports of a very broad investigation into paul manaforts dealings, both in terms of lobbying overseas, his consulting foreign governments, foreign parties and his real estate deals here in the u.s., how he bought various condos and homes in new york city, reports of properties that he invested in, in california along with his former son-in-law, there have been numerous indications of subpoenas, of people saying they were asked for information, some of those properties, the companies used to buy them have gone into bankruptcy and there are questions about some of the legal filings in those cases, so i wouldn't be terribly surprised they would want to press anybody involved in manafort's real estate dealing, for information about the financing, what he might have said in the course of

those deals and the real store may have been a friend for some time. they lived nearby each other in alexandria, virginia. >> in terms of the multiple properties he owns, this one in alexandra, he bought a condo for $2.7 million as you reported there. how do you see the playing out? is mueller going for the big fish or the little fish first? >> reporter: i think manafort is in significant danger, certainly people close to the investigation and other lawyers representing various parties have suspected for some time there would be some action against manafort or flynn. it's also possible that there could be somebody on the 45ry who might be thinking of leaving the country for some reason. there could be a statute of limitations issue. so it could be somebody who facilitated one of these transactions, but i would think they wouldn't be picking up somebody so far down on the food chain that there would be a ho hum reaction when it's revealed. >> thank you so much.

>> reporter: any time. more reaction from people covering the white house and the reported indictment and also ahead to new information on documents on the jfk assassination, later i will talk with a jfk author who calls one particular revelation chilling. you will want to hear that. dates. you look amazing. and you look amazing...ly comfortable. when your v-neck looks more like a u-neck... that's when you know it's half-washed. add downy to keep your collars from stretching. unlike detergent alone, downy conditions to smooth... ...and strengthen fibers. so, don't half-wash it. downy and it's done.

ththe next energyngs toto power our dreams,re will be american energy. what's going on? oh hey! ♪ that's it? yeah. ♪ everybody two seconds! ♪ "dear sebastian, after careful consideration of your application, it is with great pleasure that we offer our congratulations

on your acceptance..." through the tuition assistance program, every day mcdonald's helps more people go to college. it's part of our commitment to being america's best first job. ♪

we are back with our breaking news coverage of a key development in the puler investigation. he has reportedly filed his first set of charges, they are currently sealed. but they could be revealed as early as monday. joining me is a reporter for the "new york times" and heidi br przybyl la and an sift for usa today. heidi, i know you have been in the white house briefing room all week, hearing the renewed

focus from hillary clinton coming from the podium. how do you feel this revelation is being met at the white house? duping it's with concern? do you think he might have got ap inkling it was coming? >> i don't think they had an inningling. they were carrying on with halloween festivities. the president seemed to be in good spirits. we will find before monday, if this is involving, for example, palm manafort, involving his previous business relationships, the white house will do its level best as it's been doing since paul manafort came forward as someone who was key to this investigation to distance thems from him. they said, we've seen the argument before, that he was on the campaign for a short period but the question is why now? are they trying to take a person like paul manafort and flip him?

we know a lot of the key people within the white house and outside haven't been interviewed yet. we wouldn't expect for charges leak this to be the end of an investigation, we would be surprised by that. but then secondly the white house has been in full gear trying to shift this focus off of the investigation and on to bob mueller and they have been aided in that by some of these articles, for example, in the hill about the dossier that is the basis, one of the bases for mueller's investigation being partially funded by the clinton campaign. let me just say on that point, who among sus really surprised given we knew this dossier originated as a piece of opposition research. that was reported almost from the beginning. so bob mueller is facing some pressure i think to show his investigation is bearing some fruit. >> in terms of opposition research, remember he took that meeting hoping to garner

opposition research. so that is a part of the norm, but the timing here is this earlier than expected or do we have a sense that something is percolati percolating? >> i think it's the sense something is definitely percolating. you think there were grand juries being taken towing and really with this idea that heidi said bob mueller is feeling pressure. i'm not so sure he's feeling pressure as he is scratching the surface and there are all these characters that seemingly went before federal investigators, went before federal employees and then did not provide the information that they were supposed to, so you think about paul manafort fought revealing things? it's this idea that without even having to go too deep, have you these people who have been essentially working for foreign government, with varying ties to russia who are not very hard in some ways to lock at all these pieces and say, is this is what this person is doing that's

wrong. this idea that bob mueller, when you empanel an investigation like this, even though you are supposed to be looking into collusion, anything that comes up can be fair game. i think what you see here and frankly what the president doesn't like about a special prosecutor is the fact they will go where the evidence goes. they will not be limited to just an election. they will say, okay, paul manafort. we found you were lobbying for these people. we saw you were doing these things for russia. you weren't saying this and declaring yourself in this way. so i think there is this idea that that's what's worrying the president. i think that's why you saw him lash out at jeff sessions and pivot as best they can to the dossier. they realize there might be real fire if there is smoke here. >> do you think there is real belief, heidi, someone will be taken into custody on monday? is that what's next here? >> reporter: well earthquake when you issue these, there is a reasonable expectation that there will be criminal charges file t. question is who and

when? i think she makes a good point there are so many consent trick circles in this investigation that it's possible that manafort or someone else will be indicted open charges that aren't related to the collusion tangle of this web, because that is going to be the strain we think can continue for years. also, there is the money asic to this. the collusion aspect. then there is also the obstruction of justice aspect. so it's anyone's guess at this point which one of these will fit into that frame on monday. but i think the most important thing is this can be a tool as well like she says to try and get more information, because based on what i've read, yes, it is possible, a lot of these witnesses are not giving information they may be able give at this point and they need a little bit of pushing and to see, hey, this is real, you can

go to jail. remember the reporting we ssaw, related to paul manafort the money laundry and you put toke the previous reporting which was he had already been told he would be likely that he would be indicted at some point. >> i want to pivot slightly and talk about a report i know you contributed to in the "new york times" regarding the gop smr it from president trump, you have senators flake and corker openly opposed to the president. how widespread are these feelings about the president within the gop? >> the source that i have on capitol hill and from reporting on capitol hill, there are a lot of republicans who feel like jeff flake. there are a lot of republicans who feel as though the president needs to be more presidential. >> that the party is somewhat falling a off the rails, that they're not getting things done, by the way they look bad. this idea that president trump is essentially not being the role model from the white house that republicans would want him to be. the issue is, though, those same senators and congressmen that maybe are whispering to

reporters saying, yes, i kind of understand where corker is coming from, there is this idea they have to pack constituents that back their individual senators. if you are a senator from pennsylvania. you talk about the president and come out against him, when you go home, you will face rowdy crowds asking you, why didn't you support the president? you went to washington and you are basically a part of the swamp. i think a lot of the senators and republicans are fearful of their own base, as a result i don't think you will see a lot of jeff flakes out there, that's what may reporting tells me, there won't be people like bob corker, unless they retire in ways again i don't see, i think there will be people whispering for a long time and will try to be focused. every time you talk about trump, they will talk about tax reform. >> those support bob corker's falling numbers in tennessee, thanks for weighing in. twitter and facebook under fire. executives from the social media companies head to capitol hill

next week t. questions they should expect to be asked next.

. why one man is spending millions of dollars to impeach president trump. >> that explanation after the break. how do we say that this fall,

our guests can earn a free night when they book at choicehotels.com and stay with us just two times? fall time. badda book. badda boom. pumpkin spice cookie? i'm good. book now at choicehotels.com

. >> welcome back, everyone, i'm here at msnbc in new york. here's what we are monitoring for you. breaking news in the mueller investigation, the special counsel filed his first set of charges, although at this point it's unclear what specifically they are. but the charges are a part of a sealed indictment which can be released as early as monday, nbc news has not yet independently confirmed this report. here's what a former u.s. attorney told rachel mad dough about the timing of these charges. >> i see the one things i thing he's known for, he's approaching

with a sense of urgency, we're seeing that here to have charges filed, some may think this is not very quick. it seems very quick to me, it seems unlikely they would file an indictment under seal to scare somebody. i think they mean business, i think they will use it as leverage in hopes of getting cooperation against more egregious offenders. >> joining me from the campaign legal center. i know your agency advocates for stricter rules governing money and politics. is it likely the first indictment in this overall related to money? >> thanks, it's good to be here. that's possible. the charge will investigate links or collaboration between the russian nationals and the trump campaign and that can take many forms. but if a sense, we don't need to speculate about who may or may not have been indicted by the

grand jury yesterday for two reason, one, as you mentioned, we will know soon enough, second apart from that we already know, major lessons from what happened in the last election, which is that there are huge gaps in our laws, particularly our laws about political advertising that allowed russian nationals to run thousands of ads on facebook that talked about our presidential candidates and were intended to influence our election. >> i want to ask, though, before i move to another aspect of this with regards to following the financial trail if you will, it was suggested in the last hour by e an elected official, that itself the easiest thing to follow. there is a paper trail there. there are plaque and white numbers that you can deal with. so does it make sense in the timing of this even more sense that it is going to be related to money and not necessarily russia collusion? >> well, those are not necessarily different topics. the, some of the potential links

or collaboration may have involved finances. again, i think it's hard to speculate about what may be coming out or necessary given what we already know with certainty. >> okay. i do want to get to what your center did, which is file a complaint with the federal election committee against the dnc over the steele dossier. tell us why. >> just to be clear, this is a somewhat different topic than any potential russian involvement in the election. we filed a formal complaint because it was revealed that the clinton campaign and the dnc has financed the research that ultimately resulted in the dossier, but if you look at the reports that they're required to file with the federal election commission, those, that money, that spending isn't listed anywhere. instead, it's listed as payments to the law firm on that represented the campaign and the

dnc. it's listed as payments for legal services and it seems like that was an attempt to conceal the fact that the company and the dfc were paying the firm fusion gps to do this opposition research. >> okay. so then quickly, doing opposition research is not what you are opposed to, it wasn't specifically laid out? >> right, opposition research is completely legal. the only requirement is with all spending if federal campaigns is you disclose who you are paying the money to and what it's for. that can be a basic description. most campaigns say research. the fact that the clinton campaign and dnc listed payments for legal service suggest an attempt to conceal that spending in some way. so it's a violation in terms of it being reported. not the campaign, itself? thank you so much for donjoininn

now tom desistire has his heart on impeaching trump t. ad aired yesterday. >> he's brought us to the brink of nuclear war, obstructed justice in the fbi, in direct constitution, taken money from foreign governments, threatened to shut down news organizations that report the truth f. that isn't a case for impeaching and removing a dangerous president. then what has our government become? >> after its airing, president trump tweeted four minutes later, wacky, and totally unhinged, tom steyer, who has been fighting my make america great, never wins elections. >> here joining me is to him steyer, welcome to you and the president has called you out by fame. what is your response? >> oh, my response, is that it's really not about me. what we're trying to do is give a chance for the american people

to raise their voice together in opposition to this president. and that's exactly what's happened over the last week and i think that his response tweeting about me shows that, in fact, we've struck a chord. we've struck a nerve and that it upsets him. but the fact of the matter is the american people have a right to raise their voice, have a need to raise their voice and that's exactly what we're trying to enable. >> i want to ask you this latest major development the mueller investigation, why not wait and see who is indicted and what the outcome of these charges may be? >> well, i think the mueller investigation doesn't really change anything. it throws fuel on to a fire that's already burning. and shows the kind of lawlessness this administration has exhibited from the very beginning. but the fact o. matter is, it's our opinion and it's my strong opinion that this president is a danger to the american people, that he is putting the health and safety of americans at rick

and that, in fact, she attacking the american people from his post at the white house on almost a daily basis so we really can't wait for the investigation because he's already a danger and he's met the basis for impeachment. >> so this ad, where did it air, tom, where do you think the president saw it and do you think you will convince viewers of president trump's guilt? >> i think we have been putting this ad over the last week on a variety of channels around the country and i believe that he saw it on fox, but this ad really isn't about convincing americans about the president's guilt. what this ad is a request to americans to join us in raising our voices together to demand that elected officials take a stand on impeachment and what we're seeing is an incredible outpouring from the american people because this president

scares them. they are incredibly anxious about what he's doing and the attacks that he's perpetrating against them. so we're seeing, this ad isn't about convincing anybody. it's really about trying to give americans an action they can take together to raise their voice to say, really what's going on here is absolutely unacceptable and has to stop. >> tom, do you have concerns at all that this will be counterintuitive to what you are saying there and will actually mobilize and solidify donald trump's base even further? >> well, alex the way that we see this is not through a katrina tickal political lens of trying to figure out exactly what's going to happen. what we're trying to do here is to tell the truth. we're trying to give americans a chance to tell a very bake truth that i think everybody really knows. i think all those elected officials in washington, who

won't say a darn word about it know for a fact that we're telling the truth. so we're not really trying to calculate politically what this is going to mean? what we're trying to do is the right thing, give americans a chance to speak up together and not worry about the results, because we believe that if we do the right thing as a people, that's what we have done in the past. we haven't asked what are the results going to be, we've tried to focus on really doing the right thing and trying to accomplish good things together as a country. that's the history of america. that's what we think we're doing. >> but how loudly will this be heard? because as you know, tom the few reports showing the republican national committee has raised a record setting $100 million this year, there is another report that political ad spending during the mid-terms will be in the billions. so how does your $10 million campaign, while not insignificant, how is it going to hold up to that? >> i just don't think this is about money, alex t. fact of the matter is everything you are

talking about is the money they're going to spend, the money they've raised. what we're trying to say is, the greatest power in the united states is the voice and the will of the american people. if the money from right wing ideologues and people who really want tax cuts for the rich is going to outweigh the values in the hearts and minds of the american people, then we have come to a terrible place. and that is exactly the point we are trying to make. it is the voice and will of the american people that is supposed to run the united states of america, not the dollars of the richest americans. >> all right, tom steyer, it's great to have you on. i understand you are an environmental activist. i'd love to have you back to talk to me about that next time. >> thanks. nothing from the president on the charges, what will he say neighborhood, coming up on "am joy" two mu accusations on capitol hill, but are they a political vendetta?

i love to eat. i love hanging out with my friends. i have a great fit with my dentures. i love kiwis. i've always had that issue with the seeds getting under my denture. super poligrip free. it creates a seal of the dentures in my mouth. even well fitting dentures let in food particles just a few dabs of super poligrip free is clinically proven to seal out more food particles so you're more comfortable and confident while you eat. super poligrip free made even the kiwi an enjoyable experience try super poligrip free. ♪

now to the report a federal grand jury in washington approved the charge by robert mueller. joining me now is a republican strategist, deputy communications director and welcome to you both, jonathan to you first, what are you hearing about all this and how bag deal might this be? >> well, it's a very big deal because what it indicates is that when donald trump says this is all a hoax, it's all fake news, you now have the person with the most integrity, the public figure with the greatest amount of integrity, the greatest stature, bipartisan stature in the whole country, robert mueller who is going to bring indictments on monday. it doesn't matter so much who gets indicted. nobody can remember who the first person indicted in watergate was. there are many strands to this investigation. what's important is that it's on. this has begun and this idea

that you see on fox all the time this has much ado about nothing is no longer going to be true on monday. >> lauren, what happens in the president claims there is nothing to this? ? >> reporter: well, i disagree with jonathan a bit. i do think it matters, obviously, because it's a sealed die. we don't yet know who is going to be implicated in this. we don't what the charges are. i absolutely disagree. i think it's important that we figure out exactly who these charges will be brought against, what they're going to be what they're going to be charged with. and what role, if any, you know the president had. i happen to think if the president had any idea about anything regarding, you know, anything with russia in his campaign, i think we would know already. i don't agree that, you know, it doesn't matter who these charges are brought against and what they are. i think there is a lot of speculation out there right now.

i think we need to make sure we understand the facts, take it slowly and go from there. i also do think, though, it's good we have this conversation. we do feed to get a handle on any sort of foreign influence in our election process, you know the washington post reported earlier this week, we know the democrats were dishonest regarding their role in the fusion gps situation and what ultimately resulted in the dossier that we all have been talking about this week. i do think we need to have a broader conversation about any sort of foreign entity having to do with anything in elections in our country. >> i think everyone agrees on that if we learned the person last night was a big player on the trump campaign, what happens then? >> well, you know, this could go in so many different directions, this could turn into a money laundering case, a collusion case, there could be unrelated business interests that are drawn into this, which happens often in an investigation. it's not likely to be the end of it. because these indictments are coming fairly early in this

process, it could be that they want to put pressure on the person or persons indicted for a plea deal. go after the higher-ups. get some people to drop a dime on some other folks so we don't really know and a lot of speculation at this point doesn't do very much good, but i was interesting to hear that suddenly we have seen this all week on fox, it was kind of even steven-ism, like hillary clinton's campaign was doing just as bad things, now, it's true that it's not good that they didn't disclose as properly as they should have that this money was going for op research, nothing wrong, should it have been disclosed? absolutely. but that's a pimple compared to what's potentially going on on the trump side. so there are many, many strands

to this investigation and it's basically going to be the opening bell on monday. >> when do you expect we will hear from the president, lauren? >> reporter: well, you know, i think we'll wait to see. you know, likes to go directly to the people on twitter. i think we're all aware of that. it's possible we could hear from him over the weekend. i think he would be better served by waiting to see just exactly what this indictment is, who the charges are brought against what they are. you know, i have a suspicion it will come up in the white house press briefing on monday at the latest. i think we'll wait and see. i think it's important to not get ahead of ourselves, wait and see exactly what charges will be brought on monday. >> i think your suspicions are 100% right on regarding that press briefing. guys, thank you very much. >> thank you. the most chilling aspect of the jfk files released according to the author of a book about the assassinated president.

to n audiobook on audible. and this guy is just trying to get through the day. this guy feels like he can take on anything. this guy isn't sure he can take it anymore. unwavering self-confidence. stuck in a 4-door sedan of sadness. upgrade your commute. ride with audible. dial star star audible on your smartphone to start listening today. there are 130 million girls around the world who are not in school today. girls are not in school because of economic issues and they have to work. there's early child marriage, there's war and conflict. at the malala fund we help girls stay in school. there are some really amazing people around the world doing incredible work. the malala fund invests in education champions who work in the community and do advocacy and pave the way so that girls can actually go to school.

to have the expertise of our financial partner, citi, guiding us is very important. the fact that citi is in countries where girls are vulnerable ensures that we are able to get funds to the people that we're working with and expand with great confidence. when girls go to school we're going to maximize their talents. we could have a solution for climate change in that girl. that girl could be the next nobel peace prize winner.

or a little internet machine? it makes you wonder: shouldn't we get our phones and internet from the same company? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet. you get up to 5 lines of talk and text at no extra cost. so all you pay for is data. see how much you can save. choose by the gig or unlimited. xfinity mobile. a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit, or go to xfinitymobile.com.

new intrigue this week after the thousands of documents related to president john f. kennedy's assassination, including a memo from then fbi director j. edgar hoover. joining us is the author of the kennedy half century. let's look at what hoover wrote. the thing i'm concerned about, and so is mr. katzenbach is having something issued so we can convince the public that oswald is the real assassin. >> yes. >> hoover wanted americans to believe that oswald acted alone. why? >> starting with lyndon johnson, alex. it wasn't just hoover and people in the justice department. the context, of course, was the cold war. the context was the bipolar system we had in those days. the u.s. versus the soviet

union. johnson and others were deathly afraid that the american public would glean enough information to believe that either the soviets or the cubans, the communist cubans, fidel castro, were somehow behind the assassination of president kennedy. in so the pressure for invasion of cuba, which might have led to nuclear war, would have been intense. that's what they were concerned about. legitimate concern, but in the light of history we also understand that it brings questions to the forefront. did we really get the whole story in the warren commission? the answer is no. you mentioned cuba. there's been a lot of speculation around lee harvey oswald's trip to mexico city. he visited the embassies of the soviet union and cuba at the time. what did you learn about mexico? how was the cia involved? >> the cia had the embassies tapped, both the cuban embassy and the soviet embassy in mexico

city. oswald visited both. that's one of the justification that's intelligence community used back then and even now not to tell us the full story because those taps were installed with the direct help of the mexican government that was in the '50s, '60s, i think we can get over that maybe they don't. we don't fully know what the intelligence services here and elsewhere knew about oswald's trip to those embassies. i can tell you it's one of the rosetta stones. we have to understand it to interpret oswald. what is this thing, the most chilling thing you say you've seen? >> there were loads of documents. would have expected the most chilling to come from the unite. it's been known for some time that a british report ner caer cambridge received a telephone call at 12:05 in dallas, the

president was assassinated at 12:30. what did the caller say? you better call the american embassy, there's big news coming out of america. did the reporter make it up? british intelligence doesn't think so. they investigated it. the mi 5 said the reporter was trustworthy. that's kind of eerie, don't you think? >> yeah, i do. >> thank you for that. good to see you. >> thank. coming up at noon, al green on his confirmativersation with carson. we're back after a break.

and the wolf huffed and puffed... like you do sometimes, grandpa?

well, when you have copd, it can be hard to breathe. it can be hard to get air out, which can make it hard to get air in. so i talked to my doctor. she said... symbicort could help you breathe better, starting within 5 minutes. symbicort doesn't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden symptoms. symbicort helps provide significant improvement of your lung function. symbicort is for copd, including chronic bronchitis and emphysema. it should not be taken more than twice a day. symbicort contains formoterol. medicines like formoterol increase the risk of death from asthma problems. symbicort may increase your risk of lung infections, osteoporosis, and some eye problems. you should tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. symbicort could mean a day with better breathing. watch out, piggies! (child giggles) symbicort. breathe better starting within 5 minutes. get symbicort free for up to one year. visit saveonsymbicort.com today to learn more. looking for a hotel that fits... whoooo. ...your budget?

tripadvisor now searches over... ...200 sites to find you the... ...hotel you want at the lowest price. grazi, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor. . that's a wrap of this hour of msnbc live. it's time for "am joy" with my friend, joy reid who has the latest on the reported charges in the mueller