i want to read from "the new york times." he said, "we were interviewing" -- talking to maggie haberman and mr. schmidt of "the new york times." he said, "we're interviewing replacements at the fbi. did you know mueller was one of the people that was being interviewed?" haberman, "i did, actually." trump, "he was sitting in that chair. we had a wonderful meeting." haberman, "the day before, right?" schmidt said, "did he want the job?" then trump says, "the day before, of course. he was up here and he wanted -- he wanted the job." haberman, "he made that clear to you?" "he would have." trump says, "now what happens is he leaves the office, rosenstein leaves the office. the next day he's appointed special counsel. i said what the hell is this all about? talk about conflicts. but he was interviewing for the job. there were many other conflicts that i haven't said but i will at some point." chris, is he laying the groundwork there? >> oh, yeah. and, frankly, has been, don, for a long time. i remember talking to you a month or two

are there any consequences for "the new york times"? i know it's a freedom of speech issue, freedom of the press. is there anything that can be done if it can be proven that they are actively putting lives at risk. >> you can see this is happening in a broader context, not just the administration written large but particularly the commander in chief. president trump has taken a very aggressive stance towards the media, the attacks on twitter and elsewhere particularly against "the new york times," in attacking some of the reports as fake news. it's happening in that context of a very divisive time and there's nothing to answer your question directly specifically the administration can do to stop the publication of this kind of a story. but you're right, there's a push and a pole, there's a traditional fight. there is that broader context where we as journalists want to publish as much information as we think the public has a right to know about and certainly the times tried to make that case in their june report. i suspect now they're g

history book or novel from the rapid news cycle. >> editor of the new york times book review my life with bob. booktv visited the new york times and we did a profile of the book review. go to the web site you can see the entire interview. in the morning show. this is an hour long event. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> good evening and welcome to the strand bookstore. i'm nancy. i am the owner of the store along with my dad. my dad worked in history, my grandfather found at the store and

york times." >> you're presuming he reads "the new york times." i assume that he has it read to him or perhaps has the chirons on fox read to him that are about what's in "the new york times." he doesn't read his daily briefings. he definitely doesn't read "the new york times." i suspect that maybe they hoped this would somehow fly under the radar for him. so many things do. like, you know, certain facts about the global economy for instance. you know, whether or not health care is complicated. he's not a curious man. i think perhaps the only reason -- again, the only reason he's finding out about this now is because there's been reaction to it. and he definitely like monitors his twitter feed, i think more than he reads any particular newspaper or briefing book or classified intelligence. and i find actually the idea that he didn't know about this meeting to be the single most plausible detail of this entire story, that his campaign principals were out having high-level meetings with him not knowing about it. i mean he ran for president as basica

consider this package in "the new york times." mr. kushner supplemented the list of foreign contacts three times, adding more than 100 names, people close to him said. so people close to jared kushner are telling "the new york times" about jared kushner updating his security clearance application. team kushner is obviously an invaluable set of sources for "the new york times." but people in the white house presumably on team trump continue in the giant battle of the secret sources with "the new york times" to try to make the president look better than jared kushner. here's how "the new york times" describes what jared kushner told his father-in-law about his meeting with natalia veselnitskaya. mr. kushner played down the significance of the meeting and omitted significant details according to two people who were briefed on the exchange. they said mr. kushner informed the president that he had met with a russian foreign national and that while he had to report the name, it would not cause a problem for the administration. now, there's

>> guest: i'm editor of the new york time book review and a oversee book coverage at the new york times which extends from reviews in the sunday book review tour daily critic to reporting on the industry, to profiles and features. we try to cover really not only what the latest is in books, but also to cover the way in which books intersect with the largest culture and the news in general. >> if someone gets the new york times separately can you read just one or do they come in a series? or if you pick up one is it like -- street. >> i think of the book review serves multiple purposes. ideally it's to tell you what is in the book had to give you a sense of the writing and to offer some kind of judgment. i also think a book review is an art form. there is a certain writing that takes place in literary criticism that you would not get in the rest of the news report or even in feature of a book. criticism is an art form. so often my hope is people are not just looking at a book review to decide whether not to read the book but also appreciating that piece of writing in its own right. frank

york times. >> reporter: "the new york times" and "washington post" reporting that the president's lawyers and aides are lacking to undermine the special counsel's investigation. "the times" says trump's team is skewering the professional and political backgrounds of robert mueller and other investigators, looking for conflicts of interest they can use to discredit the investigation. "the post" also reporting that the president has been asking about his authority to pardon aides, family members, and even himself, in connection with the probe. attorney general jeff sessions refusing to answer questions about whether he's discussed pardons with the president in testimony before congress last month. >> i'm not able to comment on conversations with high officials within the white house. >> reporter: all this as the russia investigation appears to be widening. bloomberg reporting that mueller is expanding his probe to include a broad range of financial transactions involving trump businesses and associates. >> would that be a breach of what his actual purview is? >> i would say yes. >> reporter

maggie haberman from "the new york times" with our breaking news. i want to bring in cnn senior political analyst mike preston. michael isikof for yahoo! news. and cnn political analyst, april ryan. thanks, everyone. mark, what's your reaction to this breaking story from maggie h haberman in "the new york times"? >> wow, again, this a story, don, that's just broken in the last 60 minutes or so. again, another shoe has dropped and really the story that the trump administration can't shake. now, we have to be very careful and not use words such as "collusion" yet or "illegal" because we don't know necessarily. >> this is from three sources from "the new york times" and they were read these. so i don't think -- i don't think maggie has seen it or whatever. i think they were read this information. but go on. >> well, correct, but, again, we don't know where the investigation is going to go, but where there is smoke, and in this case, it's billowing smoke, you have to look for fire. so just for the opponents of donald trump should be careful about how th

>> i am editor of "the new york times" book review and oversee book coverage at the new york times which extends from reviews in the sunday book review to our daily critics to reporting on the industry to profiles and features. we are trying to cover not only what the latest is in books but also to cover the way in which books intersect with the larger cultural and use in general. >> if somebody gets the sunday new york times or subscribes to the book review separately can you read just one or do they come in a series? if you pick up one is that like a short story of its own? >> a book review? yes. i think a book review serves multiple purposes. ideally it is to tell you what is in the book and give you a sense of writing and offer some kind of judgment. but i also think a book review in and of itself is a kind of art form. there is a certain writing that takes place you would not get in the rest of the news report or feature about the book because criticism is an art form. my hope is that people around just looking for a book review to decide whether or not to review the book but also a

let's start with tonight's "new york times" story as opposed to to today's "new york times" story. how much does this read like a game changer to you. >> i think it's really serious. and when you think about what president trump has done for the last year which is basically deny that anything was going on with russia, there is no russian involvement in the hacks, and in an attitude that was very, very strange. his seeming coziness to the russian bear was a great concern. now we're getting more and more details. there are a lot of threads here. this thing is coming unraveling very fast. >> talk to me about the danger of putin suggesting and trump even considering, let alone mentioning in public, this joint cybersecurity task force. you're on armed services. it always struck me that if it had been ken itic warfare if someone fired so much as one shot by way of the cyberwarfare that had been warfare that had been committed we would maybe treat it with more urgency and be better as our defenses counteringing that. >> what do you playbook of it. >> what i make of it is an president that

matthew, i'm just wondering what you make of this reporting by "the new york times." does it change anything? >> well, i read the article very carefully, and it's based on three people with knowledge of the e-mail and i think david is right. i think it's very dangerous to speculate as to what the facts are or are not. but it is concerning heading into that meeting if he did know this was regarding information that had been created, you know, allegedly by the russian government, i think that's concerning. but at the same time, you know, david points out a really key piece, which it still is not evidence that there was any crime committed and i still don't think it's enough to suggest there's some conspiracy or otherwise to violate either election laws or espionage laws. >> matthew, is there some obligation that a member of a campaign -- i mean if you are approached by an entity from a foreign government, which, you know, obviously we all know the history between the united states and russia, is there some legal obligation to report that to others? if a foreign actor --

york toou"new york times" wd a lot about this. >> it's the frustration. and i think he would have liked to have had, of course, i would, too, jeff sessions right at his side, but jeff recused hilmself which i think was the proper thing to do at the time, or that would have been another story. so i would put this in the context of president trump's frustration with everything russia, every day, including today, one day after his six-month anniversary of being on the job. and here we are talking about it. >> but i mean, as someone who was an early supporter of president trump, like jeff sessions, you were, both you and jeff sessions right there supporting publicly the president, do you ever fear that the president will publicly turn on you? >> the president and i have a very unique relationship. and no, i have no fear of that whatsoever. first of all, i'm not in the administration. i'm right where i want to be. on the energy and commerce committee in congress. so, no, that thought that has clearly never entered my head. he and i get along very well. >> cong

he's doing rogue interviews with "the new york times." he throws his own appointees and congressional majorities under the bus. sean was the most active public defender, most lawyer person in the press shop and was replaced by a guy unqualified for the job. trump listens only to himself and protects only himself. gop needs to protect itself. focus on agenda. and winning in 2018. president needs them more than they need him. >> it depends on the definition of qualified. >> yeah, it depends on that definition. i think what i would keep an eye on going forward now is what happens with the white house lawyers. was kasowitz the last straw with what happens to the legal team. >> and hallie jackson is joining us on the phone, our chief white house correspondent. the players keep changing day by day. and your beat, and here we go with a whole new team as communications director. and then presumably there will be a new press secretary. >> yeah, and i'm tip toeing my way out of a throng of people. you have been showing a live shot, i'm going to ste

with "the new york times" in particular, he's a creature of new york. he grew up with -- in a place, in a town that revered and still reveres "the new york times." he has a relationship with some of the reporters that goes back many, many years. i think that is probably the answer. i think, what you are getting at is a very important notion, which is the president had a pretty good day yesterday. he came out with leadership, finally, on health care, politically and in terms of substance. he called all of the republican senators to the white house. he was both tough and kind of, you know, fun and irreverent and got them talking again on a major, major policy issue. senators, because of that meeting were on capitol hill burning the midnight oil to find a deal. he take that is steering wheel that was going on the right, you know, on the right road and he turns it off, into, i wouldn't say a ditch, but definitely a side road that many people did not want him to go on. they wanted him to stay focused. >> it detoured, if you will. >> perfect word. thank you f

should we kick off with the new york times, the russian allegations? it is interesting, because it has come to the heart of donald trump's family, that is one of the most stringent points for him. it is, how your personal life infringes on your working life generally. especially when you are president, his daughter attending meetings just this week, courting controversy again. his son with russia, was it really the right thing to do? disclose these e—mails on twitter? are you clear about the legality of this? the fbi chief has said the first thing he should have done was in form the fbi. this is political campaigning, which especially in the united states, it isa especially in the united states, it is a tough and dirty business. especially in the united states, it is a tough and dirty businessm really is. the lobbying and the pr spin is also a huge. one of the things this article says is that the criticism that donald trump's fun has faced has left donald trump very protective as a parent. but you can't have it both ways, you can't put your family as

. >> breaking news tonight. a blockbuster report from the "new york times." nbc news reporting tonight, "the washington post" explosive report that the president of the united states is currently under a criminal investigation for the obstruction of justice. >> how america learns about this major scandal as the white house shrinks from public scrutiny. "all in" starts right now. >> good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. this president tells so many lies so oven that news organizations are now employing entire teams of fact checkers to document them for posterity. and because it is so hard to get the simple and most basic truth from the administration, much of what we now know only came to light in spite of the white house. take for instance the saga of michael flynn. the first inkling there was something sketchy about the trump foreign policy adviser and his relationship with russia came a year ago through republican national convention when yahoo! news chief investigative correspondent pressed flynn on a trip he took to moscow for the 10th anniversary

this in a stunning new report this morning from "the new york times." details ahead. >>> 16 people killed in a marine corps crash in mississippi. a huge debris field, no survivors. many questions this morning. the fbi on sitement the latest information we have just moments away from a devastating scene in leflore, mississippi. >>> welcome back to "early start," i'm dave briggs. >> i'm christine romans. 30 minutes exactly past the hour. up first, not only did donald trump jr. meet with a russian lawyer, there is new reporting this morning that don jr. was told the russian government was directing her efforts to spread damaging information about hillary clinton. that is according to "the new york times" citing three sources familiar with an e-mail sent to trump jr. that e-mail reportedly says the information about clinton was part of a kremlin effort to help the trump campaign. >> yeah. the e-mail was written by british publicist rob goldstone, an entertainment business associate of the trump sr. with connections to moscow. although goldstone suggested th

comey also declined comment to "the new york times." president also offered us his version that have chat he and vladimir putin had over dinner at the g-20 summit. "i went down just to say hello to melania. while i was there i said hello to putin. pleasantries more than anything else. it was not a long conversation but it was, you know, could be 15 minutes. talked about things. it was very interesting. we talked about adoptions. you'll recall the subject of adoption was the cover story for meeting donald trump jr. hosted at trump tower and speaking of the president's eldest son, the senate judiciary committee wants both him and paul manafort to testify at an open hearing next wednesday. the committee's also asking both for documents related to information from russians about hillary clinton. for his part, jared kushner will appear before the senate intelligence committee on monday though that would be in a closed session. after all that, let us bring in tonight's starting panel, one of the three "new york times" journalists who intervie

ready, once upon a time a rico lawsuit was filed in new york city. we think of rico lawsuits as relating to the mob usually. but it's actually a broad definition basically rico laws get used against people who are participating in an organization that is engaging in criminal

the "new york times" reporting donald trump jr. met with a russian lawyer after being promised damaging information on hillary clinton. this happened during the campaign last june he says, shortly after president trump clenched the republican nomination. in a statement to cnn, donald trump jr. does not deny this meeting happened. he says it was arranged by an acquaintance he knew from the 2013 miss universe pageant which was held in russia. he did not know the name of the person he would be meeting. also at the meeting, jared kushner and paul manafort who was president trump's campaign manager at the time. now a member of president trump's outside legal team tells cnn tonight the president was not aware of this meeting and did not attend. we're getting reaction from the man who ran hillary clinton's presidential campaign a short time ago. i spoke with robby mook. watch. >> first of all, i think we need to start asking ourselves, and i think in particular republican leaders in congress need to start asking themselves at what point d

new york times," here's another quote that we can show you. when he was asked specifically about the investigation and if it would cross a redline. mr. trump said "i would say yes yes." he would not say what he would do about it, he did say i would think that's a violation. look, this is just about russia. >> for now, this is the president venting his frustrations, so he's venting his frustrations, he is not actually asking jeff sessions to resign. maybe he will, maybe he won't. this is him venting his frustration at the special prosecutor, robert mueller. he's not asking for him to leave, or resign. maybe he will, maybe he won't, but there is a difference between the president venting and the president acting. so far, he's just venting and it's interesting and compelling, it gives a real window into what he's thinking, but again, there is this difference that is very, very important at this moment. >> heather: t think the news to jeff sessions, was that new information to him that received via this near times interview or he probably had hear

"the washington post" and "new york times" reporting that mr. trump's team is investigating possible conflicts of interest involving mueller as well as mr. trump's pardon powers. bloomberg is reporting the special counsel is expanding his investigation into the president's business transactions despite president trump calling his own family finances a, quote, red line, earlier this week. "the washington post" says the president has expressed concern that bob mueller could access his tax returns. the white house says president trump has confidence in attorney general jeff sessions, after a remarkable public rebuke of him in a "new york times" interview. sessions says he plans to stay on the job. at least two people are dead and several more injured after a 6.7 magnitude earthquake rocks turkey's coast in the nearby greek islands. a parole board ruling in favor of o.j. simpson. the 70-year-old former football great could be free as early as this fall after spending nearly nine years in prison for an armed robbery conviction. for more on the five t

the president told "the new york times" he regrets ainterest poing jeff sessions. when a president expresses no confidence in a cabinet member, then that cabinet member owes the president his resignation. when a president does it publicly, which is something we just have never seen before, then that cabinet matter really has no choice from that minute forward, absolutely no choice. here is some of "the new york times'" audio recording of what the president said. >> sessions gets the job. right after he gets the job, he recuses himself. >> was that a mistake? >> well, sessions should have never recused himself. and if he was going to recuse himself, he should have told me before he took the job, and i would have picked somebody else. >> had you -- >> zero. so jeff sessions takes the job, gets into the job, recuses himself. i then have -- which frankly i think is very unfair to the president. how do you take a job and then recuse yourself? if he would have recused himself before the job, i would have said, thanks, jeff, but i'm not going to take you. it's extremely u

but as soon as this interview posted tonight at "the new york times," "the new york times" also posted in their business section a big news story about deutsche bank, which is the president's biggest lender. deutsche bank has an unusual financial relationship to donald trump. as david k. johnston and other financial reporters have documented, when other banks, when almost every other major bank would no longer do business with donald trump and the trump organization, deutsche bank continued to, and he -- they remain his largest lender. deutsche bank is also on the hook to tune of hundreds of millions of dollars in fines for their role in russian money laundering schemes in recent years. but according to the "times" tonight, banking regulators are reviewing hundreds of millions of dollars in loans made to mr. trump's businesses through deutsche bank's private wealth management unit. which caters to an ultra-rich clientele. the "times" is citing three people on the review not authorized to speak publicly. the regulators want to know if the loan might have exposed the rank to heightened r

as we absorbing this information from "the new york times." they report citing an e-mail that ahead of the meeting which took place last june which was reported on by the times, the kremlin backed lawyer and basically the top of trump campaign, his campaign manager and son-in-law and eldest son donald jr., before that meeting took place, the business acquaintance who arranged that meeting sent an e-mail to donald trump, jr., informing him explicitly that if they were going to get compromising information about hillary clinton from this meeting they should know that material was from the russian government and part of a russian government effort to aid his father's candidacy. congressman schiff, one of the things that was reported by "the new york times" in their initial story of this this weekend, was that this meeting they had discovered evidence of was first disclosed by jared kushner when he revised has application for a security clearance. apparently he's revised that application multiple times now. they then said that paul manafort had al

we visited "the new york times" a couple years back and we did a profile piece on "the new york times" book review. if you would like to see that, go to the website booktv.org and you will be able to watch the entire thing.

york times" an -- >> you are not getting ahead of "new york times" and this story at this point in time. the advice i would give him, his good lawyers give advice, shut up. basically you have a justice department investigate going on. you keep feeding him. whether or not you should have met with him or not, you have given the case to make this thing go on for months, and months. political perspective everything in the tweet will give some democrat opportunity to stand up to hammer this administration. it is a terrible, terrible distraction. trish: in other words it looks like in those emails that he was willing to take any help he could get from them? >> absolutely. bottom line, my counsel, first of all, three characters who are in the meeting, two of whom know a lot about nothing relative to politics. one knows a lot of about politics, manafort, certainly very questionable in his judgment, in his dealings, should have been a lawyer in the room. reality, probably shouldn't have the meeting but certainly should have a lawyer there basically, that would be my advice on everything from her

i don't know who the source was, but given the fact that it follows on "the new york times" story, as well as "the washington post" story, saying how senior aides were shocked that sessions had agreed or wanted to stay on his job. this certainly makes it much more difficult. the question of how appropriate it is is something he's going to have to address. he clearly wants the job, anderson. i think he's going to put up a good fight before he walks away. >> adam, i know you may not be able to know this, but is this information that the president of the united states would already have known based on his access to intelligence? or because it's part of the russian investigation? >> i don't know the answer to that. i would be surprised if that -- if this information is -- it wouldn't be widely shared. again, i think as president, i'm sure he could have access to this. but i'm not sure how far it's distributed and to whom. >> carl? >> let me say two things. one, the president can ask for this intelligence and it would not surprise me if he did. particularly if he's intent on getting rid of

way, he wants to like be a part of the conversation with the failing "new york times," right? to rope them into his delusions. i want to say i think we need to be careful in reading too much into this. i think we can psychoanalyze trump all we want and it's fascinating. but i don't know how much bad behavior mueller is going to find. and even worse than that, looking at the behavior of the house of representatives, the republicans there, and of trump supporters, i don't know what mueller would have to find in order to disillusion them. i'm not sure if there is something. the kinds of things that he's going to find, connections with the russians perhaps, you know, funny stuff with taxes, are the kinds of things that i've already heard trump voters dismiss as something that they almost already expect to be there, and they don't mind. the kinds of things that are going are going to bother trump voters are when he does not follow through on promises, which by the way he is doing now. i made a joke earlier he wasn't doing anything to help or hurt obamacare. i meant him personally.

york times interview. >> glen, something he did admit in "the new york times" interview was about that g20 conversation with vladimir putin where he said, yeah, we talked about adoptions. that's not very veiled language for sanctions. >> yeah. adoptions equal sanctions because it's part of the -- it was his retaliation for legislation that was passed in the u.s. here is what's also really interesting. remember the initial press release, which was much wrang he would over that was put out by done junior after he took this meeting said all they did was talk about adoptions. so here is something interesting. >> yeah. >> you have a person that don junior met with that they say are not associated with the russian government, yet they're talking about exactly what vladimir putin brought up during a 15-minute conversation with the president directly. those two statements don't jive. and i suspect we're going see a resolution of that. thank you very much. stay with us. coming um, we're going to talk to a key senator about the current state of play on the healthcare bill s. plus, does the presi

"the new york times" reports that donald trump jr. took this meeting because he was promised damaging information about hillary clinton. >> and it wasn't just trump jr. that showed up. he brought others. significant others, son-in-law jared kushner, son-in-law to the president. and also then campaign chairman, paul manafort. the admission is a full 180-degree turn from a statement hours earlier when donald jr. said the meeting was to discuss the issue of russian adoptions. so there's a lot to unpack here. what does this mean about the trump team's willingness to accept help from russia? we're covering all angles of the story here in the united states and in moscow. let's begin at the white house with suzanne malveaux. good morning, suzanne. >> reporter: good morning, john and poppy. the white house is in full battle mode, pushing back hard on this story. a full development we saw over the weekend first reported by "the new york times" that donald trump jr., in fact, did have a meeting with a russian national during the campaign, that

that's what "the new york times" is reporting. then donald trump jr. said it had nothing to do with the campaign. if it doesn't have to do with the campaign, are they just meeting about russian policy? there's a lot of questions about why he would take this meeting at this moment, bring in such big power players on the campaign to talk about adoption in russia. that seems a little weird. >> i want to go back to what donald trump jr. said. he does acknowledge that he went into this meeting believing that he was meeting with an individual who i was told might have information helpful to the campaign. so he went in not knowing he says he was going to meet with, only that this was arranged by an acquaintance 2013 miss universe pageant. this story breaks shortly after president trump returns from meeting with vladimir putin, vowing to work on a more constructive relationship with russia. how significant could this moment be for the trump presidency? >> well, it is potentially large, we keep finding more information all the time. today, on the sunday show, l

"the new york times" told him so. when the times first broke the story over the weekend, trump jr. called it a short introductory meeting that primarily involved a program about the adoption of russian children. that was the first statement. the next day, donald trump admitted an acquaintance told him the individual he was meeting with people that might have information for the campaign. trump jr. said, i love it. what a tangled web we weave. john roberts live in paris where the president earlier marked bastille day with his french counterpart. anything we're learning about the new revelations, john?

>> guest: i hated of the new york times book review and oversee books covered at the "new york times" which extends from reviews in the sunday book review to our daily critics, to reporting on the industry to profiles and features, sort of trying to cover really natalie with the latest is in books but also to cover the way which books intersect with the larger culture and with the news in general. >> host: if somebody gets the sunday new times or the book review separately, can you read just one or do they come in a series? if you pick a point is a like a short story of its own? >> guest: a book review? i think a book review serves multiple purposes. ideally it steatite what's in the book, to get a sense of the writing and offer some kind of judgment. i also think a book review in and of itself is a kind of art form. there is a certain writing that takes place in literary criticism that you wouldn't get in the rest of the new support or even in a feature about a book. because criticism is an art form. often my hope is that people are not dislike for book review to decide whether or no

i guess, why would you care with "the new york times" thinks? "the new york times" hates him. "the drudge" report, an aggregator, one of the biggest on the internet, an early champion of trump. now in the last couple of weeks, it seemed hostile to trump. that would be a real concern for me if i was running a political operation. losing people who supported me as a sign that things are going in the wrong direction. to think they know that? >> certainly the white house was not happy that this was reported in the last day. being blindsided by this interview and then trying to have damage control. he took the 52 senators to task and reminded them what their responsibility and promises were to the american people. that was all destroyed in a matter of hours by this interview. when you give an interview like that to the enemy? "the new york times"? no friend of yours? that's what they were doing, the president took the bait. he has received the brunt of terrible, terrible article. it will now take some time frame to get back on track. the president has to realize that you can be fru

headquarters here in new york. >> ready, once upon a time a rico lawsuit was filed in new york city. we think of rico lawsuits as relating to the mob usually. but it's actually a broad definition basically rico laws get used against people who are participating in an organization that is engaging in criminal acts. typically that's the mob but it could be other stuff, too. in 2011, a rico lawsuit was filed in the southern district of new york about an alleged financial scheme that involved a whole bunch of ukrainians and russians and one guy who ended up running the donald trump for president campaign in 2016 and he denied having anything to do with it. and the suit ultimately did not succeed, but it has -- the terms of that lawsuit, the scheme that was alleged in that lawsuit has continued to resonate in the news for a few years now. and right now, with tonight's news it is ringing like a loud bell on a cold night. the scheme sketched out by this lawsuit, this rico lawsuit said that vladimir putin's russian state run gas company made a ridiculous deal with a ukrainian oligarch, and t

that came through in the "new york times" interview. without sessions fighting his fight, without his lawyers being out there in an aggressive way, he thinks he has to be the spokesman and the warrior at the same time. >> rose: what happens to jeff sessions as attorney general? >> it is an intrigue drama within the trump administration. i've covered the now attorney general for a long time, back to his senate days and he was the ideological core for what trumpism became in 2015 and 2016, this populist nationalist fusion of conservative politics and activism and anger, it's often credited to steve bannon the chief whitehouse strategist but in fact the attorney general sessions has been cultivating these kind of political themes for a long time. he was the first senator to endorse trump during the campaign. that's why he was first in line to be appointed attorney general. and he was important in the early days of this administration, shaping the executive action on immigration, helping the president think through criminal justice policy.

just ahead, more on the breaking news from donald trump's interview with "the new york times," warning special counsel robert mueller not to delve into his family finance that's he says are not related to russia and said he wouldn't have appointed jeff sessions if he knew sessions would recuse himself. it's here, but it's going by fast. the opportunity of the year is back: the mercedes-benz summer event. get to your dealer today for incredible once-a-season offers, and start firing up those grilles. lease the e300 for $569 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. >>> "the new york times" conducting a wide ranging interview with donald trump. he said he would not have hired jeff sessions had he known he would recuse himself. emthat robert mueller's investigation had the leash on it if donald trump feels it goes too far or delves into his family finances. there could be some finances unspecified. and he talked about the extra meeting that he had with vladimir putin. and we want to discuss that aspect of the interview now. joining me, former u.s. amb

of this "the washington post" and the "the new york times" bombshell, too. and i think this could be an administration that is a bit worried about what they could be hearing if they do agree to testify. you hear the president talking about red lines last night, there are warning signs -- >> in fairness, he was asked by "the new york times," they used the term red line, he agreed to it. it was not just -- >> he could have said i'm not going to talk about red lines but he said anything that is related to my business, and therein lies the issue. because a lot of this russia deal does go back to his business interests, his sons boasted about it, in fact talked about the meeting that donald trump jr. had last year that involved russian businessmen that had apparently some inside scoop on hillary clinton. so it does go back to russia, whether or not the president wants to acknowledge it or not. >> one important thing to keep in mind, the white house was adamant that the investigation is on russian meddling. that is true, but you also have to go back and look at th

, this new bill, yet i'm reading the interview he did with "the new york times" where he's talking about entitlements and i want to share a quote where he says, you know, you're 21 years old, you start working and you're paying 12 bucks a year for insurance and by the time you're 70 you get a nice plan. it's as though the president has a very sophomoric understanding of how health care works. so is the president your advocate here? is he helping you sell this? >> i think the president's helping us on this issue and a host of others. i think what has to happen is congress has to do what we said. again, we make this job way too complicated. i know what i told the voters in the fourth district of ohio. i know in crawford county i get -- today there is not one single plan offered in the exchange, not one plan if you live in crawford county, ohio. so i know what's happened to folks. i know what i told them i was do. that's what i'm focused on accomplishing. i think the president is doing the same thing spop let's simply do what we said, do what the american people sent us here to accomplish.

report now maggie haberman reporting in the new york times and it is really something that certainly shows intent to collude with the russian government and that is a giant turn in this unfolding story this morning sobered up. everybody still talk about russia. well let's try to get to the heart of this and cross live now to our tease caleb moore pin in new york hi there caleb well the story has been circulating for several days now but child union has just released a new statement what more can you tell us. well it all started over the weekend when the new york times came forward with allegations about a meeting that took place between donald trump jr and gerald cushion or and a russian lawyer now the new york times in their report they alleged that this meeting in taken place because there had been a campaign had been promised dirt on hillary clinton and they furthermore said that this russian lawyer had been working with the kremlin now as we continue to to see the facts come out the only source that was ever cited by the new york times was confidential government records and it t

post" is reporting on "the new york times" on their cover. how significant is this "new york times" report? how does it change the argument? >> it's a big story because we have an instance here of a tangible piece of evidence that points in the direction of what this entire narrative has been about all along, right? trying to demonstrate some sort of link, some piece of evidence between the trump campaign and russian actors, be they state actors themselves or people doing their bidding in an effort to influence the election. this "times" story has a lot of delimiting information. we have to be careful about that. there are gaps we have to fill. there are things we can take away based on the story that we know. one of those things is that donald trump jr. supposedly entered the meeting not under the pretext that it would be about kremlin-linked information to help his father in the campaign, but that was the actual point of it. it didn't seem terribly ambiguous. we heard that donald trump jr. said that we talked a lot about the russian adoptio