yourself somehow some days. >> my last question, where does john bolton figure in? >> he is now the number one mustache in the west wing as we know. and president trump very much a strin brenner guy, believes everybody should be clean shaven. i think if bolton would go here, i tell you, the iranians would fold like that, they would be entlald with the handle bars. >> thing they call that game face. chuck todd thank you very much. wishing you a good evening. i will tell you what is leading our broadcast tonight. bob mueller dialing up pressure on trump with a new subpoena threat. that's big deal. meanwhile, trump reshuffling his criminal defense team. and breaking this hour, one of trump's accusers filing new subpoenas in court. we twin with ty cobb out. this news comes after the reports that mueller is ready to fight fire with fire. telling the white house for the first time that if they won't have donald trump, the president, testify voluntarily in this probe, that bob mueller

will then try to force donald trump to testify with a possible some. with cobb out, emmet flood is in. he is a veteran litd gator who defended bill clinton during his impeachment. he also served in the bush white house. cobb was the good cop in this mueller probe. he calmed trump. he turned over documents. he was by all accounts the most cooperative lawyer on the team. now he is gone, which means the team is less cooperative tonight than it was last night. that's the first takeaway. this also previews where the fight could be going, the trump white house arming for a potential bruising fight with mueller. high stakes. and there are people who would argue donald trump doesn't have to testify at all. bill clinton took that position but ultimately testified in the ken starr probe. we are seeing signs of gearing up for a fight with the

executive privilege. one summed it up, who do you want on your side if mueller decides to subpoena the president? you want your wartime consignaturely airy. emmitt is a quintessential wartime consignaturely airy. look. here he was in an interview just this morning, his last interview about this change. >> it's certainly not off the table. and people are working hard to make decisions and work toward an interview. and assuming that can be concluded favorably, there will be an interview. >> trump loyalists are increasingly arguing the opposite. they are saying there isn't a way from donald trump's perspective, to meet mutualer in the interview room favorably. it's too much risk, too little reward. and that's why this whole fight could be headed right to the supreme court. i'm joined now by california congressman ted liu. he serves on the judicial

committee, as well as prosecutor harry lickman. thank you for being here. i start with you. what does it tell you that bob mueller is using the subpoena threat? >> it tells me thing at least reached something of a stalemate. i don't think it is a permanent stalemate. i think in part the threat of a subpoena is meant to the make the talks revive because the reports we have now are a month old and things are come to a stall. but i think they will return. yes, he has played that card. i don't think it is a thunderbolt from heaven. everyone has always known that's part of the rules -- >> you can go there. >> he said the words and pretty much made it clear. and i think that's just meant to say let's get serious here, guys. do you want to try the work something out or not. >> trump's former adviser steve bannon is speaking out on this. as you know he is a widely respected legal expert -- no, he's not but he is a political guy with input on the white

house. he says cobb was a mistake, totally incompetent, in over his head, obsessed with the concept of waving executive privilege. failed to realize there would never be could never be a special relationship with mueller. i would say what bannon doesn't know about the law he makes up for in what he knows about political brawling. if this is an administration that is not looking to be saved by the facts the way you would sometimes when you have an innocent client and you say i am really confident about putting all the facts out there, they are turning to a brawl, what does that view from bannon on the brawl say to you. >> first of all, plig in flood he's the first guy remotely capable of having the kind of fight that you describe. it's not just aggressive but the chops to bring a court challenge from the district court to the supreme court. he's heads and shoulders more capable than anybody who has been in in that regard. look like they are focused on a possible court battle and they

are actually bringing in as you say a consignaturely airy. >> on the subpoena issue, nixon lost in the supreme court on a similar argument he couldn't be subpoenaed for the tapes. bill clinton ultimately testified. i want to talk about the politics of this rather than just the legal issues. politically if donald trump really wants to sell to the american people that he did nothing wrongen in what does he have to hide? why doesn't he go and talk and have the interview? if he doesn't want to do the interview it suggests he is trying to hide information. in terms of executive privilege they had witnesses inhe can vog it all the time in that's various committees by saying they are going to invoke the executive privilege. they never did, but then they wouldn't answer the questions that the congressional committees have. >> they would not invoke executive privilege. as you said, the republican controlled congress was not calling them out on it and they were able to answer only the questions they wanted to answer.

>> they used that essentially as a dodge? >> absolutely. >> when you mentioned u.s. v nixon. this goes to a big question. harry, are you comforting getting really boring with me. >> yes, i am. >> i'm kidding. this is important. >> should we make our voices slower. >> this is important. u.s. v nixon, everyone knows in at least the broad strokes nixon lost because people remember things went to the supreme court and he was out. if you are worried about presidents breaking the law that seems to stand for something good. but it's more complex because u.s. v nixon can either stand for the general notion that presidents aren't above the law. okay. or it can stand for a much narrower legal principle that when congress creates a different mechanism to hold the president accountable as they did then with the congressionally authorized prosecutor, that that can be taken all the way up to the supreme court and you can get that evidence, right. whereas, there is an argument on trump's side that this is different because it is a

different type of prosecutor and they would argue this is essentially a debate within the executive branch and they could argue that they could win even with u.s. v nixon. your view. >> first i am a nerd. this is exciting to me. i'm not bored at all. i agree completely. there is the other distinction which is the u.s. versus nixon, nixon was brought to heel in terms of producing evidence. clinton v jones brought to heel in terms of a civil deposition. >> deposition. >> u.s. v trump would be the first time anybody says you have got to show up for a criminal trial and testify with you are really on the line and your presidency is on the line. he will have arguments to make. i think at the end of the day the court will side against him but people who are seeing this as open and shut i think are overreading u.s. v nixon and clinton case. >> which is striking coming from you, i think. i want to get your views as well congressman. i also want to add in another special legal expert voice we have here. former u.s. attorney guy lewis

who worked with bob mueller, james comey, so knows some of the players. let me start with the conferring we are just having. on one hand u.s. v nixon seems like bad news for a president on the run. on the other hand it is narrower than some of the issues that would be presented in a u.s. v trump. >> harry is 00% right on this in that -- 100% right on this in that there will be a fight. i do not think these changes, especially in trump's attorney today, are indicative of anything but okay let's gear up, let's put our helmets on, let's suit up and we are going to fight this thing. look, you look at this president's past history, litigative history. he's no stranger to lig. and how many times do you see him reaching across the aisle saying you know what, let's find

a middle ground? let's have some consensus here? it is a to the going to happen. he's going to fight this every step of the kay way. i think this thing is -- >> you sir -- guy, you are sort of making legal news or news for nerds because you know a lot of the law here and you know a of the will of the people. as i mentioned, including mueller. you are predicting tonight based on what happened today, that this fight over donald trump testifying is going to go all the way to the supreme court? >> i do. and again, you -- a good point. look at mueller's background. mueller is a former marine. he is born and raised in the department of justice. he was the chief of the criminal division when i was trying noriega down here in miami. and he was aggressive as all get-out. he supported us 100% of the time, every step of the way. and it's like the movies that you watch, the old world war ii. when you tell the marine to take the hill, he's going to send in

wave after wave after wave. and it's going to get very aggressive and i think messy. >> well, i believe the saying is the army never leaves their wounded and the marines never leave their dead. bob mueller isnd staing shoulder to shoulder with every panel he created as a team. let me play the greek chorus of 2018, if you will, which are donald trump's friends, enablers, and loyalists on the news trying to speak to him directly through the camera and say don't do this interview. >> would you let donald trump talk to this team that mueller put together? i would never allow it. >> absolutely not. i think he would be in a better position challenging this legally than sitting down with the special counsel and answering that list of 40-some-odd questions. >> i would say as i have said to other clients, if you want to go down there, i'm going to go stand in the door and you are going to have to go over my dead

body to go down there. >> i am a recovering lawyer, but it doesn't take lawyer the know that the central lesson on watergate is that no one is above the law, not the president. not anybody else. and there is nothing in the constitution that says the president needs to be treated differently when it comes to routine things like interviews with a prosecutor. and also keep in mind that deputy attorney general rod rosenstein and robert mueller are very aware that the president might fire them. yet they have very strong statements with rosenstein saying the justice department would not be extorted. mueller threatening to subpoena. which tells me they have got really strong evidence. they believe they have got a really strong case. i think that's why they are acting this way. >> guy, do you share that analysis? it's certainly true that rod rosenstein who ultimately is mueller's boss and the key decision maker on what mueller does that becomes public outside of the indictments themselves has been as someone who follows

this to my mind stronger in public this week than we have ever seen him. >> i agree, ari. i think rod gives a wit about the threat of being fired. i think mueller could care less about the threat of being fired. these are two guys that are going to do under job. and they are going to call it like they see it. and they are aggressive prosecutors. they have been aggressive prosecutors. and i think they will continue to be aggressive prosecutors. >> guy lewis, congressman ted liu, and former federal prosecutor harry litman an interesting piece of news an and law school. we thank you. coming up, donald trump is threatening to get involved and use the powers of the presidency against the justice department it self. we also want to dig deeper given all the news today about what the clinton precedent would mean for the mueller talks. i'm going to speak to the lawyer who questioned bill clinton and the lawyer who defended bill clinton. we will give you both sides of the law later on tonight.

also, a new action in court from one of trump's accusers. they are tonight using court subpoenaed attempts to get the long lost tapes from the apprentice. and tony schwartz. coauthor of the art of the deal on what happens when trump gets corner. you are watching the beat on msnbc. ♪ ♪ so is his horse. ♪ ♪ when it comes to snacking. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ that's why he uses the chase mobile app, to pay practically anyone, at any bank. life, lived victor's way. chase. make more of what's yours. advil liqui-gels minis. breakthrough in pain relief. a mighty small pill with concentrated power that works at liquid speed. you'll ask... what pain?

advil liqui-gels minis. (gasp) (singsong) budget meeting! sweet. if you compare last quarter to this quarter... various: mmm. it's no wonder everything seems a little better with the creamy taste of philly, made with fresh milk and real cream.

with the creamy taste of philly, ♪ with expedia you could book a flight, hotel, car and activity all in one place. ♪ you wouldn't accept from any one else. so why accept it from your allergy pills? most pills don't finish the job because they don't relieve nasal congestion. flonase allergy relief is different. flonase relieves sneezing, itchy, watery eyes and a runny nose, plus nasal congestion, which pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. and 6 is greater than 1. start your day with flonase for more complete allergy relief. flonase. this changes everything.

breaking news tonight from a lawsuit related to one of donald trump's most high-profile

accusers. now subpoenaing roar records from the apprentice television show for what she says is necessary evidence to prove what donald trump defamed her. she accused trump of sexual misconduct in the run up to 2016 election. this is after the release of those infamous access hold tapes. he called hadary liar he said during the campaign he would sue her and other women. he never did. deserve owes did sue alleging donald trump defamed her in part by calling her a liar in public. here's the latest news. ed to her lawyer is requesting these subpoenas for archival apprentice footage, all documents video or audio that contained deserve owes or donald trump speaking of her. they are also subpoenaing any recording in which trump speaks of women in a inappropriate or sexual american.

-- sexual manner. joining me a former clinton campaign aide and liz plank. what do you think of the significance that it was donald trump who claimed he would initiate these lawsuits, didn't, and now is suffering the brunt of one of them against him? what these tapes could have on him? >> i said this before but i think that silencing women is the worst mistake donald trump ever made. there were 19 women who accused him of various sorts of sexual misconduct. if they are lying it's what donald trump did in reaction to that that he is now possibly going to be paying for. the thing that was totally acceptable that menused to do a tul time in a pre-me too era

calling these women liars no longer works. if i may quote drake since i am on your show -- do i have your permission? please. >> bury me now and i only get bigger. every time he tries to bury -- >> i'm speechless. >> every time you try to bury one of these stories, stormy daniels, karen mcdougal or deserve owes he only made the women more powerful and made this story go less and less away. >> jess? >> i meanean i completely agree. i would take a moment to contextualize the me too movement. 19 people came out and said this man sexually assaulted harassed me. we had the access hollywood tapes of him admitting to such behaviors and he faced zroer repercussions. he stood on the stump and declared they were too ugly to

be sexually assaulted. he declared he was going to sue them for defaming a. then he became our president. the me too movement we are looking at is a direct response to the inker and the outrage that women across the country felt with watching that man get away with it. what is the best thing is that it appears he may not in fact get away with it. the moment he spawned by doing the thing he did and trying to at the time out of it the way he did means these new -- there are new thing that come out on the tapes once they get subpoenaed. if we hear new things, more allegations if we reair some of the things that were aired during the campaign it is going to happen in a very different universe than what is playing out in 2016. >> i think you are speaking to a very important point which is there is a sort of jurassic park locked in amber aspect to a lot of the political conventional wisdom analysis that says if donald trump got away with something through at least the

electoral college vote once in 2016 then everything flies. but you walked us through every to the contrary to that. this subpoena seeks any recording in which mr. trump speaks of women in a sewell nature in a time in our society where some of those things are shifting and there may be more accountable. we will play what the access tape said in a 2018 lens. >> i'm going to use tom tick tacks in case i start kissing her. i'm automatically attracted to beautiful -- i just start kissing them. like a mag threat. just kiss. when your star they let you do it. you can do everything. >> whatever you want. >> gri grab them by the [ bleep ]. do anything. >> liz you said earlier maybe all 19 women were lying and cases do resolve things. the whole thing is to keep an

open mind within each case. but donald trump's main defense to all of this has not been to say across all the board, well these things happened so be it. it has been to maintain a denial and a fake news counter-attack against anyone and any person, in many cases any woman who brings these allegations forward. >> right. he also claim that the tape isn't real. right? which i don't even -- i mean -- it's like olympic -- it's like the olympics of making up stuff. so obviously that tape exists. we just listened to it. and obviously what he said on that tape, many women confirmed actually happened to them. coming back to the news that we have today, the fact that the subpoena is going to be you know sort of encompassing not just what he may have said about summer deserve owes but about other women i am excited to hear and will not be surprised if he has said other thing about other women and what kind of

repercussion also come on that. >> a quick note on repercussions. >> yeah. >> summer's lawyer is gloria allred who of course just won the only conviction currently. whenever you hear someone saying me too has gone too far, i want you to know there has been only one conviction. if i were donald trump i would be very, very scared. >> right. and summer has a legal team with multiple lawyers as you mentioned. gloria started this off with her in 2016. it was also, if we are going to get into the weeds, it was counter-suits of defamation against mr. cosby that initially led to the disclosure around the quaaludes that then led to the criminal case. you are both making -- go ahead. >> in the same way, the cosby allegations were out there. people knew them. in the same way that before the me too moment we were talking about this stuff. we knew it. we simply as a society didn't care to treat these women like

their stories mattered. we are in a different place now in 2018 than we were in 2016 when it first came in. >> right. and to end on the same song we began with from liz, wait for the kicker. maybe we'll keep waiting for the kicker. thank you both. jess mcintosh and liz plank. coming up, donald trump is threatening the justice department directly with new calls for rod rosenstein to step aside. what's the gop doing about it? former senator russ fine gold joins me. also, will all of this lead to a mueller face to face? i am going to speak to two lawyers who have been on both sides of a president under oath. stakes don't get higher. what does donald trump do when he is cornered? does the way he fights dirty spreading across our nation. tony sha warts joins the beat live tonight exclusively. next.

(passenger) what are you doing? (driver) i can't believe that worked. i dropped the keys. (burke) and we covered it. talk to farmers, we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ capdynamic lightingrs elevated comfort powerfully efficient and one more thing the world comes with it ♪you can go your own way... the 2019 jeep cherokee if you have moderate to severe or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently.

for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ♪ otezla. show more of you.

with pg&e in the sierras. and i'm an arborist since the onset of the drought, more than 129 million trees have died in california. pg&e prunes and removes over a million trees every year to ensure that hazardous trees can't impact power lines. and since the onset of the drought we've doubled our efforts. i grew up in the forests out in this area and honestly it's heartbreaking to see all these trees dying. what guides me is ensuring that the public is going to be safer and that these forests can be sustained and enjoyed by the community in the future. now we turn to something

special on the beat tonight. two insiders who led the very fights that are in the news tonight. a prosecutor under ken starr who questioned president clinton under oath. and one of clinton's most prominent lawyers who was there throughout these legal fights including that testimony. this fight played out over six months in 1998. independent counsel ken starr and his team were trying to get clinton to testify before a grand jury. there was a big fight. a subpoena delivered in july and clinton ultimately giving in 12 days later. >> the president has been subpoenaed by the independent counsel. >> his lawyers back in washington were preparing to negotiate with independent counsel kenneth starr for his testimony. >> he is said to be insisting on the right to question the president in person. >> the president will testify about his relationship with a former intern under oath and on tape for the grand jury. >> so first we furniture to assault wisenberg who questioned president clinton as deputy independent counsel under ken

starr. thank you for coming on the beat about this. >> thanks for having me. >> did you know in the leadup to that that president clinton would ultimately testify voluntarily after getting the subpoena? or was in athat a genuine quest in your office as it may be in mueller's tonight where you thought you would have to litigate it out. >> once we decided to issue the subpoena we didn't really have any doubt that he was going to testify in some format. and we had the authority of u.s. versus nixon we felt behind us. we also thought politically he wouldn't be able to do it. but there is an important thing about u.s. versus nixon that should not be forgotten, particularly in the case of president trump n. u.s. versus nixon, the supreme court thought it was very important that leon jaworski, the special counsel, had these specific authorization to contest executive privilege. that was in the federal regulation that controlled him.

bob mueller does not have that authorization. so there is a real potential legal argument the trump people can make saying this isn't a justicible issue because mueller does not have the right -- it is an intraranch dispute. mueller does not have the right to question my implication of executive privilege. >> you says justice shl and intrabranch. you know you are getting me excited. >> [ laughter ] >> this is something we were discussing at the very top of our show tonight. and you are putting your finger on it, which is does u.s. v nixon stand for the proposition that no president is above the law which would be good for mueller forcing him or does it stand for something narrower which requires congress to give that and during which they could go all the way to the supreme court? >> i think there is no question it stands for the proposition that nobody is above the law and

that the courts say what the law is. my point is a narrower one that as a procedural matter president trump's team could come in and say i'm sorry we are invoking executive i have were. bob mueller doesn't have the authorize under the regulation to contest that. i don't think -- if trump does it i don't think mueller is going to fold his tent up and go away. he could argue i have that authority inherently. knowledge it is a legitimate point he could make. >> right -- >> in the case of president clinton. >> go ahead. >> in the case of president clinton, ken starr was the independent counsel. there was no question he had the authority to litigate the matter if the president would have challenged it. of course, no court had ever held you can can subpoena the president for his grand jury testimony but i think it's certainly implicit in both the u.s. versus nixon and in the paula jones case. >> right. that's why we are literally back

where we were in the starr matter as you say with some different authorizing power but we are back to the fundamental questions of our constitution and what branch wins. i want to play now your very historic cross-examination of bill clinton there in that video deposition. take a look. >> would you please tell the grand jury what that oath means to you for today's testimony. >> i have sworn an oath to tell the grand jury the truth. and that's what i intend to did. >> mr. president, were you physically intimate with monica lewinsky? >> when i was alone with miss lewinsky on certain occasions i engaged in conduct that was wrong. >> parts of that are you and parts of that are your colleagues. of course there is a whole team that questions the president. but viewers can see there that was a president who was a careful lawyer a former state attorney general, reading from the piece of paper which was how he wanted to define what he did.

contrast that to the potential witness you would have in donald trump. and do you think based on what you know, that donald trump would pose more risk to himself perhaps than bill clinton did in that? >> i think it's not so much that trump will pose a risk to himself because he can be prepped. i think he's done a lot of depositions and he's very smart. the problem is, the clinton team pretty much knew what we had when he came in for his testimony. there is a lot of stuff that bob mueller has and knows about that president trump has no idea of knowing. and so that's what is so dangerous. but you bring up another interesting point -- or the clip brought it up. this could be a press department that trump might want to cite. recall president clinton did not answer all the questions that we had. >> right. >> he didn't plead the fifth amendment with you he said some of these are too private and i'm not going to answer it. we felt that we had enough and

we didn't challenge him further but it's certainly a precedent that president trump can cite. >> interesting. saul wisenberg one of the few people alive who has questioned a president in a grand jury proceeding. thank you for coming on the beat. >> my pleasure. now i turn to bob bennett. he's a high-profile attorney who was on the other side of that as president clinton's personal lawyer in the paula jones case. my thank to you as well. based on everything you just heard, what do you think of your former long distance at ver adversary's points there? >> i don't totally disagree with him. i agree with him on much of it. what you have to remember is bill clinton is a very unusually capable witness. i don't think mr. trump is. i think a critical point that he made was that we knew

everything, really everything that might be asked and had prepared answers at the various stages. i don't think that's the case with mr. trump. so i think he would -- -- >> what do you think -- let me ask you this. what do you think about something in a a lot of trump defenders say and that he has tweeted about, for what it's worth, which is the argument that if there is no high-level collusion provenible at least on the part of the president and that the whole thing turns to obstruction that can by way of analogy look a little bit like what some of the clinton folks said about bill clinton which is he ultimately admitted to things that many people thought were wrong and objectionable but there wasn't an underlying felony and to the extent the argument was about obstruction it wasn't enough. what do you say to that? >> that doesn't make any sense. obstruction is a very serious offense. and i think the big risk to president trump is many of the

underlying offenses might be very difficult to prove. but if he's under oath and he gives a false statement then he can be in serious, serious trouble. i think it's much riskier for donald trump to testify than it was for president clinton. >> we went digging through the archives and we found donald trump talking about the whole jones case you worked on because he was, you know, always talking. take a listen to this. >> i think his lawyers and in particular the lawyer -- i won't even mention names, but representing him with respect to paula jones i thought did a terrible job. i'm not sure they shouldn't have taken the fifth amendment, i don't get along with this man starr, he is after me. he is republican, this, that, i think he should have taketon fifth amendment.

it is not a good thing for the president to take the fifth amendment but he probably should have deny it. >> what do you think of that. >> it's absurd. what you have to understand is you have to have a strategy and a he will goal. our goal -- i was working closely with white house counsel, lloyd cutler, a great, great legendary lawyer, was to win the 1996 re-election and keep the president in office so he could fulfill his term. and by every analysis, we concluded that if the president refused to testify, that would be very harmful and would put ate risk our strategy. and what happened? sure, there were some scars. no question about it. but the president was reelected. the president served his term. and if he ran again today, he would be reelected.

>> well there you have it. spoken like a zealous advocate but you raise a point that's very relevant, which is that if donald trump does ultimately start a court fight or another battle to avoid testifying which would be different than clib even if people who love trump would say if he can talk everywhere and tweet all the time why wouldn't he want to talk to mueller. still ahead, how trump's new attack on bob mueller could be putting the probe on a collision course with congress. before that, the coauthor of the art of the deal, tony schwartz is with me when we are back and live in 90 seconds.

hey! we didn't have a homeowners claim last year so allstate is giving us money back on our bill. well, that seems fair. we didn't use it. wish we got money back on gym memberships. get money back hilarious. with claim-free rewards. switching to allstate is worth it. the kayak explore tool shows you the places you can fly on your budget. so you can be confident you're getting the most bang for your buck. alo-ha. kayak. search one and done. i'm all-business when i, travel... even when i travel... for leisure. so i go national, where i can choose any available upgrade in the aisle - without starting any conversations- -or paying any upcharges. what can i say?

control suits me. go national. go like a pro. when someone is cruel or acts like a bully you don't stoop to their level. no. our motto is when they go low, we go high. >> michele obama famously called for the high road. it was appealing as an ethical argument but it was also associated with the obama family's unquestioned political success. now, politics clearly rewarding a different approach. donald trump won the electoral college with lower road than a lot of people thought possible. in trump's art of the deal he states when people treat me badly my general attitude has been to fight back very hard. we are about to explore in a point with the coauthor of that book, tony schwartz. he issued today trump's dirty approach is being rewarded and

even mimicked. he argues this is actually testing our values as a nation as we reckon with a barrage of cruelty. >> now the poor guy, you ought to see this guy. i don't know what i said. i don't remember. >> on carly fiorina telling rolling stone look at that face, would anyone vote for that? can you imagine that? the face of our next president? >> maxine waters a very low iq individual. >> although we have a representative in congress who they say was here a long time ago, they call her pocahontas. when trump is pressed on these comments he will often default to claiming these are jokes. many people don't consider them funny. and they point out each if it is a joke, he has power, and this is very cruel. the larger question we want to explore tonight right now is whether this style is eroding civility across the board. there was only of course politics in the reaction to this

white house correspondent's dinner moment. >> i actually really like sarah. i think she's very resourceful. like she burns facts, and then she uses that ash to create a perfect smokey eye. we are graced with sarah's presence tonight. i have to say i am a little star struck. love you as aunt lydia in "the handmaid's tale." >> i'm joined by tony schwartz, the best selling of the author of the way we work is notworking. i want to explore with you not the predictable partisan overdrive we action that was very blue/red, et cetera to the comments. but the deeper point you are reaching towards, which is when cruelty is rewarded, what do we as a society do about it? >> well, you know, i think what we have lost over the last two

years in this trump era is the recognition that our values are fundamentally -- they are embodied values, our lived values are the content of our character. they are who we are. and two of the values we hold most dear i think or the most universal are honesty and compassion. and those two are -- neither is represented in trump. and i think that the problem is that he's dragged the dialogue and the focus on those two core values to a level that drags all of us with him. that's my concern. >> as you know tony, because you have worked more closely with him in an expressive capacity writing the book than most people have. what he does, though, if i may is he das tarredizes the consent

of honesty and says that he is actually just being more honest than others by saying, quote, unquote, the cruel things that other people really feel. and for that point i want to apply for you one of his first far rays into politics in new york city, where you are, with ed koch, where he went further than most people would about the mayor in new york's tough enough rhetorical town but then he says these are my feelings, i'm just being honest. take a look. >> in the letter i told mr. trump that i would not be granting him the exemptions that he desired. that letter aroused mr. trump's ire. >> there is a gentleman in new york who is disloyal. >> you are talking about the mayor of new york, aren't you. >> i am talking about the mayor yes. >> you called the mayor a moron, is that any way to talk about mayor. another person. >> i'm expressing feelings. that's the way i feel. >> that's the way i feel. how do you counter that sort of

pc defense of what you call cruelty? >> well, what binds us together as a civilized society, that's -- what civility serves is the willingness, the capacity to be both truthful and compassionate and a number of other values. and without them, we lose our safety, our sense of safety, our sense of security, our sense of trust in one another. and civilization doesn't hold together any more easily or naturally than democracy does. so when you begin to debase the most core values that every contemplate of tradition has valued, we are in -- we are at a point where we sit faced with chaos. and certainly at a minimum with a sense of fear and anxiety about what is going to happen next. >> let me show, for context on

this, because we were looking at it, most people in the country -- this goes beyond party -- think that the civility has gotten much worse since trump took office. very few people, in a world where people's facts are disagreeing about all kinds of political things, 70%, including by definition many trump voters think it's worse. if we know it's getting worse why does it also feel like we are to some degree powerless to change it? >> because the end justifies the means in a highly polarized world in a highly polarized society. so everything gets rationalized and minimized because the assumption is that so long as we are getting at the end of the day what we want we can do almost anything. and what we don't realize is how much toll that takes on our

humanity. you know, every day i go and talk with leaders. and one of the things i talk about is this notion, this core notion of the value as a leader of being both truthful and compassionate. neither one ari is sufficient by it self. honesty -- think about this. honesty, truthfulness, without compassion is actually cruelty. so you need -- >> right. >> -- these entailed values to be a whole human being. donald trump has neither honesty nor compassion. the result is chaos. in the life he leads and the impact on us. >> the nuance or the thing you are supposed to get as a human being, yes, you speak from a place of hopefully truth but

with consideration on the impactan other people. tony, whenever i have you on i think we should have a nice glass of malbec and have this conversation for longer we have to fit in a little break. >> i'm sorry i'm not there. i am used to being with you. >> thank you for making us think dealer. up ahead, trump's attacks on robert mueller creating a tough task for congress. unless my hands are dirty. between running a business and four kids, we're busy. auto insurance, homeowner's insurance, life insurance policies. knowing that usaa will always have my back... that's just one less thing you have to worry about. i couldn't imagine going anywhere else. they're like a friend of the family. we are the cochran family, and we'll be usaa members for life. save by bundling usaa home and auto insurance. get a quote today.

you might or joints.hing for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember.

when it's your mission to get a better hot dog in every hand, you gotta make a better dog! that's just what oscar mayer does. with no artificial preservatives, any added nitrates or nitrites, and by waving bye to by-products. so you can get back to loving them. for the love of hot dogs. (car horn) delivcrisp leaves of lettuce,s. freshly-made dressing. clean food that looks this good, eaten at your desk. panera. food as it should be. now delivered. mitzi: psoriatic arthritis tries to get in my way? watch me. ( ♪ ) mike: i've tried lots of things for my joint pain. now? watch me. ( ♪ ) joni: think i'd give up showing these guys how it's done? please. real people with active psoriatic arthritis are changing the way they fight it. they're moving forward with cosentyx. it's a different kind of targeted biologic. it's proven to help people find less joint pain

and clearer skin. don't use if you are allergic to cosentyx. before starting cosentyx you should be checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms of an infection. or if you have received a vaccine, or plan to. if you have inflammatory bowel disease tell your doctor if symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. mitzi: with less joint pain, watch me. for less joint pain and clearer skin, ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx.

ask your rheumatologist show me the billboard music awards. the billboard music awards knows how to party. [ cheering ] what up, dog? show me top artist. unbelieveable. i've got my whole family up here. look at my dad looking all sharp. with just the sound of your voice, xfinity x1 gives you a front row seat to the billboard music awards, including throwback clips from some of your favorite artists. the 2018 billboard music awards, sunday, may 20th. only on nbc. important one. your president is threatening your justice department. here is the tweet. at some point i'll have no choice but to use the powers granted to the presidency and get involved. trump tweeting in support of republican allies in congress who have been taking the lead in what critics say is an attack on rod rosenstein. a senate panel had approved a

bill to protect mueller's investigation but mitch mcconnell and paul ryan are now against it. joining me former democratic senator from wisconsin russ feingold. you know paul ryan. he is leaving congress. wouldn't this be the time to step up? >> it's time for everybody to step up. when trump was elected, the expression watergate was sort of a drip, drip, drip confident allegations. it was already a right there moderate rain and in the last 18 months is, it's become an incredible downpour. we are at a situation now where the pace is quickening. and where this is going to come to a conclusion. it's time for everyone to think what their duty is, to take a deep breath and for those in office including those you mentioned to review the oath of office. to uphold the constitution. to defend this country against enemies foreign and domestic. and when the president of the united states says he's going to wage war on the justice

department of the united states, that's an attack on our constitution. so everybody who is taking that oath has an obligation to put aside party. i've seen republicans do this on a number of occasions. i remember when i was in college watching elliott richardson, a lifetime republican standing up to nixon, barry goldwater, the former standard bearer for the republican party saying enough's enough. comey himself and john ashcroft standing up to george bush in a hospital room when they wanted to extend the warrantless wiretapping. these moexts limping up to their oath have happened before. and they need to happen now if we're going to stand up to this horrific attack on our country. >> when donald trump puts this out, do you think he is testing it the waters or just being emotional? >> i think he doesn't care about the institutions of this country. i think he is willing to destroy their legitimacy because it's all about him.

again, watergate expression, ari, was that there was a cancer on the white house. in this case, i would say the bubonic plague is loose in the white house. that's where we're at. and this man simply doesn't care. it's up to the people in this country and the congress in particular to do their duty to, do what they have to do to stop this attack on our institutions. >> a former u.s. senator russ feingold, we wanted your insights on this. i appreciate you coming on. we will be right back. you wouldn't accept an incomplete job

from any one else. so why accept it from your allergy pills? most pills don't finish the job because they don't relieve nasal congestion. flonase allergy relief is different. flonase relieves sneezing, itchy, watery eyes and a runny nose, plus nasal congestion, which pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. and 6 is greater than 1. start your day with flonase for more complete allergy relief. flonase. this changes everything. this is a story about mail and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries

to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪ when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night, so he got home safe. yeah, my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. what?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. i'm trying to manage my a1c, then i learn type 2 diabetes puts me at greater risk for heart attack or stroke. can one medicine help treat both blood sugar and cardiovascular risk? i asked my doctor. she told me about non-insulin victoza®. victoza® is not only proven to lower a1c and blood sugar, but for people with type 2 diabetes treating their cardiovascular disease, victoza® is also approved to lower the risk of major cv events such as heart attack,

stroke, or death. while not for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (announcer) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing, or swallowing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. gallbladder problems have happened in some people. tell your doctor right away if you get symptoms. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, indigestion, and constipation. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. change the course of your treatment. ask your doctor about victoza®.

i just found out when i was walking through the door that we were also going to be joined today by another favorite. a great friend of this president. a tourless champion of strong borders and the rule of law, he spent a lifetime in law enforcement, sheriff joe arpaio. i'm honored to have you here.

>> a new statement from vice president mike pence in phoenix last night hailing sheriff arpaio for being a champion of the rule of law. we can tell you arpaio was found to have basically broken the law and admitted guilt bicepsing that pardon. he peddled aid birther conspiracy against obama and would have been headed for jail except for the trump pardon. that was donald trump's first pardon. we wanted to get that note in there. our show is over. "hardball" starts now. >> krufs. let's play "hardball." \ >> krufs. let's play "hardball." s >> krufs. let's play "hardball." >> krufs. let's play "hardball." h >> krufs. let's play "hardball." a >> krufs. let's play "hardball." r >> krufs. let's play "hardball." d >> krufs. let's play "hardball." b >> krufs. let's play "hardball." a >> krufs. let's play "hardball." l >> krufs. let's play "hardball." l >> krufs. let's play "hardball." ckrufs. let's play "hardball." rkrufs. let's play "hardball." ikrufs. let's play "hardball." skrufs. let's play "hardball." iskrufs. let's play "hardball." . let's play "hardball." >> good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington tonight. we're seeing early indications of a constitutional showdown. special counsel robert mueller told the president's lawyers he could subpoena the preside