Put what on the president . This idea that you just said the the New York Times is reporting that the president approved either wrote or approved the that is not an outlandish suggesting. I take the the New York Times reporting on its face and why wouldnt a father thats president of the United States want to have a say in what his son was putting out that involves him and his presidency. Seems like a legitimate thing thats why i asked. 39yearold son whose running the Trump Corporation and the trump organization, so he doesnt need to be looked over the shoulder by his father. Heres what i think we need to really focus on and obviously i appreciate you having me on. I need to be clear about three things here. Number one, the president was not aware of the meeting, did not attend the meeting and was only made aware of the emails very recently by counsel and not seen the emails. In fact, you know, i didnt see the email until yesterday and im one of the lawyers. So there you have it. Okay. So thats point one. Whats point two . Point two is, the three points were. He was not aware, did not attend and just found out about the emails or saw the emails yesterday. Right. Let me ask you something, how can you see these emails as anything other than proof of russian efforts to infiltrate the election . Well, look, first of all i just heard your last guest who said the entire thing was a put up. That none of this true. I know he said that but if you dont think that there are questions of credibility in this situation, whether Its Don Junior who changed his story or the notion that this man, mr. Goldstone who obviously is going to have to come forward and clear this up at some point, can you imagine not firing a guy who made up a lie like this about you, counsellor . Can you imagine . If you had somebody working for you who said that you met with prosecutors and had Sensitive Information and that you wanted to help an election and you dont fire the guy, thats pretty strange . You about it. Its an important conversation, please. The way its been framed, youre putting her on, the network, all the networks are put those statements on about her as a fact statement. No. Im putting her on that this is her say. She also said don junior and jared and manafort all wanted dirt so badly. She said that also which takes you back to the Appropriateness Argument For Donald Junior and a Disclosure Argument for Jared Kushner who subsequently amended his Disclosure Statement and Paul Manafort which we havent heard from. I dont represent paul. Jared kushner, he amended his disclosure form, so and then donald trump jr. Put out the entire chain of emails. Heres what you have. The emails are out. The information about the meeting is out. It was discussed by two of the principals that were at the meeting and what do we have . Not a violation of the law. And of course im a lawyer and because you dont let russia interfere in American Election . You know that. Doornd junior has said as much. Don junior was very direct last night when he was on hannity talking about that. You know political campaigns well. You come from a long line of families in political campaigns. You know what happens. Theres a lot of meetings. The Ukrainian Government was giving information to the dnc and Hillary Clintons people on who, donald trump. Were acting as if this doesnt happen. Lets look at it very quickly. Ukraine is not russia, okay . You can get you can get research from whomever you want, but if you solicit information from a foreign government, let alone a hostile one you could be in trouble with the fec. I dont want to talk about legality thats not my place. If you dont think it was inappropriate to take this meeting, not only are you disagreeing with donald junior, i think we have different ethical standards. Donald trump jr. Said he would have handled things differently. Which i think is the right thing to say and that point is there. I want to finish up with this. You just said that if its the ukrainians its okay, if its the russians thats not. Thats not the law. Im saying ukraine is not russia. I think they would be analyzed differently in terms of Potential Threat to the process, so hesitation is the legal key. We can agree to disagree. Why did he say it was inappropriate . What he said was in retrospect he would have looked at it differently. So he would have done it at a different time or thought differently of this decision. Its been criticized on both sides of the aisle. I dont know why you would fight that proposition. Im not fighting and he took it. He had the meeting. Youre saying it was okay to take it i think. Im saying no. Im talking about you asked i dont want to talk about the law. Appropriate is not a legal standard. Im the president s lawyers. I understand that. If our culture is only about what you can go to jail for, we got a messed up democracy. Its got to be about doing what is right as well. You just said if the ukrainians did it, its fine. If the russians did it i did not ever say that. I never said it. What i said was in your view is it okay for the russian chris. Is it okay in your view for the ukrainians to give Dossier Information they got Governmentally On then President Trump to the dnc and the Hillary Clinton campaign . Is that okay with you . Is that okay . One, lets be honest. Is it okay . Not my call Special Counsel. Two, is it illegally no because i think solicitation is what triggers election law standards. This is not about the law. The ukrainians came to the Clinton Campaign and supposedly this lawyer came to donald trump jr. Two observations, one, again, i think it depends who it is coming from in terms of appropriateness not legality. I want people to remember this moment. You and people who support the president and the president himself cannot say enough that the media cant forget the election. We keep dwelling on the election and yet it is you, sir, that brings up Hillary Clinton as the excuse for dealing with this current situation. No, no. You use Hillary Clinton because you guys cant leave the election alone. We have moved past no you havent. You are the one who brings up Hillary Clinton, not me. You asked me and you just said again, chris, with due respect, you said, if ukrainian does it could be different. I think it would be a different analysis, if a known hostile actor that was cited by our Intelligence Community for trying to interfere in our election, yes, ukraine is not known for that. Do you think the meeting that donald trump jr. Took, do you think that the meeting he took was the violation of the law . I dont know. Its not for me to say. The standard is tight. Treason say very tight statute. You know its not statute. Chris, you know this isnt treason. Its not my call. By the way, jay, like i feel about running down the road of Hillary Clinton every time something is brought up about the president , i feel the same way about legal arlts leave it to the Special Counsel. My concern in this situation is this, forget about donald junior, however, this is proof of an alleged russian agent trying to infiltrate the campaign to the disadvantage and potential. You think she is a russian agent . Im saying that that was the suggestion, that this information was coming from the russian government. Why the president would insist on calling this a witch hunt instead of doing what you would think the responsibility of the president would be which is to put your arms around this investigation and you see you see what the russians tried to do to my son, we have to figure it out, all the different ways they did it and stop it, not on my watch. Why does he insist on calling it a witch hunt despite what he just saw in his sons own emails . Look at the basis upon which this investigation was triggered. James comey leaks internal memos that he took of conversations with the president of the United States. He takes them in his meeting with the president. He puts them in his government computer, sticks them in his Government Desk and creates a memo that he leaks when he gets fired to a friends of his to go to the press for the sole purpose he said under oath of obtaining a Special Counsel. Which is then appointed. Theres a Special Counsel appointed and think about this for a moment. He gets a Special Counsel is appointed based on what, illegally leaked evidence. I dont think thats okay, and if you were a lawyer in my situation i dont know that its illegally leaked evidence. If an fbi agent rosenstein. He didnt leak the information. Rosenstein is responsible for the Special Counsel. That is someone that the president leaned very heavily on, said he was of the highest regard. What was the basis of the Special Counsel being appointed . The whole world knows it. He did the release and leak the information that was to get the Special Counsel. You have to ask you have to ask mr. Rosenstein. Oh, okay. Chris, chris. He didnt say he did it because comey wanted it and you have republicans stand up and say this was a great move. Yeah, chris, do you think that its okay for james comey, the fbi director to take the notes of his conversations with the president and then release them . A conversation he had with the president of the United States on multiple times, you think thats okay . I dont think it qualifies as a leak unless its confidential information. You take Government Property which is this and, by the way, the governments take in the position that its Government Property temporary to james comey and you distribute that thats a violation. How come how come the Doj Doesnt Act on it . How do we know theyre not . How do we know they are . We dont know is the answer. I get what youre answer but at the end of the day. You still wind up where you are and what we just learned about we learned about a couple of different ways. One is from donald trump jr. Himself and the other is from what you would call leaks i wouldnt. What would you call them . What would you call a conversation chris that the president of the United States that he gave to a third party to the the New York Times . Why is that not a leak . I dont think its material. If thats something thats separately investigative thats fine. But as a journalist i look at the sum and substance of the actual information. But this was an fbi director having a conversation with the president of the United States. I understand. Its immaterial to our current conversation. No, its not. You know this and i know this. Conversation between the fbi director and the president of the United States are protected by what, the executive privilege. Sure. James comey ignored that and he shouldnt get away with that. Thats your position. I accept it but that does not mean that what Don Junior Put Out in his emails and what came out from people in the white house around the president Doesnt Matter and thats how we got to where we are right now with this chain. A chain that the president , our president still refers to as evidence of a witch hunt and i dont get it. I dont get it. I dont understand how you can make ill answer the question. The entire basis upon which this investigation was triggered and took place was what, leaked information by the fbi director. Do you believe this is a witch hunt . Do you believe theres no validity to the russian interference einvestigation . I think the whole underlying matter this is started is wrong. You dont think russia interfered with the election. President obama supposedly knew that the russians were trying to interfere with the election . What did he do . He went to Vladimir Putin and said stop it reportedly and he took a couple of their properties. For a couple months. Thats what he did. If he thought it was that bifg a deal. What happens . Is that a no . Is that a no from you that you dont believe russia interfered in the election . I have no idea what the russians did or look, i have no idea what russia tried to do or didnt try to do. You have no idea therefore you must reject what the Intelligence Community is saying. One step at a time. If you have no idea what they did, you must necessarily therefore believe what the Intelligence Community said is a lie . No. The Intelligence Community said to President Obama from what weve seen and what youve reported and others have reported. They put out a report that said it is in controe vertable. There is no question russia interfered in the election in many different ways. They also said it Didnt Impact One Single vote. Which is different. No. No one is suggesting that it changed the election outcome. No, chris, who was the president of the United States when this was taking place . This is a distraction. Im answering your question. Who was the president of the United States . Yes, they interfered, no they didnt interfere. Look, based on the information weve seen of the russias supposedly attempted. I havent seen the data. You havent either. Im a lawyer and i didnt even understand it. Did they do it or not do it . The russians hacked it or not. I have no idea if they interfered. You dont believe the Intelligence Community. The Intelligence Community has given Inconsistency Reports over 17 intelligence agencies. Said it all happened then it was reported that it was four. Im not looking at intelligence reports that anywhere different than what you would see in the public. Heres what i know. President obama trumps own chiefs, his appointments have said yes this is what happened. Youre saying theyre lying. No, im not. Thats not correct. What im saying. Whats the other possibility . Either you believe them or you dont. Have you seen internal intelligence reports on this . Nope. No. Have i . No. But i have no reason to disbelief these people who are trusted with serving the people of the United States and evidently you do. Heres the great question, so President Obama knew this was going on, he did very little about it and you ask yourself that question. We have a Special Counsel investigating issues surrounding the russian probe. Thats what the Special Counsels appointed for. And the information about the russian hacking and russian attempts to interfere were already previously known. You tell me if you think its right to have this kind of investigation. I dont think it is. I dont understand the premises. The premise is russia interfered in the election and you want to protect your deposition, you have to investigate how did they do it, what worked . How do we stop it . Where are the holes . Sure. Thats not a job of a Special Counsel. No. He looks at different criminal aspects of that. Did people work with them . Was there criminality . If theres nothing there theres nothing there. The Special Counsel can handle the Counterintelligence Investigation which is what youre talking about. Thats your opinion. They cant. Thats not within their purview. Thats not what hes doing. Hes doing the criminality around this. I asked you if the russian interference investigation is worthwhile or a witch hunt. You didnt want to answer whether it happened and now youre just going into whether mueller should be looking at crimes. No. You asked me about the to be clear, you asked me about the president s statement about witch hunts. I told you that the whole basis upon which and i could say it again, i dont have to bore you with it again, its the same statement and that is the basis upon which the Special Counsel was appointed was based on leaked information by the former director of the fbi based on conversations he had with the president of the United States. Thats not completely accurate because we noel the doj was looking at it before he did that. Thats the counterIntelligence Community is investigating and looking into the russia situation. Thats different than the Special Counsels job. I want to be clear on that. Of course theyre different jobs. Even on the face of it, weve been hearing nothing from the people around the president except we never met with any russians or think about meeting with the russians. Time and time again that has proven to be not true. Most recently with donald trump jr. Who if nothing else showed a willingness to meet with somebody under exactly those circumstances. Right, okay. So clearly there are questions to pursue. Will they bear fruit . Who knows . What would the fruit they would bear . Theres no the proof im not saying there is criminality. Im saying there is a reason to look, because if these people keep changing their stories and theyre were lofts meeting connected to the kremlin, it is worth looking at. The Financial Relationships that we still dont know about because of the lack of transparency from the president of the United States and the people around him and these meetings, if anybody was compromised by the russians in their efforts to infiltrate the election. Its worth looking at for the sake of the democracy. Donald trump jr. Had a 20 minute with a russian lawyer that produces nothing at least the witnesses have acknowledged that it produced nothing. Youre banking on that in a way that i dont think im just saying i dont think thats a guarantee. Look, donald trump jr. Said what happened that nothing happened. Natalia, the lawyer said donald trump said the meeting was about one thing and another thing. He was correct. The meeting she said it. The meeting was about i dont know that thats true. Talking about the Magnitsky Act also gets you in the same basket of inappropriate conversations. If shes talking about getting rid of sanctions thats a sensitive issue especially if shes willing goif you something good in exchange for that information. Youre reading into a conversation that you have no evidence of youre doing the same thing. Im looking at the evidence that you put you all every network, its not cnn its every networks the conversation that the lawyer from moscow said, none of that was it. I dont know how that happened. The idea that the person alleged to be an agent of the kremlin saying no, im not and you banking on that is a little absurd. Im not banking on anything. I look at the law. Was there any illegalality, any legal problem with this issue and theres not a legal issue. Donald trump jr. Said yesterday it doesnt have to be illegal to be wrong. He said yesterday and you reported it and you reported it correct correctly, he said yesterday last night if he was doing it again it was the heat of the campaign he would have done it differently. You know what . Hes allowed to say that because thats how he feels. And then were now speculating on what facts may or may not exist. No, no, im not. Im asking questions about what we still dont know and youre saying we do know because don junior said nothing else happened even though hes changed his story several times and the lawyer who is allegedly working for the kremlin, she says nothing happened. I dont think the rest of us can be satisfied with that standard. The lawyer whose allegedly working for the kremlin because who knows. She says shes not, the russian government says hes not. Goldstone whose apparently the biggest liar in the world says so. This publicist decides to spin one of the most fantastical stories ive ever seen and, by the way, 24 hours later still isnt fired for it even though just threw his employer under the bus. I know what youre thinking because youre a lawyer. The to give the lawyer a break. I have this thing in my chest that goes boom boom boom. Its called a heart. It makes me human and this defies common sense. The guy had 24 hours. How long would it take you to fire someone who spun a tale about you being a russian agent and trying to infiltrate the election. Quickly. Heres the differential. I dont know your other guests that you had on the previous segment. Im not trying to disparage his legal capabilities at all. I dont know who he represented. I dont like hitting the lawyers in that regard. It happened in 24 hours. I want to clear up one other point. Theres a lot of unknown around the meeting. Theres no question about it. Weve been parsing it this morning. There will need to be more understanding of it. Legality, morality, ethics, all of it. On this bigger issue of why it should not be called a witch hunt, you had the cia director, mike pompeo, theyre loving him inside the agency, the president wanted him in there, he said there is no questions, the russians interfered in the election. Questioning that premise seems to do a disservice to the service of this country and i dont know why you play with that conclusion. I think its a disconnect. The president is talking about the entire process of this whole Special Counsel thats going on, not the counterintelligence determination. You got to look at those. He never has said in full throated fashion, those russians are on notice. They interfered in our election and theyre not doing it on my watch. He brought maybe they did. Maybe it was somebody else. He brought it up. The president said he brought it up multiple times with Vladimir Putin during the g20 and dont conflate, i dont think its right to conflate a Counterintelligence Investigation that mike pompeo is doing. Thats true. You should keep them treated separately. He is at a minimum unclear about that. He watches the show. Im sure hes watching you right now and feeling good about things. He should feel free to tweet, russia interfered in the election theyre not going to do it again. Going after my people for helping them is wrong. That would seem to be what your describing, but jay i cant keep you any longer. The Counterintelligence Investigation going by intelligence with regard to russia or anybody else, that is a completely different process and what the president s talking about which is the way this entire Special Counsel process is about. He should be clear because it matters a lot and it undermines the confidence and gets a lot of people in this country thinking the same way which is not a way to protect democracy. He asked Vladimir Putin multiple times about it. At the end of the day, i dont think its fair to conflate those two but i do appreciate you having me on. Always. You are always welcome on new day to discuss what matters. Always. Thank you. Thanks so much. Lets discuss everything that you just discussed with jay and see all the things that he said along wall the latest russian revelations. We want to bring in our panel. We have senior political analyst ron brownstein, julia pace and all allis fill mont. There was a lot of between chris and jay about the Intel Community as chris pointed out Donald Trumps own intel chiefs including the cia director, this is of course your wheelhouse have concluded, that russia meddled. What did you hear there . I heard a couple things. First one thing well put aside for a moment. There was a referral to this as a heat of the moment decision. We should get back to that allison. The president s son has had 13 months to think about this and he never actually bothered to review his emails to determine if the word russia was in a subject line. Hard to believe. This is not a heat of the moment decision to keep this quiet. On the issue of the Intel Community, i think there is a really significant point here in all the noise and there was a lot of noise in that conversation, one basic question, did the Campaign Officials including the president s son willingly accept a meeting to discuss receiving information from a hostile foreign power . Yes, we know this from the email. Exactly. The rest of this about heat of the moment, about 20 minutes, the real story allison on the other side of this investigation is who hacked the dnc emails and whether they ever had a conversation with the Trump Campaign about those emails. We dont know the answer to that. We have one tiny clue thats being lost in the noise. The campaign was willing to speak with russians who they knew when they walked through the door were going to potentially provide information derogatory about Hillary Clinton. Thats huge. The rest of this to me, noise. Does it matter that their argument is that the Guy Goldstone in the emails was lying, which i feel really we have to hear from goldstone. He could be lying, but wow, what a doozy he spun with all this detail. If thats true that hes lying, does it all go away or does the intent to take that meeting still matter . There are two pieces. That suggests to me that anything past the meeting was not significant in terms of the election. I dont think thats a huge issue here. The issue here is theres an email chain where somebody in the campaign in this case the president s son knew the Person Walking through the door or thought the Person Walking through the door represented official Government Circles from a hostile power. All this the rest of this is who knew what when, did don junior think this was a good idea, 13 months ago, i dont think thats the story. You cannot walk into a meeting with someone you thinks a representative of a hostile foreign power and accept information about a rival Political Party in the United States. You cant do it. Julia pays, how is the white house dealing with all of this . We know their public persona and a couple of tweets that the president has sent out and then we read reports of whats going on internally . In talking to white house officials yesterday and also trump allies outside the building, there is a shift in the way that they were discussing this matter with the don junior emails versus other revelations that have come out about russia. When those other stories have come out theyve more easily been able to dismiss them as stories that are being peddled by anonymous sources, by people in the intelligence communities. I think seeing the emails from don junior in black and white, the very clear language from goldstone about this being part of a russian government effort to aid the president And Don Junior Reanestheticing so favorably whether this pushes the investigations further or creates any legal matters aside, this was a difference for a lot of people who are working in this administration. They may not say it publicly. You may not hear a dramatic shift in tone as we saw from the president s outside counsel just now, but they privately know that this is a much more serious situation than they have been in previously. When senator blumenthal said that thing about getting rid of mueller, i rolled my eyes a little bit. Democrats going too far down the road. Jay then made a lot of points about how the Mueller Investigation is inherently illegitimate and based on Fruit Of The Poisonous Tree thing. Comey leaked it and it was wrong. That made me think differently. Ron brownstein, made in the same suit that i have on today, very embarrassing, when you heard him make those points in the contechblt of What Blumenthal said do you think theres a chance that the president of the United States would move on mueller . I know hed have to go through the doj and at this point rosen sine that he cant remove him directly, he could try to make it happen . Is that even a possibility . Yes, theres always been that possibility. He singled in some of his tweets and the key question is whether the republicans in congress who really are the point of leverage on this sends an single that that would be unacceptable to them and that would cause them to break from the president. Look, i think for republicans in congress the entire experience with donald trump from the moment he came down the escalator has included being put in the defending things they never imagined they would have to defend from the access Hollywood Video to hiring the fbi director in the middle of an Ongoing Investigation to judge cure el, made other things and what the lesson that President Trump is taking i think correctly is that while they may grumble in the end, very few of them ever truly tried to impose consequences. They tried to look the other way and tried to rally back to the areas of the agenda where they agree. And if this is, in fact, different for them, if Firing Mueller particularly now that there is reason for him genuine reason for him to be investigating the president s son, his campaign manager, his soninlaw, if that is truly different for them, they have to make that very clear. Phil, you keep hearing, we keep hearing from all sorts of President Trumps supporters in the white house, well, lets look at what President Obama did . He did very little when he was told, that the russians were attempting to meddle in the election. Look at that guy. He should have done something. How do you see it . And thats a very criticism and youve had that from democrats and republicans alike its actually beside the point of what were talking about here. President obama was at least able to acknowledge that russia was meddling in the election. We havent heard that in a really forceful clear way without other caveats from President Trumps still despite what were told by Rex Tillerson and other aids about his conversations with putin in their private meetings. Were talking bay move basic question when it comes to the russia meddling with this president. Again, it has just spurred this broader investigation that now with the president s own son and these emails makes it look like at the very at least there were people in the Trump Campaign who were open to talking about russia and talking with russia and trying to get helpful information from moscow. Were out of time. Do you have anything to add to that in just a few seconds . I would just say, if you look at the balance, the former president of the United States spoke with in serious terms to the American People, sanction the russians, expel diplomats and close facilities, also approached the russian president. President trump spoke evidently with the russian president. If you balance the two, i cant figure out how the white house said what they did was light. The white house has done nothing. Panel, thank you very much. Great to get all of your take. Donald trump jr. Says he considered the meeting Opposition Research. Should he have seen it that way . Should he have agreed to it knowing it was from russia . We discussed with Campaign Insiders next. Wait till you hear what they have to say next. For me this was Opposition Research. They had something maybe a concrete evidence to all the stories i had been hearing about that were probably underreported for years not just under the campaign. I wanted to hear it out. Really, it went nowhere and it was apparent that that wasnt what the meeting was actually about. We have allis stuart for ted cruz great to have both of you and all your vast experience on with us this morning. Robbie, it must be a little surreal for you to be back into campaign mode, back remembering those days. 13 months ago. What did you think yesterday when you saw the reveal of all of these emails . I was surprised by the tone of the emails and how don junior seemed to embrace without missing the beat that the russian government first of all was supporting his father but second of all want to go get involved in the campaign but sadly, i wasnt surprised to be perfectly honest that the russians were doing this and this kind of contact was taking place. This is what weve suspected for some time and just to reinforce some of what was being said this morning. This was staring at us all the time. The republican partys platform was changed in cleveland to become more friendly to russia. They removed protections for the ukraine. The Russian Ambassador was hanging out at the Republican National convention and we knew last year that one of trumps Advisors Carter Page was flying over to moscow and giving antiamerican speeches. There was a lot of evidence bubbling up and the experts certainly told us once the dnc hacked that was the russians. Im not surprised that this happening, but boy, i was shocked that they were this sort of cavalier about some thing so serious. I know that youve said in the past day this story has gone from a quote, Nothing Burger to red meat for the Mueller Investigation. I like the metaphor. What do you mean . We go from no meeting to a meeting about adoptions to now we know for a fact based on these emails that the meeting was set up specifically with regard to providing information that would be incriminating to toward Hillary Clinton and helpful to the Trump Campaign. Robbie is familiar with how this works. Ive been on five president ial campaigns. People are always coming forward with Opposition Research and generally you have lower level staffers receive the information. When you have three top officials from the Campaign Meeting with someone they dont even know their name or not sure what theyre talking about that raises questions and the way they shove this under the rug for so long, i think that raises concerns. I just want to talk to you about that. Obviously what has been said is that all candidates, all campaigns, if they got some sort of juicy emails suggesting research on their opponent, of course they would go to that meeting. What does it tell you that the Campaign Chairman and a top advisor to the candidate went . It means that they expected to get some valuable information and the key is, like i said, this happens all the time. Campaigns are always searching for Opposition Research. The main difference is were talking about receiving it from the russian government. Any one with half a brain would immediately call the fbi. You go back a year ago when robbie spoke about this, the questions of russian leaks and whether or not russians were involved in spreading information that would discredit hillary and help the Trump Campaign, donald trump jr. Criticizes robbie and said that he was disgusting liar and questioned his moral compass and thats the concern. He knew exactly what was going on. He knew what robbie said and others and journalists were right in what they claimed, however, he tried to discredit them and i think thats the concern. Moving forward, this isnt going to be about something that might be illegal. It might be improper. I dont think its about a crime. Its about credibility and its not about litigation, its about the repeated lies we have surrounding the story which continues to raise many more questions. I want to ask you about one thing, robbie that keeps coming up. We have had a dozen guests, supporters of donald trump, republicans say this, which is aha, the Clinton Campaign did the same thing. They made with the ukrainians, they got Opposition Research from the ukrainians, so why is the media focusing on this. Why dont you focus on what hillary did . Whats your response. I literally have no idea what theyre talking about. You Didnt Go To Ukraine or someone on the campaign, you did not go to the ukraine to get Opposition Research . No. Absolutely not. And what i do know happened was that reporters got information directly from the ukrainians of secret accounts where Paul Manafort, Trumps Campaign manager was receiving millions of dollars for work that he was doing to help a kremlin backed candidate. So that you did get . Im saying reporters got that. I read about it in the paper like everybody else. I think theyre trying to confuse us. Just to be clear because theyve said it so many times. You dont know of any meeting no. For get going to the ukraine. You dont know of any meeting between the Ukrainian Government and the Hillary Campaign . Not at all. If foreign nationalists were reaching out to us with Opposition Research, there would have been a deliberate discussion about how to manage that both from a concern, you know, legally and ethically but also concern for staffers. We dont want our staff getting in trouble. And the other thing i would point out here thats interesting about this. We had people coming to us all the time, particularly a lot of workers and contractors that got stiffed by donald trump. These people were vetted very carefully before anybody talked to them but also relatively middle or junior staffers on the campaign were the ones who interacted with them. Either the Trump Campaign thought this was information was so important that they needed the most senior people or they thought it was so secret that they didnt want more junior people reaching out and having these conversations. Or theyre newbies, not Paul Manafort. Not Paul Manafort. Paul manafort has a lot of questions to answer about ukraine. I think this is, you know, just a lot of dust thats getting kicked up. Alice i want to play for you what one of the top counsellors, Kellyanne Conway said about this on new day, listen. You have don junior i think america matters. I never met with anybody to have anything to do with russia, now hes saying he met with someone to get research on Hillary Clinton who was connected to the kremlin. He never said the word Opposition Research. Vomit words like collusion and russian interference. All of which you have no evidence. For me this was Opposition Research. They had something, you know, may be concrete evidence to all the stories i had been hearing what do you think about their responses to all of this . I think it needs to be a lot more concise and from their standpoint if they say theres there, put it all out on the table. Lets get it all out there. Lets let mule tr do his investigation and put this behind us. It is a tremendous, tremendous distraction and i think we cant continue to say that trump juniors Naivety Backs in the time makes this okay. Lets get it all out there. There are a lot of republicans in this town that want to do good work and unfortunately theyre engaged in verbal gymnastics trying to distance themselves from this or trying to say lets let the investigation play out and they cant get their lettingive accomplishments done and i think thats important. I think the Credibility Issue right now is important and its putting a stop on making the ability for republicans to have legislative accomplishments. Get it all out there, put it behind us and move on to what the American People really care about. There you go. Thanks for being here. The kremlin says there is no proof russia interfered in the u. S. Election. They say that these donald junior emails should be dismissed and theres nothing to investigate. Thats the kremlin. Is that a legitimate basis for defense on these matters . What does this mean to our democracy . We will hear from former cia and nsa director Michael Hayden next. The agent, everything about it is untrue. So lets bring in somebody who can help us make sense about what does matter and what the remaining questions are. The former director of the cia and nsa, general Michael Hayden. Thank you for joining us. Good morning. So, lets get to it. When you see these emails, what questions do you have . Well, i think phil mudd actually captured it exactly. Its interesting, maybe even important what happened before, what happened after, but whats core is whats in the email in black and white. That the Trump Campaign at the very highest levels, people related to the president at the highest levels agreed to accept a meeting from what they agreed to be a representative of the russian government who is volunteering their support to try to get donald trump elected president of the United States. Thats very clear and frankly i think thats a Game Changing exchange in that email chain. Tell me about that. Why is this after all the threats for all of these months, why is this one in a different category . It provides linkage from what, number one, we know the russians did. All right . Thats a established high confidence judgment of the entire american Intelligence Community and dont obfew kate this with three, four or 17. The overall american Intelligence Community, high confidence judgment, the russians interfered in the American Election. Weve got a lot of work to do to prevent them from happening again and i fear that the Current Administration isnt putting enough energy into that but allison to answer your question, the Criminal Investigation we have underway was is about the question, is there a link between the already established russian effort and people inside the United States whose similar activity would constitute a crime. Thats the investigation. We dont know that a crime has been committed. All weve got in the email is an expressed willingness on the part of the Trump Campaign to cooperate with what the russians were doing. The general is famed for having a great b. S. O. Meter. Where is your b. S. O. Meter on your defense from the kremlin but also from trump allies and his own and the counsel for the family thats referred to this this email chain, that this man mr. Goldstone made up these detailed accounts that he has in here about the meeting with the Crown Prosecutor and what the information was and why it was being owned. That he made it up. This man that was not fired by the man he was represented about, by the way, do you buy that can it be completely b. S. . No, i dont. I instinctively base on my life experience discount the russian denials. I come back to my core point. It really Doesnt Matter what you had in the email was an expression that was accepted by the Trump Campaign and then a willingness to have the meeting. The intents there is regardless. Well get all the other details and frankly my instincts are this is part of a sustained well orchestrated, Synchronized Effort on the part of the Russian Federation to infiltrate and effect the american electoral process. What do you make, general, of President Trump resisting his own intel chiefs as recently as last night, cia director pompeo reiterated once again the unequipcal belief and evidence that russia meddled. What does it mean that the president doesnt go along with that . Its very disappointing and reflects my comment earlier, allison, that i dont think weve got enough energy on that track here, not the criminal track, but the counterintelligence track, what happened, why, how can we prevent this from happening again. The american account, the american account of the meeting in humburg between President Trump and president put irch has President Trump beginning the meeting with, ive got to get this behind us, did you do this is what he said to Vladimir Putin. Thats the american version. Thats conceding serve in the whole exchange. The question was not, did you do this . We know they did this. And it turned the confrontation, so to speak, into a discussion as to whether or not we had enough evidence not Holding Russia to account to this. The day before the president called into question the judgment, reminded everybody of my gen rags Intelligence Officers mistake with regard to iraq Weapons Of Mass Destruction and then finally said we can never know for sure. Thats teeing up the putin