Cooperate with bob mueller. The new reporting here is that manafort was trying to basically be an apparent double agent and that explains the news you may have heard earlier this week when bob mueller suddenly canceled the plea agreement with manafort. And it gives context to this other story tonight. Donald trump telling the New York Post that pardoning Paul Manafort is not off the table. Those words are farther than donald trump has gone off that topic so far and it would further tie donald trump back to a convicted felon at the center of the collusion probe who stands accused of obstructing that probe and meeting with Julian Assange if he actually gave him the pardon. Then theres this, Donald Trumps lawyer Rudy Giuliani making waves by bragging about this newly exposed ongoing secret alliance with manafort, saying it delivered valuable insight as to where it was headed. So that is a lot. Let me tell you what it means in terms of where we are. Before Paul Manafort came forward and confessed he was guilty, a criminal, he had a joint Defense Agreement, you probably heard about these, where he would share information with trump. And one of those agreements is fine as long as youre still a normal defendant. Now that was supposed to end when manafort flipped. His continued effort to try to double Cross Mueller and stay on team trump may have been a bid by manafort for a president ial pardon even as he worked with the special counsel in the hopes of a lighter sentence. Thats how the New York Times put in the their careful reporting. Note that that was a kind of a supposition, maybe there would be a pardon reward. If manaforts goal was to trick mueller into getting a lighter sentence, he failed. But if his goal was to commit one more crime to increase the odds of a trump pardon, well, tonight i have to report for you this news that is leading our broadcast, that very pardon not off the table. It would appear trump is getting the message. Now, remember, during watergate, Richard Nixon could have tried pardoning all those burglars early on to shut them up just like trump could have tried pardoning manafort, flynn, or gates, say, two years ago. For all the bluster, trump has not done that yet for the same reasons nixon didnt do it even as things got worse because pardoning the guilty people in a conspiracy in the middle of an open probe does make you look like youre part of the conspiracy. And trump continues to insist hes not part of this conspiracy. And theres word leaking tonight that he has submitted those written answers and some of the answers coming out that he says he didnt know about the trump tower meeting or about roger stones wikileaks intelligence in advance. Big claims to make the bob mueller. Lets get into it with a few people who know a lot about this. Natasha bertrand, Shelby Holliday and former federal prosecutor paul butler. On the pardon news, how do you read trumps statement tonight, paul . As a prosecutor, will you look at that as linked to whats going on with manafort . Or Paul Manafort is so reckless and allegedly criminal its hard to draw any conclusion yet . So Paul Manafort is a stonecold thug who in september confessed in open court to at least 10 Crimes Involving lying and cheating. So in a way its not a surprise that even after that guilty plea hes still lying and cheating. The surprising thing, ari, is that in the past, Paul Manaforts crimes have been about helping Paul Manafort. Right. His lies to mueller help donald trump and they put manafort at great risk. Lets pause on that. I want to let you build on that, because its very important what you just said. We are dealing with you call him a thug, i would call him a guilty convicted felon, but those are words of art, they mean the same thing. So here is this felon who previously was busted for witness tampering to try to get out of his own prosecution for foreign lobbying crimes. So that was for him. Your point is the new thing going on is not necessarily to duck his own crimes, because he was going to get leniency for mueller. So whats it for . Yeah. Now he puts himself at great risk for exactly what happened which is hes likely to spend the rest of his life in prison. Right. Natasha . I think what you said is really important. Its hard to distinguish between manaforts general recklessness and whether there was a strategy here. I think it might be a combination of both. Manafort had proven himself to be a reckless figure. He went to trial against all odds. He wrote an oped in violation of a Court Gag Order and, of course, he was engaged in witness tampering which is what put him in jail. So for his whole life, i think its shown from the way hes built his career, hes thought he is above the law. He basically thought he could engage in all of this foreign lobbying without registering with the Justice Department. He thought he could pull the wool over the eyes of mueller and then a jury. So im not surprised necessarily that he would maintain this back channel to trump because it provided him with an ability to angle for a pardon throughout all of this. Now, whether or not trump does that we have to wait and see, as you said. It would potentially be obstruction of justice. But manafort is always looking out for himself and at the same time, his hubris is amazing. Youre calling it a back channel to trump, which is one dramatic way to put it. Were always searching for our spy movies and thrillers and ways to understand this stuff. Also, and a half that, tell me you see it differently, its an obstruction channel to the white house. Its possible and, of course, legal experts that ive spoken to said it depends on what was discussed. If there was a diangle of a pardon by trumps lawyers to manaforts legal team, that could be potential obstruction of justice. I think the pardon is dangling in the New York Post right now. Exactly. So i think theres been an open acknowledgment that trump expects to give manafort a pardon and that manafort has been lying to the special counsel, another issue we have to look out for is whether he took this plea agreement because he was trying to get information about the investigation and then funnel it back to the Trump Campaign. But this could backfire because, of course, trump has submitted his written answers to mueller already and if any of those answers match the lies that manafort was telling to mueller and if manafort and trump thought mueller didnt have information to the contrary, that could really peru damaging to trump. And shelby, this goes to another point which is the president has his lawyers, hes submitted his answers, he doesnt need inside information from a convicted felon about whats going on if hes wholly innocent and the facts are exonerating. I mean, again, not everyone knows how this works, why would you . But you cover this stuff, ive practiced law and covered this stuff. This isnt how it works. And for your analysis, i want to play Eric Swalwell saying, yeah, why do you need help from manafort to get out from under this. That doesnt make sense if youre innocent. Take a look. Its not appropriate. Manafort was a cooperator. It sounds like hes breached his agreement with the government. Its not the way innocent people conduct themselves. The president was not colluding with russia, why is he colluding with manafort to get a window into the powell special counsel investigation. I would add its not just Paul Manafort. Rudy giuliani says theyre speaking to 30 people in the probe to get information from people who are witnesses, who could be witnesses, who could be cooperating against the president or helping him. But we know theres a lot of information being shared with the white house. Its also notable the president is saying other people in this probe, jerome course rsi, and r stone, are being brave to stand up to mueller. We interviewed corsi, hes telling the special counsel stick it. He was offered a plea deal to plead guilty to lying to the fbi and hes saying i didnt lie and you can prosecute me, you can put me jail. You think, though, that donald trump saying theyre brave is more than just an opinion about their personal courage . It could be a signal to hang in there, dont cooperate, dont plead guilty and, yes, be on my team and jerome corsi is telegraphing to the president that hes very loyal to him. He said all along my crime was that i supported zroump they appear to be talking to each other through the media. Donald o they appear to be talking to each other through the media. If you read the tea leaves in the Court Documents nbc broke yesterday, the prosecutors are also they have evidence that roger stone had information about wikileaks dumps and roger stone denies having any advanced knowledge but there are emails that dont look good for him and theyre also probing potential witness intimidation. This is something the journal reported on previously. Roger stone was involved in writing stories about his alleged back channel Randy Credico who he says was his confirmed source for the wikileaks information and rural is taking seriously that roger stone is out there telling people like jerome corsi and other associates to write stories about credico being his back channels. Now that we have these emails nbc revealed, it looks like maybe roger stone had a different back channel. Maybe he had somebody telling him what assange would release. And all this manafort conspiring, according to muellers charges, comes at a time where the president has been exposed, been busted, for trying to abuse the Justice System to order illegal prosecutions of james comey, of Hillary Clinton and then he put out an incredibly irresponsible piece of propaganda, blithely accusing multiple doj officials of treason, retweeting this thing and saying when will this trial for treason begin . And you can see there Rod Rosenstein, mueller who is doing this investigation behind bars. What is your view of that,fall . You know, there comes a point where theres such a pattern with regard to the president of obstruction, of trying to impede the investigation. We look at his firing james comey, we look at him dictating that lie on air force one about the meeting, don jr. s meeting with the russian lawyer. And the kind of conventional wisdom has been none of those acts by themselves are obstruction but theyre evidence of a criminal intent. Of an intent to impede the investigation. And, again, i think what Robert Mueller will do is to look at this pattern and i mean, the evidence seems fairly inescapable now that the president will stop at nothing. Hes not interested in an investigation thats a search for truth, hes interested in clearing his name even if thats not consistent with the evidence. Doesnt that give, natasha, an alternative reading . Giuliani is often described as brazen or reckless or gaffeprone. Which is possible. I have seen evidence of that. But another reading is he represents his client and his client has made it clear, according to pauls analysis, that the goal is not so much to cooperate or show the facts but to effectively obstruct and destroy any full investigation. And if that is the goal, thats why rudy talks this way. Thats why he openly brazenly brags. I cant think of the last time any member of the bar has dr bragged about receiving information from a convicted felon who allegedly lied to a degree that his plea deal blew up. Right. And giuliani for his bluster, he appears to have been telling the truth about this one. Just after manafort signed his plea agreement he came out and said no, the joint Defense Agreement is still in place. No one believed that because it was just so implausible and so rare and unusual. Such a great point. Every legal expert i spoke to said this is not possible. But it turns out he was actually telling the truth, that he never actually pulled out of this agreement. And i think that is so telling about how from the very beginning this seems to have been the plan. Experts are telling me that it is clear now that manafort never had an intention to fully cooperate, fully align his interests with prosecutors because he still had that one foot in the door with trump. Yeah. Its remarkable. And in some ways its legally scary. Natasha bertrand and Shelby Holliday, thanks to both of you. Paul, because im talking to jerome corsi i want to get you on reaction to that later in the show so stick around. Coming up, im going to have a live interview with a mueller witness and a witness at the heart of the Mueller Probe. Jerome corsi says the mueller team may incite him. Were also getting new leaks about how trump answered the questions on collusion. And ivanka Trump Defends her email use that led to, yes, her own fathers fans chanting lock her up. And, later, Stormy Daniels breaking with Michael Avenatti and saying things that question his role in the attorney in the definition suit against trump. Im ari melber and youre watching the beat on msnbc. How about some of the lowest options fees . Are you raising your hand . Good then its time for power e trade the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. Alright one quick game of rock, paper, scissors. 1, 2, 3, go. E trade. The original place to invest online. The United StatesPostal Service makes more holiday deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. With one notable exception. I am a techie dad. N. I believe the best technology should feel effortless. Like magic. At comcast, its my job to develop, apps and tools that simplify your experience. My name is mike, im in Product Development at comcast. Were working to make things simple, easy and awesome. Bob muellers office doesnt leak, but one of their potential criminal targets is leaking. The entire draft indictment and statement of offense, i want to show it to you right here. This is a draft Court Document mueller said he could use to charge jerome corsi, a Rod Rosenstein associate with lying to the fbi about several things, including conversations he had with stone that relate to wikileaks. Thats why the name of a very controversial figure who, according to this leak could be charged with a felony in the Mueller Probe any time, his name is in the news in a big way. Jerome corsi. Jerome corps. I corsi having conversations with roger stone. Jerome corsi, Rod Rosenstein associate. The corsi story. Jerome corsi is live on the beat. Thank you for being here. Great to be here. You were offered a plea deal by bob muellers team . Thats correct. Why did you reject it . It was fraudulent. It required me to lie and it required me to violate various regulations and even i thought commit fraud and i wont do that. I will not lie to keep myself out of jail and i realize that i could go to jail for the rest of my life. Im 72 years old. I might die in jail but im still making this decision. You think what youre doing today increases the risk that you will be charged, be convicted, and die in jail . Yes, i do. When you look at this plea negotiation, you did enter into some kind of discussions with them. What would you have accepted . What would a plea deal look like that you would take . I would have taken immunity. Thats not a plea deal, thats just immunity. Thats my terms they proposed this and said we want you to consider it. This first count which they said you only have to agree to one count but you have to go in front of a federal judge and swear this on a bible. Now, for me to do that, i believe in my heart would have been a lie. That counts as that i knowingly and willfully presented information i knew to be false with an intent to deceive federal authorities. I do not believe i did that. In my heart i went in to tell the truth and i wont swear before god and a judge something i consider to be a lie. But you did Say Something at the time that you now acknowledge to be false . No, i acknowledge that what i testified day one because i had not seen my 2016 emails i understand but im going to hold you on this. Go ahead. You led them to believe that you did not have contact with someone on behalf of roger stone when you did. The statement i gave the first day was wrong. And it was wrong because i forgot the email that theyre referring to. I had not seen it in two years. Lets show this so viewers can understand because this stuff is obviously important to your life but its important to the probe. Here it is, the mueller on this document says corsi contacted an individual in london to pass on person one, roger stones request to learn about wikileaks materials for the campaign. You did do that. And the special counsel allowed me to amend the original testimony and i testified after i saw the email that that was true and a fact and i didnt deny it. And heres the, exhale y ee you provided to nbc news. This individual should see assange. Correct. At the time, what were you trying to do . Were you trying to get information about the stolen Clinton Emails back to the Trump Campaign . Yes. Yes. And obviously i wanted would havent sent that if i didnt want malloch to go. Everyone who was a political associate when assange dumped these emails on Debbie Wasserman schultz, said he had more, everybody wanted to know what they were. You wanted them out, though, to help the Trump Campaign. Absolutely. Did you see anything wrong that . No. Under first of all, under New York Times v. U. S. The pentagon papers case, even if Julian Assange had stolen material that was classified, as a journalistic see him, i can get that material and i can publish it. Im not committing a crime. So i was happy to do it and i was happy that it would benefit donald trump. And appreciate you putting that on the record. Now then, this is also from the mueller documents youve leaked. Your email, youre telling stone youve got a friend in the Embassy Planning two more document dumps. Thats assange. Thats assange. One shortly after im back, second in october, impact planned to be very damaging, time to let more than the Clinton Campaign chair be exposed as in bed with the enemy if theyre not ready to drop hrc. Is that a reference to john podesta . Yes. And let me explain that. Because this was one of the main points of contention with the special counsel. I maintain and its my best recollection that i figured that out. Now, special counsel couldnt believe that. They said dr. Corsi, we have emails you knew it was podesta, you knew he was going to drop them in october, how he was going to drop them. You knew almost what they included and what they contained. I said yes, thats true. How did you know . I figured it out. So you tell roger stone about podesta, he goes on the predict it and tweet about it. Correct. That was based on you . Well, i dont know what roger based it on but i did tell him and it could have been based on me. You have to ask rojjer what ger thinks. Well, ive interviewed roger. He touted his intermediary to wikileaks at the time. During the campaign. Lets look at roger stone, this is before you knew there would be a criminal probe into your conduct. This was roger stone saying he had an intermediary. I have not let with mr. Assange and i never said i had. I said we communicated through an intermediary, somebody who is a mutual friend. Is that you . I dont know. You have to ask roger. Now, roger told me on august 15 or 13, and i published an article saying that roger had made contact with assange. I didnt think it was me because i didnt think roger believed that i contacted assange. What about now that the main thing that links roger to assange with private intelligence, with things that no one else seemed to know at the time is joe decembpodesta. Could you be rogers intermediary . Sure. But not because i talked to assange. But because i figured it out on my own. Ive never spoke within Julian Assange, i dont know him and i have no contact that i was an intermediary. There was no third party who said roger stones got this. But you were making an important point tonight in this interview which is that Julian Assange as an intermediary, the fact that there was information believed to be private that proved to be accurate, podestas time in the barrel, that could have come from you in roger stones mind that you would be that intermediary . You have to ask roger stone. I told roger stone. Lets get this clear. In july, i was on vacation with my wife in italy, 25th anniversary, i think flying over i figured out that assange had podestas emails. I told roger in this email and subsequently i thought it was podestas emails. So lets get one more point on that. Go ahead. The other point is, this was my conclusion, my supposition. It did not come from assange and it didnt connect back to assange. So theres no link for me to assange. The link is from me figuring this out and telling roger. If i was the source, it was because roger believed me figuring it out, not because roger believed i had a source. So you gave that defense to muellers prosecutors . Its actually the truth. Its also a defense. Fine, its a defense. Its the truth. You said that to them. How did they take that . They didnt believe it. Jeannie reed, one of the prosecutors, said dr. Corsi, you are asking us to believe that on an extended International Flight with your wife you had divine intervention and god inspired your mind and told you assange has podestas emails, hes going to dump them in october and theyll be dumped in a sere quality fashion, is that what youre saying . I said i guess thats what im saying. Did they give the impression they were upset with you . Absolute. I did they raise their voice . Yes. Stormed out of the room. Did they yell at you. Well, they dont to raise their voice to yell. Because they have power. And they make their points with such strength that you know theyre saying if you dont give us the source youre going to jail for the rest of your life. So thats how they reacted to this defense of yours. How did they react to this other defense that you made on behalf of roger stone which is you agreed to help roger Mislead Congress about how he found out about podesta . Theres two rounds of this that i went through. Round one, i openly discussed that with them and admitted it all, because it was true. I was telling the truth. You were telling them the truth about a lie. No. Well, okay, yes. Yes. You were telling them the truth about a lie. Im going to clarify that if you will allow me to. You will get time here. You and roger put forward false information to the Congressional Committee about the source of the podesta tip. Would you allow me . Youre getting time but thats about a lie . Ive been trained in Public Relations by edward bearnaise. British petroleum becomes bp and now theyre beyond petroleum. Is that a lie . If that were a lie and people were guilty of a crime for doing that, there would hardly be a politician alive today in office. You want to debate it. I didnt say crime, i said lie to congress because hold on, you told the mueller folks, as i understand it. Theres a reason why roger stone thought he needed to not tell the truth about podesta but work with you on allow. You will allow me. In front of the grand jury Aaron Zelinski said dr. Corsi was this a lie . I said yes. Was this a lie . Yes. So i hope i will admitted to them that in their terms this was a lie. Why did you do that . Because it was the truth. And why did roger stone want you to lie. You have to ask roger stone. At harvard i neglected to take the mindreading course. I have one more point i want to make to you and that is when this testimony came up over the issue of the House Intelligence Committee, i was given immunity by the mueller prosecutors in order to make this testimony because my lawyer didnt want me to be held for suborning perjury because roger used that memo in his testimony with the House Intelligence Committee sworn testimony. I do not object to it. Did he use you . I dont know. Er be i dont believe roger had thought i had legitimate information because i never represented to roger that i went to see assange or had a connection with assange. You think he used credico. Credico this is important denied they was intermediary. Let me show you that. Do you ever carry messages from Julian Assange about what he might plan to do or the nature of his work to other people anywhere else in the world . No. Absolutely not. So he says he was definitely not the intermediary. You say tonight that roger may have thought you were the intermediary. When you gave roger this hot information about podesta, whatever theorigin, he must have told trump. I dont know what roger did. You have to ask roger. You know roger stone at the center of this. He is an adviser to donald trump and that was hot information that proved to be true. You would expect he would tell trump rather than keep that from trump. When i figured out it was podesta i told stone and i told about everybody i knew and i knew it would help donald trump and i was happy to do that. I was speculating but i was sure i was right. Is it accurate to say you expected roger to tell trump . I didnt look, logically should i have expected it . Yes, of course. Yes, you did. Well, no, you asked me i didnt know see, youre asking me questions about somebody elses state of mind and i cant answer those questions. The expectation, sir, would be your state of mind. You thought it would help trump, roger is a trump adviser, roger came to you with a special request. This is not everyday business. Roger came to you with a request, have someone as an intermediary in london go to assange, then you come back, give them this hot intel about podesta which proves to be true and im asking in the context of that arrangement, did you expect that information to go to donald trump . The part youre missing is that i never i told roger, ma malloch is not going to see assange. I didnt think anybody was going to see assange. Certainly i told Joseph Farrow my boss at world net daily, by me an airplane ticket, ill see assange. Assange hasnt told me anything. You didnt think that was viable . Would you give me a few so i can scoop you . That wouldnt work. So assange wasnt going to tell anybody. I happened to figure it out and i dont think stone thought i was a connection to assange because i didnt represent that. And you understand that the reaction of the mueller investigators is a reaction many people would have that your defense is you magically figured this out yourself without other leading information, got it right, and told roger stone . Yes, miss reed, thats exactly what happened on the flight going across to italy. When you look at this, off joint Defense Agreement with president trump. Is that still active . Yes, but it was not formal written but weve acted that way and we represented such to the special counsel. They know that. You do or do not have a joint Defense Agreement . Theres nothing many writing but my attorneys and the president s attorneys are communicating as if there were an agreement in writing. You have a verbal understanding of an agreement. Yes, that is correct. That exists. And what type of information pursuant to that agreement have you provided to trumps lawyers . My instruction is to the attorney, and i do not participate. These were lawyer to lawyer. Copy. I didnt listen to them or hear any recording of them. My instructions were one way. In other words, well tell the president what were doing so hes informed. Again, i support the president , i want him to be able to survive the mueller investigation, i want him to run for reelection and be reelected. Thats all my political preferences. So i said lets let the president know whats going on in the mueller investigation. I didnt want advice. I didnt want to know anybody elses case. Jay sekulow was not saying tell jerry corsi to do this. It didnt happen and i wasnt interested in it. And im not counting on donald trump for anything, including a pardon. Thats not the basis on which i made my decision. Why are you bringing up a pardon in a Television Interview . Because thats what everybody you were talking about it before. But i didnt ask you about the pardon. Youre bringing it up. Because i want to make it clear that i dont expect one, im not asking for one and im making my decision completely on the basis that i know i have to face trial if they indict me and the consequences are i may go to prison for the rest of my life. I understand you face serious consequences. And i understand that. Would you accept a pardon . Well, thats hypothetical. The whole conversation you brought up a hypothetical pardon conversation. I wont give you a hypothetical answer. Ill tell you what ill do at that time. So people listening may draw the inference that you are right now auditioning for a pardon when you end that statement saying let it be offered. I would say youre asking me to tell you what people who are listening think. I dont know what theyre thinking. But youre not asking for a pardon is what you maintain . Im not answering for a pardon and im not anticipating a pardon. Do you understand why people dont believe you . Yes, of course. Ive had this problem all my life. I told my mother when i was in kindergarten, i said to my mother i came home early, she said why, jerry . I said im not going back. Im done with this. And i knew at five years old my mother wasnt going to accept that. Ive had this issue all my life and when i come to decisions i dont think the way people otherwise normally do. When i come to one of these things and put it together, often its right but nobody will believe me that i put it together. Ive had that over and over again so i dont expect the special prosecutors to believe them but im not going to tell them a lie that they want to hear because they cant invent somebody who didnt exist. You are here because its newsworthy that you are a target of this probe. Correct. You also politically are known as a leader of the birther movement. Oh, yes. Which is a total and complete lie that you believe. Is there let me let me finish my question. Finish your question, yes. Is this the same defense you are now trying to use with mueller as youve used in that political operation which is that you stand for a lie . That you say you believe it. And your defense is that because you genuinely believe the lie you shouldnt be held accountable for it . So you have a copy of the original hawaii 1961 birth registration for barack obama. I havent seen it. I went down with law enforcement, sheriff arpaio, hawaii wouldnt show it to law enforcement. I dont think it exists. If you can show me that ill agree i was wrong. So far all that we have is a computer printout from the white house that didnt exist in 1961 that forensic analysis says is a fraud so ill stand by what i originally said as true even though you think its a lie. You believe the statewarranted conventional assumption and im a conspiracy theorist which was a term invented by the cia for people who doubt that lee harvey oswald, not at the peak of his game as a shooter with a used italian rifle that didnt shoot straight when it was made at a site that was misaligned killed jack kennedy shooting past a tree with three shots. I dont believe that happened. Now, again my question to you yes. Do you think that that will help you in your defense that because you believe this other lie you say and youve devoted time and energy to this other lie that now you that you have this apparent lie in front of you, you can just say, well, i believe lies, thats my thing. Mr. Zelinski asked me that. He said dr. Corsi, you take a fact from here, a fact from there and a lie and you package it and convince people its true. Im looking at zelinski youre talking about the mueller prosecutor. Did he ask that in relation to birtherism or other issues. He didnt say birtherism. You knew he was talking about that because you know thats a lie. No, because i know he cant accept what i have written yet as true. So he brings that up with you and says what . He said you dont know the difference between true and false. Youre so confused in your mind you cant answer questions. Which does make it harder to prove a false statement. Its not a tactic. Im sitting here tonight and im telling you i do not believe barack obama has a legitimate 1961 original birth certificate. I dont think it could be produced. I defy you to produce it or anyone else. Im telling you here. Second, when i flew to italy on that flight i did figure out on my own without any outside help or influence that Julian Assange had podestas emails and exactly how he would use them. A lot of what youve said does not add up and you know that because youve admitted that some of what youve said in the context of this topic are lies that you had to admit to. Youve also admitted that you and rod rosensteger stone worke to mislead i object to your characterization, counselor. Thats why youre here. I object. This is me wrapping. Appreciate you coming in can i wrap . You can have a final statement. First of all, i dont think i lied. You admitted on this interview to lying. Oh, no, thats were talking theres two things. When i did the work for roger there. Ive referring to the outofcourt lies. I said in your terms it was a lie. In my terms it was politics. Politics is that way. I dont consider that to have been but you did admit in this interview today that you told those lies because you had to update them to mueller. And i told the grand jury because in front of the grand jury theyre not going to believe my longer explanation. What i believe in my heart, okay . So ive said, fine, you want to call it a lie, call it a lie. But im telling you right now, i do not have a source going back to assange. I did get this all put together on my own. I was not an intermediary between stone and assange. Ill stand by that. And i told you youd get your final statement. And appreciate that. And appreciate you taking the questions and what you did say that is true is you are in a situation that has potential criminal liability and appreciate you taking the questions. And ill come back. All right. Jerome corsi. A man in the news. Well have reaction when were back in just 30 sends. In front of the grand jury Aaron Zelinski said, doctor corsi was that a lie . I said yes. Was this a lie . Yes. So i openly admitted to them that in their terms this was a lie. Why did you do that . Because it was the truth. And why did roger stone want you to lie . You have to ask roger stone because at harvard i think governorelected to take the mind reading course. That was jerome corsi. Now im here with several experts. Watergate prosecutor nick ackerman, matt miller who worked at the Justice Department and another former federal prosecutor paul butler back with me. Nick . Let me start off with my legal opinion. Liar, liar, pants on fire. This guy is not telling the truth. First of all, when you look at somebody and you decide whether theyre telling the truth, you dont leave your common sense at the door post. What he says about suddenly coming up with the exact timing for the Podesta Emails to come out doesnt ring true. But what i think is the real killer here that really puts the lie to him is that later on between january 13, 2017 and march 1, 2017, he deleted those emails. The very emails that you were questioning him about that had to do with these contacts with Julian Assange. Youre saying the proof at the time about trying to get the goods is stuff that he tried to hide . And he did, he deleted it. And he deleted it that time period is extremely significant because thats when the Congressional Committee, the Senate Committee, was bringing in roger stone and was starting to ask questions about this. This is not something that somebody forgets. You dont forget the fact youre asked to make a contact with Julian Assange. I mean, how many times do people in america suddenly decide, oh, im going to speak to Julian Assange . Its not something you forget when youre called to a Senate Committee and you wind up destroying the very evidence that shows that you were right in the middle of this whole thing. Matt miller . Yeah, look, i think nick hit on the absolute key point and thats the thing for me. You can sometimes go in and say, look, you know what . You asked me this question and i forgot that i got this email, i forgot about it. The fact that he tried to conceal this by deleting his emails is the thing that makes him look so guilty. Its hard to come in and convince a prosecutor, convince a jury, convince anyone listening in the interview that i just forgot about that when before the investigation started right when the investigation started you went and tried to destroy all of the evidence of this conversation that you now say you forgot you had. It just looks suspicious. I have to say, i found it pretty interesting that the first thing he said in his interview is that i cant sign this plea agreement because it would be a lie. Jerome corsi built his career, as you well referenced in one of your final questions, on being a professional liar so its rich with irony that he says the thing thats blocking him from signing this plea agreement is that it would be a lie. It doesnt make sense. I think the pardon thing that he kind of danced around, wouldnt really talk to, is really the only explanation. Other than that, his behavior isnt rational. Hes looking at time in jail. The case is serious against him. I think the evidence is pretty strong and him not taking this plea agreement leads me to think hes looking at some other path out. And he does seem, paul, to understand that jail is a very real thing. He has spent realtime with these prosecutors, hes felt their seriousness. He mentions the elliptical reference to birtherism, the lie hes associated with. To matts point, he not only associated with lies, in this interview he admitted to the lies and says he admitted them to mueller. So if hes already done all that and he can sign a statement that spares him jail time that is one more lie, why not do that . Because hes a good liar. He turned the lie that president obama was not born in the United States into a New York Times bestseller. But as your very effective crossexamination indicated, ari, hes not a great liar. So you did what an effective prosecutor does, you dont berate the witness, you let him incriminate himself with his own lying words. So to nicks point, no way he figured out that the wikileaks email of podesta was forthcoming. Again, nobody knew that and he doesnt seem like the brightest bulb on the tree to begin with so the mueller prosecutor is right. It would have been divine intervention for him to know that. The other thing is the forensic evidence. His own email contradicts his story in that it says that he was in touch with Julian Assange. So, again, thats inconsistent with what he said. And the third thing, ari, is the point you brought up about his now in his own admission telling the truth about a lie. So he made up this story with roger stone about the first lie. To a prosecutor, lies are evidence of consciousness of guilt. Then i want to broaden out from jerome and matt miller, talk about the fact that roger stone had some motivation to n concoct a fraudulent memo to hide the podesta sourcing. What does that tell you . It tells me a couple things. I think the most important thing it tells you is that roger stone lied to a Congressional Committee. Jerome corsi got use immunity to testimony to the grand jury and he had to because his lawyer feared if he testified truthfully that would be suborning perjury. What that tells me is that roger stone, when he went in and gave this false statement to congressional investigators, very likely committed a crime. And so when you look at this plea agreement, theres obviously the reasonficatiamifit jerome corsi will be charged with a false statement but when you look at roger stone and his culpability, theres the potential conspiracy to defraud the United States charges, the collusion charges, but then i think it looks like a pretty serious case and a pretty obvious case of lying to a Congressional Committee that mueller will have him on as well. Right. So theres a lot thatm ma eman out from this even though the swo sordid detail cas can get weeds. Thank you very much. Up ahead, Paul Manaforts double cross and the secret trump tower meeting and what trumps aides are saying he told mueller about that meeting. Also, but her emails. Ivanka responds tonight. The United StatesPostal Service makes more holiday deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. With one notable exception. After a scratch so small rocket you could fix it with a pen. How about using that pen to sign up for new insurance instead . For drivers with accident forgiveness, Liberty Mutual wont raise their rates because of their first accident. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. The russia probe has been in the news and Donald Trumps lawyers are keeping it that way because there are three of his answers leaking that he submitted to mueller. Abc news reports trump said he was not aware of the changes to the rnc platform. Roger stone did not ever give him advance intel about wikileaks, and trump also telling mueller he was not told about his sons secret meeting at trump tower with russians offering dirt on Hillary Clinton. Trump reportedly saying he was answering to the best of of his recollection. Im joined by gene rossy. Let me start with the basics. Why would people on the trump side leak this . Well, heres my view. The attorney for Paul Manafort is basically an insider trader. And the trump people are using this information to possibly coordinate trumps answers to the questions with what they know Paul Manafort is saying. If theres a consistency in what they say, even though they may not be truthful, that only helps donald trump. Thats probably whats happening. I wanted to add this, ari. I negotiated and supervised probably a thousand guilty pleas. Many of those had cooperation language. I am absolutely appalled that the attorney or attorneys for Paul Manafort would sit in on briefings with Paul Manafort and then leak the Insider Information to a subject, if not a target, of an investigation. That is preposterous, its absurd, and those are the kind remarks i can say. Have you ever seen in your practice, you mentioned a thousand prosecutors blow up a plea agreement over this type of doubling. I found out my cooperator was lying to me in debriefings and in the grand jury, and i had individual plead guilty for lying in front of the grand jury. And this is unheard of, i had my cooperator plead guilty to lying at a guilty plea. So i took it very seriously. Let me get you on one more thing. Trump has publicly said he didnt know about the trump tower meeting. Thats different than saying it to the if he does. I just talked to someone whos under heat for lying to the fed, which is a crime. But before the trump tower meeting trump was bragging he had new dirt coming in on hillary. Take a look. I am going to give a major speech on probably monday of next week and were going to be discussing all of the things that have contataken place with clintons. Youre going to find it informative and very interesting. How does mueller answer this question if trump was lying about not knowing about the meeting . One way is you get cell phone records, and that blocked call that donald trump jr. Made, that could be the key to the throne. Also you could get people that are on the periphery that said donald trump, the father, knew that the son was going to meet. And let me tell you this. There is absolutely no way the president ial candidate donald trump did not know before, during, and after that there was this huge meeting to obtain dirt on Hillary Clinton. That defies imagination. Gene, you know how to nail it down. As you say, sometimes things that arent believable arent true. We will find out. Gene rossy, thanks for your expertise. There is breaking news about Michael Avenatti that may surprise you in a moment. The United StatesPostal Service makes more holiday deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. With one notable exception. You may be learning about, medicare and supplemental insurance. Medicare is great, but it doesnt cover everything. Only about 80 of your part b medicare costs. A Medicare SupplementInsurance Plan may help cover some of the rest. Learn how an aarp Medicare SupplementInsurance Plan, insured by Unitedhealthcare Insurance Company might be the right choice for you. A free decision guide is a great place to start. Call today to request yours. So what makes an aarp Medicare Supplement plan unique . These are the only Medicare Supplement plans endorsed by aarp because they meet aarps high standards of quality and service. Youre also getting the great features that any Medicare Supplement plan provides. You may choose any doctor that accepts medicare patients. You can even visit a specialist. With this type of plan there are no networks or referrals needed. Also, a Medicare Supplement plan. Goes with you when you travel anywhere in the u. S. Call today for a free guide. A peaceful night sleep without only imagine. Frequent heartburn waking him up. Now that dream is a reality. Nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for allday, allnight protection. Can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn . And i found out that ima from the big toe lian. Of that sexy italian boot so this Holiday Season its ancestrydna per tutti order your kit now at ancestry. Com another important story tonight. Stormy daniels now publicly criticizing her lawyer, Michael Avenatti that he has not treated her with the proper respect and deference. She also references a fundraising site that he set up without telling her and shes shot sure she will keep him as her attorney. Avenatti says hes always been an open book with daniels and it was designed to defray some of her expenses. An Interesting Exchange between client and attorney. Hardball with Chris Matthews is up next. A pardon. Lets play hardball. Good evening. Im Chris Matthews in washington. Tonight President Donald Trump is saying publicly that a pardon is on the table for Paul Manafort. For the first time, the president himself is talking about protecting the former star witness and convicted felon who now stands accused of lying to federal investigators. In a move thats raising new questions about obstruction of justice, trump today told the New York Post he wont rule out a pardon saying it was