And meet the far right trump whispering inside the white house. Am i the only one who is sick and tired of being told to pick up my trash when we have plenty of janitors who are paid to do it for us . When all in starts right now. Good evening from new york. Im chris hayes. It has been nine months since attorney general Jeff Sessions came before the Senate Judiciary committee in his confirmation hearing. It was his own testimony that led to his recusal in the russia investigation and the appointment of robert mueller. Sessions has become key to questions about President Trumps possible obstruction of justice and today senators were loaded with questions. Sessions were evasive, we markably, even about the simple question of whether he had been interviewed by robert mueller. Were you request have you been interviewed or been requested to be interviewed by the special counsel either in connection with director comeys firing, the Russian Investigation or your contact with russian officials . Youll have to ask the special counsel that. No. Im asking you. Repeat the question then. Have you been interviewed or been requested to be interviewed by the special counsel either in connection with director comeys firing, the russia investigation or your own contact with russian officials . Well id be pleased to answer that. Im not sure i should without clearing that with the special counsel. What do you think . Im just asking, have you been interviewed by them . No. You havent been interviewed by if special counsel in any way, shape or manner . The answer is no. Whats so funny. Who knows. And then there was his rematch with senator al franken whose question in the january hearing was the first domino that led to sessions muellers appointment. The goal post has been moved. First it was i did not have communications with russians. Which was not true. Then it was i never met with any russians to discuss any political campaign. Which may or may not be true. Now its, i did not discuss interference in the campaign, which further narrows your initial blanket denial about meeting with the russians. Yes, you can say what you want to about the accuracy of it. But i think it was a good faith response to a dramatic event at the time. And even though President Trump has not yet invoked executive privilege to bar sessions from testifying on certain matters, sessions will still essentially unilaterally saying what he does and doesnt have to answer before a congressional committee. Did the president ever mention to you his concern about lifting the cloud on the russia information . Senator feinstein, that calls for a communication that ive had with the president and i believe it remains confidential. But you dont deny that there was a communication . I do not confirm or deny the existence of any communication between the president that i considered to be confidential. But even sessions could not agree with the president that the russia investigation was a witch hunt. The president has characterized this special counsels investigation as a witch hunt. Do you share that view of the special counsels work and do you still have confidence in the special counsel as you stated before the Intelligence Committee in june . Well, people are quite free in this country to express their views about matters of that kind. Im just all prosecutor who just says the process has to work its will. Joining me now, senator amy cloeb shar. A member of the Senate Judiciary committee. Did you feel that the attorney general was sufficiently forthcoming before your committee today . There is clearly a lot of Unanswered Questions here, for instance, the firing of jim comey which is critical for the Judiciary Committee when you have an fbi director fired when the president says its one thing and then a few days later says no, its actually about russia. So those questions obviously unanswered. A number of us, this is our first time to be able to ask the attorney general questions about this really e more nous change in policy on anything from criminal justice to the immigration, refugees. There were a lot of questions about those where i think people would like to dig deeper into this enormous shift in policy from this Justice Department. There seems to be a central question here about the role the attorney general may or may not have played in the firing of james comey and the possibility that amounts to obstruction of justice as special prosecutors looking at it. Are you confident that you can say that the attorney general did not collude with the white house to obstruct justice in. I dont know the answer to that question because we didnt get all of the questions answered. But what i do know is that i asked him specifically about whether he Still Believes that this investigation should be allowed to continue. I specifically said, do you agree with the president that this is nothing but a witch hunt. He pretty much implied he did not agree it was a witch hunt and that you should allow these investigations to take place. I thought that was very important because you know, chris, this summer it seemed as though the attorney general was close to being fired by the president simply because of this investigation that would have set off these dominos to the deputy rosen stein and others and really the entire senate stood up and said no, this is not going to be another saturday night massacre. You had an exchange with him about journalists and the press and the dojs posture toward prosecuting them. I would like to play that and get your reaction. Would you commit to not putting reports in jail for doing their jobs . I dont know that i could make a blanket commitment to that effect. But i will say this. Weve not taken any aggressive action against the media at this point. But we have matters that involved the most Serious National Security issues that put our country at risk and we will utilize the authorities that we have legally and constitutionally if we have to. What did you make of at this point . Well, i really ask that question because thats exactly what attorney general holder said, that you dont put reporters in jail for doing their jobs when its news gathering. And whats happened with this administration is theyre starting to review their subpoena process regarding the media back in august. I am concerned about this and we have him now on the record saying they havent taken a major change in action but were concerned about it. And the second thing i asked him about, of course, was something to do with nbc and that was the threats by the president to revoke licenses over content. We now have been able to get chairman pie of the fcc on the record saying that no, they would not be doing Something Like that. Part of our jobs now. Were emergency break. Stress test every day for the constitution. And one of the major things we need to do is protect the First Amendment right for news gathering. My dad was a reporter his whole life and i care a lot about this issue. I dont want you to go to jail, chris. Thank you, senator. I appreciate that. Theres a piece of legislation that pertains to the russia efforts and the russia efforts to disrupt. You have introduced legislation along with senator warner, to essentially require a transparent labelling of advertising by platforms like facebook, so that you can stamp out foreign advertising influence. What is the idea here . This is a really big deal and we are unveiling this tomorrow. And it is a bipartisan bill with senator warner and senator mccain. What this is about, its a National Security issue first of all. Weve now learned that at least 100,000 in rubles for spent to buy ads to influence the american election. Last time i checked were supposed to be self governing and our democracy shouldnt be influenced by foreign powers. s also an issue of fairness. We have 1. 4 billion spent onion line ads in the last election. Money is migrating over there and yet nbc or cnn or any of the networks, when you buy an ad on there as a politician or even an issue ad, youve got to register the ad. Its in a public file. People can look at it. Not true about this online ads. Were simply taking the rules and applying them online. Its hard for people to object to this but im sure they will. Its the right thing to do for our democracy and we dont have much time to get it done before the next election. Thank you, senator. I appreciate you making time tonight. Thank you. Our msnbc contributors are both former assistant watergate prosecutors. They join me now to review. Let me start with you, nick. Someone who hasnt been before the committee for so long. The Oversight Committee and theyve dodged and delayed. You could tell the senators were loaded to bare. What struck you . This whole hearing in his appearance there, what he said was exhibit a as to why he should not be our chief legal officer. Its absolutely disgraceful. First of all, he gets up there, they ask him questions about his conversations with trump regarding comey. He was asked that four months ago in another committee hearing. He was put on notice he would be asked the same thing. He asserted the same kind of vague confidentiality clause, i dont know where that comes from. What is the legal i mean, what is he citing there that stops you from being able to answer. Himself. And he knows that the republican chairman of the committee is not going to go before a Federal District court and ask for a contempt citation and force him to testify. He has no right to do that. Its wish ya washy. And then he goes on, they asked me senator feinstein asked him what justification he has to represent donald trump in these emolument cases. There are three of them where donald trump has basically been getting money from Foreign Countries in violation of the emoluments clause in his hotel in d. C. This is his own personal stuff. And hes marshalled the Justice Department as the legal entity of the United States to defend him in those suits. Because hes too cheap to hire his own lawyer. Thats whats going on here. Jill, what struck you watching sessions today . Zbli thi. I think the same things that were bothering nick bothered me. I think its outrageous that the congress will let him continue to say, well i cant answer because of confidentiality. There is no such thing. Theres executive privilege and that has to be invoked by the president. And if the president doesnt invoke it, he cant refuse to answer questions. And the president hasnt. Someone needs to force the president to say he can testify or im invoking executive privilege. But even executive privilege is not unfettered. It does not apply if they were discussing something thats criminal. And in this case thats quite a possibility. Thats what struck he as i was reviewing the transcript and the questions about comeys firing, and he gave the same cover story thats been shown to be in bad faith, that he was too hard on hillary clinton. You have here the chief legal officer of the country, its an open question whether he was embroiled in a conspiracy to criminally obstruct justice. And that stuck out to me, jill, how much weve put that in the become of our heads well, you know, the president does something almost every day to divert our attention from yesterdays bad news. Its hard to keep on with the old bad news when he does new bad news. It would be really interesting to have an hour long program with this is the worst week ever and then look at the week before when we said this is the week before and the week before that that was the worst week ever because he keeps doing things that are outrageous. Its not just in connection with russia but in how he streets our servicemen and the families of deceased servicemen. He has shown absolutely no respect. And this is a man who is complaining that people who are protesting Racial Injustice are not showing respect when they kneel in front of the flag when he wont call the parents of deceased Service Members. That is outrageous. We keep getting lost in the bad news every day. We have more on that story in just a bit. The reminder today of watching sessions because the sort of parallel investigation of mueller obstruction and the possibility of collusion. The facts on the obstruction case are essentially all known. Pretty much. Thats right. When i watched him, everything entered into the record from all parties on what was going on here. And i think theres more. Thats why sessions isnt telling the whole truth. Do you think he has legal exposure . He could. He wouldnt be the first attorney general to go to prison. There is no question that he at least at a minimum was involved as an eyewitness to an obstruction of justice. He was there when donald trump gave him all kinds of crazy reasons why he was going to fire comey. Gave him the pretext. He was the pretext to use initially with the letter and then donald trump finally had to come clean saying no, i wasnt the letter. I wanted to get rid of him because of the russia investigation. The answer that we played where sessions tells senator leahy that he had not been connected by mueller. Thats surprising to me. I imagine hes telling the truth because hes not going to purger himself im not willing to say he wouldn wouldnt purger himself. Fair enough. Its not surprising. Mr. Mueller has to take witnesses in a logical order and i dont know what the investigation is showing and where sessions would be in terms of when he wanted to interview him. He clearly is someone that if i were mueller i would want to be interviewing because he has been a participant in so many episodes that relate to obstruction of justice. And i think you were right when you said the facts are pretty clear and when i was asked in may whether i could make an obstruction of justice case, i said i think i could. And if you asked me that today, im sure i could. And you are not alone in that. Brookings Institution Published something on this. A lot of lawyers ive spoken to think that there is a case on its face. And i predict that will be a bomb that will drop at some point from the mueller team, if i had to bet. Jill and nick, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next, the shocking new reporting the president offered the grieving father of a fallen soldier 25,000 and then he apparently didnt follow through. When i received the diagnosis, i knew, whatever it takes, wherever i have to go. Im beating this. Breast Cancer Treatment is continuing to evolve. Ctca is definitely on the cusp of those changes. We really focus on taking the time with each individual patient so they can choose the treatment appropriate for them. I empower women with choices. Its not just picking a surgeon. Its picking the care team, and feeling secure where you are. Visit cancercenter. Com breast Appointments Available now. If you look at president obama and other president s, most of them didnt make calls, a lot of them didnt make calls. I like to call when its appropriate, when i think im able to do it. They have made the ultimate sacrifice. So generally i would say that i like to call. President donald trump on monday tried to use the deaths of soldiers killed in action to score points. Four american servicemen were killed earlier this month and the president was responding to criticism and questions about contacting the families more quickly. His false statements about the practices of his pred sayser saying he didnt think they ever called has now invited scrutiny of his own methods of offering condolences in these wrenching cases. The Washington Post spoke with families of 13 americans killed in action this year. Some families had spoken to the president and were grateful to him. Others were upset. And one man told an entirely different soldier. This corporal was killed in january. And the president called the father and the conversation too a bizarre turn. According to the post President Trump in a personal phone call to a grieving military family offered him 25,000 and said he would direct his staff to establish an online fundraiser for the family. Said i was going to write a check out of my personal account for 25,000. I was floored and i wish i would have recorded it. He said no other president has done Something Like that and im going to do it. When the codo lens letter came i opened it up and read it, i was hoping to see a check. Was farfetched thinking but damn its a letter saying im sorry. The white house said the check has been sent. Its disgusting that the media is taking something that should be recognized as a generous and sincere gesture made privately by the president and using it to advance the medias biassed agenda. The white house tells nbc news that the check was sent recently. But the check has not been received. Iraq war veteran, the chairman of the Advocacy Group vote je jets. Cojets jets. O jets. Org. I dont know where to start. Your reaction to the story that we just told. About the 25,000. Very clearly that doesnt surprise me at all. Weve been here before. We were here during the president ial campaign. Donald trump up at a campaign, assaulted megyn kelly and during the next fox debate he doesnt want to go because shes there. Hes going to boycott and give a Million Dollars to veterans groups so he didnt go. That was the big fight. Then we had the conversation of who are the groups hes going to give to and finally months later they find out he never gave the money. After hes exposed by the Washington Post he gives the money. He has a long history of thinking that money is an answer to show his support for the armed forces. And its par for the course for him. And this is very consistent with behavior that we saw last year when he ran for president. The reason that were trapped in this hellish news cycle and i have to say i find it almost too awful to really talk about. We have the situation which at the center of it are going through unimaginable grief who have lost loved ones, whose politics run the gamut from people who oppose to president to support him, who are b