Indepth interviews with leading newsmakers, plus discussions with Americas preeminent political minds. Important meeting because i never even heard that. As far as you know, this is all of it. This is everything. This is everything. All right. So who do you believe . Joining me now to break this down, former state Department Senior adviser. Paul butler, Professor Of Law at georgetown law school. Former fbi agent. Clint watts author of messing with the enemy. David k johnson and former watergate prosecutor. Wow, we just have an embarrassment of riches. Im going to go Around The Horn and talk about. Im going to start with you paul. Just on how this changes the legal case. Trump tower meeting. June 3. Donald trump jr. Gets email from Rob Goldstone saying moscow supports his fathers candidacy. He responded if its what you say it is, i love it. Trump junior and goldstone finalize a date. Same day trump teases this major speech. June 8 russian intelligence
these are places where he should be
Lockstep, all major markets are down. But the dow and s p 500 are down 6 10 of a percent. The nasdaq tech stocks which populate the nasdaq are down a lot more. The nasdaq is down 1. 4 . That wraps up this hour for me. Ill see you tomorrow at 11 00 a. M. Eastern with stephanie ruhle, then 3 00 p. M. Thanks for watching. Deadline white house with Nicolle Wallace starts now. Hi, everyone. Its 4 00 in new york. In a single round of media appearances Rudy Giuliani today torched two years of Donald Trumps collusion denials. Muddying the waters to a near unrecognizable condition as he spirals deeper into incoherent scenarios about what the president did and didnt know about the trump tower meeting. That meeting is now at the heart of the Obstruction Of Justice investigation and is perhaps also being investigated as part of a conspiracy to coordinate with a known american adversary. Here are two of the president s closest allies and advisors debuting the new line on russian
deals with paper in
greatest moment, witting down all those many 75 witnesses and bringing those who presumably believe will provide the most support for her case as she presents it to the grand jury and seeks indictments. vaughn, you have his comments against judge chutkan just days after his lawyers promised trump would take her admonition seriously, consistent with practice we can say for sure, vaughn, but not, it would seem, recognizing that this time could be very different. reporter: right, donald trump seems to have every intention of fighting this. i asked him explicitly at the iowa state fair, upon his departure from iowa on saturday, whether there s any chance he would take a plea deal. take a listen. i don t do plea deals. we did nothing wrong. we don t take plea deals.
it s not uncommon to see a summer reset like this. it happened in past presidential campaigns. the question is, can they adapt. and can they, as you said, convert new voters. and draw new donors, too. totally. because he s been getting big dollar donors and they re capped at a certain point, so he has to find new money. david to the question of mitt romney suggestion of witting down the herd for those running for president. we heard that at the end of the 2016 primary, ted cruz, marco rubio and others. is it likely that republicans are going to listen to that argument? it s interesting, mitt romney is not making the argument to the candidate themselves. he s making them to the financial backers, right? right. he s saying you should turn off the spigot here and no longer fund candidates who aren t viable to trump after the first contests, iowa, new hampshire, south carolina. whether or not candidates will
on the way, documents disappear, they can be destroyed, people reach out to witnesses, others flee. but after the search warrant, once there is no longer a legitimate law enforcement basis to keep the affidavit sealed, typically you go to the judge with a motion and you ask him to unseal it, and he signs an order unsealing it. so i expect that s going to happen at some point, it may be redacted in part to your point, but we re going to see, i imagine, most of it, and i hope relatively soon, and that s going to help us answer all the questions that we have. so, andrew, if you were practicing at the justice department and advising the attorney general on a decision that would be up to him, and you had the evidence that he was witting in all of this, was knowledgeable, would you indict a former president? so if the crimes are sufficiently serious, and there is precedent for bringing those