and more, fairly, urgently, and accurately. it's a mission that's more important than ever. and that's why you'll see me back here in "the situation room" tomorrow night. please join us then. until then, i'm wolf blitzer in "the situation room." "erin burnett outfront" starts right now. "outfront" next, breaking news. president trump in an extraordinary statement threatening north korea with fire and fury. north korea responding moments ago, threatening a missile strike on the american island of guam. are we on the edge of a nuclear war? plus, the u.s. preparing for a north korean strike. we're going to go live to u.s. command center, one of america's first lines of defense. let's go "outfront." good evening mia. i'm erin burnett. "outfront" tonight, the breaking news. fire and fury, president trump with that extraordinary threat to kim jong-un. language never before heard from an american president to the leader of another country. three hours after a story broke in "the washington post"

reporting north korea has miniaturized a nuclear warhead, president trump at an event on opioids, lashed out at kim jong-un. >> north korea best not make anymore threats to the united states. they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. they will be met with fire, fury, and frankly, power, the likes of which this world has never seen before. >> "fire and fury, the likes of which the world has never seen," words that echo none other than kim jong-un himself, which has threatened a, quote, merciful blow to the united states, a, quote, nuclear hammer. and words matter when it comes to possible nuclear war. moments ago, north korea responded to president trump by saying it's, quote, examining an operational plan to launch missiles at the american islands of guam. and breaking now, a new cnn poll just released at this hour

showing 37% of respondents approve of trump's handling of north korea. a grim number. before tonight, even before north korea threatened guam, trump was hit in response to his fire and fury statement, with a bipartisan slam from senate leaders. >> i take exception to the president's comments, because you got to be sure that you can do what you say you're going to do. in other words, the old walk softly, but carry a big stick. >> across the aisle, dianne feinstein lashing out in a statement saying, quote, president trump is not helping the situation with his bombastic comments. jeff zeleny is "outfront" tonight from the white house. and jeff, look, he said it not once, but twice. he carefully chose those words, fire and fury and power the likes of which the world has never seen before. he said them twice. we have never heard this kind of bluster from an american president to another world leader. >> we have not, erin, certainly from a u.s. president to a world leader.

it would be more common to hear it in the reverse here. but those words were off the cuff, described to me as being spontaneous. but you're right, he said them again. he echoed them. it's certainly something that he has been saying in private conversations with his military advisers and others. but the situation here is, he's at odds with his own advisers here. secretary of state rex tillerson has left the door open to diplomacy, as has nikki haley, the u.n. ambassador. so that is what was so interesting about the president's comments this afternoon, that he is, you know, certainly escalating things, no doubt. but is he closing the door to diplomacy here? john mccain, you heard his reaction there, dianne feinstein as well. but the question here, erin, is how do other world leaders react to this? is he closing the u.s. off of any type of a diplomatic situation here? there's no doubt, when president obama left this white house, he had one message for president trump. he said, north korea is the biggest threat.

today we're seeing that's right. erin? >> we certainly are. and thank you, jeff, because this unprecedented threat is coming, as we are learning some crucial new information about what american intelligence now knows about north korea's miniaturized nuclear warhead. and this is the crucial thing, right? you may have the delivery, the intercontinental ballistic missile, but they didn't yet have the ability to put the pay lo load on top. this is the huge development and possible transformational one for the world. jim sciutto is "outfront," jim, this is a stunning and an alarming development. it is happening on a time frame that is very different than we had expected. >> that's right, an accelerating time frame. multiple officials telling us that north korea is now produce ing miniaturized of nuclear weapons that could be placed on top of an intercontinental ballistic missile, which they're also making progress, with the range to hit many parts of the continental u.s. now, we are told that is not a consensus view of the u.s. intelligence community yet, and it is not the belief of the u.s. intelligence committee that such

a weapon has been deployed yet, yet they are making them. still very crucial, but it's part of an accelerating timeline here, where they're only going in one direction. one official who is familiar with this intelligence report telling me that, really, it's not a matter of if, but when. and this happens as north korea makes increasing threats. keep in mind this threat against guam. guam is a u.s. territory. it has a u.s. air force base there, in fact, two of them with thousands of u.s. military personnel. i just learned a short time ago, some of the basis, perhaps, of that north korean threat, and that is this. north korea said in their threat that the u.s. had flown strategic bombers over its territory. in fact, we're able to report now that the u.s. flew two b1b bombers over the korean peninsula on monday, this part of continuing u.s. air operations there. it's something that the u.s. has done before. but that threat to guam, it's not by accident. those b1b bombers are based at anderson air force base in guam. it's a threat that the u.s. military takes very seriously.

>> absolutely. thank you very much, jim sciutto. and let's go straight now to retired u.s. army major, general spider marks, bob baer, and gloria borger, our chief political analyst. bob, let me start with you. these are unprecedented words, fire and fury, from an american president. >> erin, they are. let me tell you, though, i think the narrative is not necessarily what our president has stated. i know that may seem a bit koint t counterintuitive. what's important to understand is that the north korean regime, for as long as it's been in place, it goes back over 70 years, has been on a path to assert itself and to establish itself as an independent body. and it has done that. and it has been in a linear progression in terms of achieving what it is now on the cusp of being able to demonstrate and deploy to the world, which is a nuclear capability, missiles, nuclear deterrent, we are, in fact, a big player, not just in theglob.

and we are going to stay there. it really doesn't matter what our president says. whether we think it is presidential or not is not the narrative. the nairrative is the kim regim has achieved what it's been looking to achieve for many, many decades and it's tonigon t cusp of deploying that. >> yet, when you have an american president speaking, frankly, in words that echo kim jong-un himself, words that are often,, you know -- >> true. >> -- sort of looked at, even though people find them frightening, but the bellicose, belligerent rhetoric that we hear. bob, they're now coming out tonight and saying, well, guess what, we're looking at a military strike on guam. do you take that seriously, bob? >> erin, i do, in fact, take that seriously. don't forget that north korea has essentially attacked us in the past, in 1968, they attacked the "uss pueblo."

held prisoners for a long time. they've attacked american soldiers. this is a very violent, irrational regime. and i agree with the president. i don't know that he's a madman, but they are perfectly capable of making a preemptive attack against guam, even though it would be suicidal, you know? this is a very dangerous country. and we do not know how advanced they are in their miniaturized nuclear weapons. we do not know whether they, for instance, have bought reentry shields from the russians for their nuclear weapons. we just don't know. intelligence in north korea is very bad. >> intelligence is bad. so, gloria, obviously, when news like this happens, when we hear, okay, they have the ability to put the nuclear payload on the icbm, it can completely change the timeline overnight with just one new piece. and the president responds with fire and fury, which are, gloria, coming from a president, unprecedented words. and as jeff zeleny points out, words that completely contradict

what his own cabinet members have said as recently as days ago, when the u.s. has said, the u.s. is not seeking regime change and north korea is not our enemy. >> well, the benign way to interpret this would be that there's a good cop/bad cop situation going on with the president being the bad cop. however, i don't think most people would interpret it that way. and i think what happens is that you're playing into the regime's hands right now. because he can go back and say, look at these words. the americans are threatening us. and they are the aggressor. we are not the aggressor. and i think you have to wonder what our allies are think right now about what our intentions are. and you can only hope that general mattis and rex tillerson and general mcmaster behind the scenes are talking to our allies, as nikki haley did, in the u.n., and trying to figure out what to do next. we are not accustomed to the

saber rattling from us. we are accustomed to presidents who try to take the temperature down, not presidents who try to raise it. and that's what we heard today. >> and general marks, i guess the question for you is, at what point do words become insurmountable? right, they're just words to a certain point, and then all of a sudden they can turn into sympathetic, like a war that nobody wants to have happen, right? but that's certainly where the rhetoric is going. can it be -- you know, how do you ratchet it back at this point? >> yeah, to gloria's point is, everything -- the mission number one on the peninsula is to de-escalate. if there's an incident, as bob described, with the "pueblo," with the tree chopping incident back in '76, with firing incidents that have taken place on the islands on the shoulders of south korea, is to taualways de-escala de-escalate. and we've always given north korea the benefit of the doubt

and been able to ratchet it down. so true, words are significant. but the words that the president are using now have less impact in pyongyang and more impact in tokyo, in seoul, and in beijing. and that's the important point that we need to get our arms around. you're right, we have a disconnect between the secretary of state and president of the united states. what happens when people start turning on the lights and waking up in those three capitals this morning and are trying to make sense of this all. >> and they see fire and fury and assume it's kim jong-un and then they see it's president trump. bob, we have a new poll here tonight. 85% of americans say north korea is a serious threat to the united states. 37% of americans approve of the way president trump is handling the situation with north korea. is this the most serious threat the united states faces right now? >> it's a serious threat, but i also agree with general marks, you have to de-escalate. this is what we've always done with north korea, we've talked them out of a war. so what the american people deem to be a threat doesn't mean that

we need to go nuclear on this. and this is essentially what the president has said, we're going to go nuclear on this if they don't stand down. getting everybody stirred up about north korea is not going to help. and i side with the secretary of state, rex tillerson. you know, we've got to talk to these people, experts on north korea, that know kim jong-un, so you've got to talk to this guy, you can talk him out of this. so this dual policy in the united states is not helpful. >> and yet, gloria, this is a president who says what he wants to say, you know? you just heard jeff zeleny. what he said was off the cuff. that's what he said and that's what he wanted to say, and he said it twice. he didn't care what rex tillerson said. you know, he says what he wants to say. >> and look, this is a president who one would presume has looked at all options and has been sitting around with his military advisers, with his national security adviser, and looking at all options. and listening to his secretary of state, who's trying to de-escalate the situation. >> and by the way, a president who knew this news about a

miniaturized icbm, right? >> right. >> before it was in "the washington post." theoretical theoretically, he didn't hear it from "the washington post," one would hope. >> right, but donald trump, i think, takes it personally, as he does everything. and feels that he's being bullied by the regime. so he was going to throw it right back at them. and you know, his problem is that they'll probably believe him. and, you know, while three quarters of the american public doesn't believe anything that comes out of the white house, i'm not so sure that's how they're going to feel. and so, i think it escalates a situation unnecessarily, and i think, you know, now, everybody else has their work cut out for them. and it makes life a little bit more difficult. >> all right. thank you, all, very much. and we have more of the breaking news ahead. it's just after 7:00 in the morning in china. really, perhaps the only country that could get through to north korea right now. we are live in beijing with our

own will ripley, who has spent so much time in pyongyang. plus, how will kim jong-un respond? i'll speak to will ripley, 13 times he's been to pyongyang. and is america provide for a nuclear strike? live to the command center facing a stark reality tonight. well, because it tells us something powerful about progress: that whether times are good or bad, people and their ideas will continue to move the world forward. as long as they have someone to believe in them. citi financed the transatlantic cable that connected continents. and the panama canal, that made our world a smaller place. we backed the marshall plan that helped europe regain its strength. and pioneered the atm, for cash, anytime. for over two centuries we've supported dreams like these, and the people and companies behind them.

so why should that matter to you? because, today, we are still helping progress makers turn their ideas into reality. and the next great idea could be yours. ditching the cover-up for good? that's cool. showing off my arms? that's cool. being comfortable without a shirt? that's cool. getting the body you want without surgery, needles, or downtime? that's coolsculpting. coolsculpting is the only fda-cleared non-invasive treatment that targets and freezes away stubborn fat cells. visit coolsculpting.com today and register for a chance to win a free treatment.

somewhere along of self-discovery: a breakthrough. ♪ it's in our nature to need each other. ♪ with a stunning 4k displaydow and graphics thates. bring them to life. peter! you still with us? the dell inspiron 15 7000 gaming. dell, as real as it gets. breaking news, north korea threatening to take action tonight in response to president

trump's threat of fire and fury. korea warning it is examining a plan to strike the united states' territory of guam. that threat, of course, following the president's warning, of course, that north korea could be struck like the world has never before seen. and u.s. intelligence analysts, of course, warning that north korea has produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead, that they are able to launch on a missile capable of striking the mainland united states. that is, of course, a game changer. will ripley is live tonight in beijing. will, you have been on the ground. you have been to north korea 13 times. what is the reaction right now to what we are seeing? these unprecedented words from the president and now a direct threat from the north korean regime to guam. >> well, we don't know how north korea is going to respond to these words from the president, because that threat to strike guam with ballistic missiles was made as a result of a u.s. b1b bombing flyover on the korean peninsula that happened on monday. this takes things to a whole new

level. and in the coming hours, we expect for some sort of a response from the chinese government here in beijing, which often kind of stands in the middle, urging all sindes t remain calm. they tell the united states not to escalate the situation with military exercises. they tell north korea not to escalate the situation by launching more missiles. but now you have a situation where the rhetoric on both sides is white hot. it's never really been like this before. and we know in the past, that north korea responds with force. we can see missile launches. we could potentially see a nuclear test. and of course, north korea will come out with its own strongly worded rhetoric, perhaps a direct attack on president trump. i was in north korea speaking with government officials about a month and a half ago about this very topic. and they say, it's a nonstarter for them, that the u.s. demands that they give up their nuclear program or their missile program before they'll sit down at the negotiating table, erin. so these two sides are very far apart. we really have to watch and wait and see what will happen next. >> thank you very much, will ripley. and "outfront" now, the democratic congressman, eric

swalwell of california, member of the house intelligence and judiciary committees. congressman, thank you for your time tonight. let me start with the basic question here. were you aware that north korea had the ability to attach a nuclear payload to a missile that can strike the mainland u.s. before today? >> i can't go into that, erin, but what i am aware of right now is we very much need a cool-headed president and not a barstool threats. we really need the president to talk to our experts who will lay out for him all of the diplomatic options and also assure him that the military options, while they are there, they are no good ones. he also needs to talk to our allies. we had -- we made progress over the weekend at the u.n., with the sanctions that were put in place. and you know, he should get credit for doing that, but he shouldn't be inconsistent and move to this new threat that he's making. and he should talking to china, because china remains a pivotal player in what will happen next with korea.

>> so congressman, let me play again the threat that the president made today. and again, just to be clear so our viewers know, the president was speaking at an event about opioid addiction. and he sort of, it seems, ad libbed, and said this at the beginning of that meeting. here he is. >> north korea best not make anymore threats to the united states. they will be met with fire and fury, like the world has never seen. they will be met with fire, fury, and frankly, power the likes of which this world has never seen before. >> he delivered that. he obviously was angry, arms crossed. what's your response, congressman? >> it's not helpful, erin. especially the progress that u.n. ambassador haley had apparently made over the weekend. and so, we've seen this before. rex tillerson says one thing about what's going on in the middle east, you know, as we saw with recent divisions there, and

then the president comes out and attacks these countries. we saw that just recently. and so, again, erin, he needs to be level-headed right now. he needs to be consistent. and unpredictability is an okay tactic, as long as it's part of an overall strategy. and right now i'm not convinced that there is an overall strategy. >> do you, congressman, believe, from what the president said today, that he is willing, he is prepared, to use a nuclear weapon? >> yes. i believe that he is somebody who would prefer to use the military over diplomacy, because it's easier and he hasn't shown a willingness to engage even our friends. that's what concerns me. he has a lot of smart people who are working for him. and a number of experienced generals, a number of foreign policy experts. he should listen to them. also, erin, he should appoint an ambassador to south korea. we had a very experienced hand there in mark lipport. and he's no longer there. so he could add more experience to the team, to understand all

of his options. >> so you just heard the breaking news, i'm sure, congressman, that north korea is coming out now and saying it's examining a plan to strike guam. how seriously do you take that threat, which i think is interesting, our will ripley is saying is more in response to the united states flying bombers over the korean peninsula, and it is not actually, yet, a formal response to trump's threat of fire and fury. so they may up the ante even more. but let's start with this threat to guam. do you think it's serious or just words? >> very seriously. you should take people at their word or you'll be sorry you don't. but unnecessarily escalating the situation is not in our interest. our interest is to work with our allies, to work with china to explore every option before we have to visit the military option. and i thought the president was on that course over the weekend. and so it is concerning that he has jumped now to a pure nuclear option to take care of north korea's capabilities. >> of course, at moments like

this is when the american people need to trust their president. president trump is our president. he is our commander in chief. a brand-new cnn poll just released shows only 37% of americans approve of his handling of the situation in north korea so far. you, obviously, speak to all of your constituents with, and perhaps carry even more sway, obviously, over the -- your democratic ones. how much confidence do you have? do you believe that this president is able to step up to the plate and handle this. >> i'm very worried, erin, that he does not value partnerships. and if you look at the greatest challenges america has ever faced, we have overcome them, because of mesh leadershamerica and partnerships. you think of malta and casa kbl blanca. an american president sitting down with our allies and even necessarily countries we weren't so close, but we came together and addressed those threats. and right now you just see the president going the old tried and not true way of trying to go military first.

and it also reminds me, erin, if he's relying on uncorroborated sources, to say that north korea has this capability. you know, we saw what happened in iraq, when we leaned in like we did and the evidence didn't end up being there. >> just a quick follow there, "the washington post" is the outlet which reported this. and the president came out and made his comments, which presumably indicated he already had the intelligence. but are you opening the door to the fact that they may not have this ability at all? >> if they have the ability, he should be forthcoming with the american people, other than just re-tweeting a fox and friends story and de facto declassifying what is an unnamed source. "the washington post" is a very credible outlet, but we should not launch a nuclear attack based on a "washington post" story that the president re-tweeted this morning. he should lay out the case to the american people.

>> all right. thank you very much, congressman. i appreciate your time. next, you've got about fewer than 5,000 miles that separate north korea from hawaii. how vulnerable is hawaii to an attack? well, we're live tonight in honolulu. and a closer look at a miniaturized nuclear warhead. what this all comes down to. is it truly ready for launch in north korea? at the end of an icbm? and where exactly could it strike. at panera, a salad is so much more than one thing. more than one flavor, or texture, or color. a good clean salad is so much more than green. and with panera catering, more for your event. panera. food as it should be. here ya go. awesome, thank you. thank you. that's... not your car. your car's ready! wrong car... this is not your car? i would love to take it, but no. oh, i'm so sorry about that. you guys wanna check it out? it's someone else's car... this is beautiful. what is this? it's the all-new chevy equinox. this feels like a luxury suv. i love this little 360, how do they even do that?

i made a bad decision on my last car purchase. well, your car's here. bummer... bummer. wah-wah. i'm ready for an upgrade. (laughter) i am totally blind. and non-24 can throw my days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do. talk to your doctor, and call 844-214-2424. it's ok that everybody ignoit's fine.n i drive. because i get a safe driving bonus check every six months i'm accident free. because i don't use my cellphone when i'm driving. even though my family does, and leaves me all alone. here's something else... i don't share it with mom. i don't. right, mom? i have a brand new putter you don't even know about!

it's awesome. safe driving bonus checks, only from allstate. sometimes i leave the seat up on purpose. switching to allstate is worth it. it can seem like triggers pop up everywhere. luckily there's powerful, 24-hour, non-drowsy claritin. it provides relief of symptoms that can be triggered by over 200 different allergens. live claritin clear.

north korea threatening to strike the u.s. territory of guam. this comes after president trump promised to deliver, quote, fire and fury to north korea, after

u.s. intelligence analysts assessed north korea has produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead capable of being mounted on an intercontinental ballistic missile and striking the united states. guam, of course, is not the only island within striking distance of north korea. another potential target within kim jong-un's range is hawaii, which is where sara sidner is live tonight. she's inside a bunker in honolulu. of course, sarah, if north korea launched a nuclear warhead toward hawaii, let's start with the very basics thing if such a thing were to occur, how long would it take to go from launch to strike? >> reporter: just 20 minutes, erin. that is what all the experts say. they say that from the time of launch of north korea with a nuclear warhead, it could land in hawaii in 20 minutes, which means there will be about 5 minutes as it's being tracked and there will be 15 minutes to get the population warned. and here's where that warning would come. first, there would be a call that would come into this phone.

it's a secure line. this gentlemen would pick up the phone. he would say, okay, the missile is coming. and then there would be a warning that would go out to the entire population. they have sirens they are working on now to make sure that the population knows exactly what that sound means, that there's an attack that's going to happen. this phone would be picked up by someone sitting here. they would pick up the phone and they would call all of the counties. and that goes to all the counties directly, to let them know that a warning siren is necessary and that an attack is underway. erin. >> so, so sarah, that's pretty stunning, when you talk about 20 minutes, of which really only 15 minutes count to warning people. how is hawaii actually preparing for the potential of a nuclear strike? it's one thing to have such an idea in concept and it's another perhaps to look at it as a real risk. >> reporter: absolutely. it's a really good question. how do you prepare when you only have, for example, 15 minutes. but that is why hawaii is looking for -- they are the first state to try to get their population prepared.

they've been working on this for months now. at least seven months, trying to come up with a really good plan and get that plan out to the public. and what they're telling people is, look, you need to look at your surroundings. because -- and this is really important -- a lot of people on this island believe that if they are hit with a nuclear warhead, that everyone is going to die. and the emergency management folks here say that is absolutely not true. not true. there will be lots of survivors. and your ability to survive will probably depend on where you are and what you have planned for. so if you're in a car, you want to get inside of a building. if you're in your house, you want to get to the center of the house. if you're on the beach, see if there's a cave nearby or go across the street to a building. try to get below ground, if you can. these are all things they're trying to get out to the public. and this is a just-in-case scenario. people here are not panicking. the emergency management folks do not want people to panic, but they want them to be prepared. preparation is everything. and the thought is that the

strength of the bomb that north korea currently has is about what the united states had back in the '40s. we're talking world war ii era time. and people survived hiroshima, people can survive if that same type of bomb hits here. erin? >> all right, thank you very much, sara. "outfront" now, former assistant secretary for the department of homeland security, juliette kayyem, and former reagan political defector, jeffrey lord, along with our senior analyst, jeffrey toobin. juliette, of course, when you look at hiroshima and nagasaki, there were plenty of people who survived the initial impact and died in horrific ways days, months, years later. it's one thing to survive, and another to call that a survival. obviously, this is the biggest threat that any president has faced, right. the big question here is, is any state ready? >> no, not for the kind of attack that might be anticipated from north korea. i just want to say something. this isn't the biggest threat that a president has faced. it may be the biggest threat

that we come to, because of the sort of language by donald trump, but we're at this stage, talking about preparedness for a nuclear attack. you know, let's take ten steps back and see whether we can't stop that from happening. but just quickly on the homeland security site, hawaii is part of fema region nine. what does that mean? it means that they have been preparing for everything from earthquakes to tidal waves to even this, given their proximity to north korea. what that means is that they've been focused on what's called duck and cover, some of you -- some older viewers will remember this, this was a turtle, a movie that was sent out during the 1950s to prepare the population for potential nuclear armageddon. it was the biggest public relations campaign made by the government to educate people what to do. it's the duck and cover. it remains the best advice we can give the american population facing a nuclear detonation. but just the comparisons to hiroshima don't work. one, because we know what the response will be, but secondly,

because hawaii, and you know, we're just much more densely populated as a nation at this stage. but the hope is we never get to this, of course. >> right. of course, the issue is, when you look at times in history, when you have had moments like this, forget what precipitated it, whether it's the words of a president or otherwise, jeffrey lord, you so often like to look at jfk. in this case, let's talk about the cuban missile crisis, okay? a new yo"new york times" headli today called what we are seeing with north korea is a cuban missile crisis in slow motion. darryl issa was also just likening this to the cuban missile crisis. at that time, jfk addressed the nation and sounded a lot different than donald trump today. here he is. >> i call upon chairman to halt this threat to world peace and the stable relations between our two nations. he has an opportunity now to

move the world back from the abyss of destruction. >> jeffrey, it is -- there are, obviously, words. abyss of destruction. but a very different tone, right? putting the onus, the opportunity on the russians as opposed to threatening them with fire and fury the likes of which the world has never before seen. sorry, go ahead. >> erin, two things. two things, quickly. what provoked the cuban missile crisis was the perception of weakness that president kennedy was seen by the soviets the to have demonstrated at the bay of pigs and later at the berlin wall. and they felt they could take him on in cuba and succeed and take him on in berlin and succeed. they could put nuclear missiles in cuba. there's one other thing that we're not mentioning hear. on january 12th of 1950, secretary of state deane atchison gave a speech at the national press club in which he drew the defensive perimeter line for america and the pacific. that line included japan and the

philippines. it did not include the republic of korea. six months later, north korea with the backing ofstalin, invaded south korea. there are a lot of people who thought that speech indicated weakness and the korean war was laun launched. soi so i would suggest as we consider language -- >> young the president is projecting strength? not weakness? >> yes, you have to project strength. president kennedy, i think, realized himself he had made a mistake. >> and yet john -- so you're saying the president today is projecting strength. let me just play again what john mccain just said in a radio interview. he, obviously, sees this completely different than you do, jeffrey. let me put it in his words. >> i take exception to the president's comments, because you got to be sure that you can do what you say you're going to do. in other words, the old walk softly, but carry a big stick. >> gloria, the implication from

john mccain is clearly the president is walking way too loudly. >> well, i would just suggest that i'm sure that the president is consulting with secretary mattis and secretary tillerson. secretary mattis in particular would have a very good idea about what the united states' capabilities in the pacific are or are not. i think that would be a very important person to be listening to in all of this and i would think senator john mccain would agree with this. jeffrey? jeffrey toobin, i'm sorry. go ahead. >> can we just dial this all back a little bit? i think this is an important story, but it is an unconfirmed report of a possible technological development from north korea. and suddenly, on television, we're talking about people hiding in caves on hawaii. i mean, i think -- you know, north korea has had unstable leadership for a long time. they've been developing nuclear weapons for a long time. the idea that we are now in some

unprecedented new territory, it does not serve anybody's interests to talk about this as if nuclear war were imminent pip mean, it just seems crazy to me. >> so what do we do? do we ignore the words of the president of the united states? >> well, no -- i mean, i think the words of the president of the united states are not helping the situation. i mean, we're so used to editing what he said. what he actually said is if there's going to be more threats, not an attack, but more threats from north korea, we're going to see, in effect, a nuclear war. because he said, like -- like the world has never seen. >> in which case, jeffrey, to your point, that truly is a game changer. i think that's what john mccain is pointing out. you're setting a red line there that you know north korea is going to cross. threats is what they trade in. >> that's right. that's how they talk. that's the ingo of the north korean government.

but i think everyone should dial this all back a little bit and not create some sort of panic that we are on the brink of a nuclear war, because, you know, it's just one person's opinion. i don't think we're on the brink of a nuclear war. and i don't think anybody needs to do anything in hawaii, except take a great, enjoyable, long vacation. >> juliette, let me ask you a question, though. how does the president dial this back, right? he has just set a line, if you continue to threaten, you're going to be met with fire and fury the likes of which the world has never before seen. how does he not act on that threat without losing face and credibility. that's the crucial question. >> i think it is, ands here's the irony or the sort of what's so upsetting about this is the truth is is that nikki haley, his u.s. ambassador to the yu.n, had a great weekend. she actually succeeded in getting the security council to agree to these sanctions. then things start to ratchet up. i agree with jeffrey. i mean, you know, look, i come from the world of preparedness, so you can never be too prepared for anything.

that's what you want people in homeland security to be. i think the thing that worries me about this language more is it increases the capacity for mistake. i don't think trump is waking up thinking i'm going to nuke north korea or vice versa. i just think that when you ratchet up the language like this, it leaves the sort of capacity for -- to avoid mistakes. it sort of narrows that lane. and that's what, i think, is different right now. and i think most presidents in the past have recognized that. and have said, look, i'm not going to narrow that lane. but, you know, obviously, the president can ratchet it back with his language or let tillerson and ambassador haley do what they were doing pretty well this weekend. >> well, and of course, you also have mixed messages from all over this administration, right, jeffrey lord? tillerson coming out and saying, we do not seek regime change and north korea is not our enemy, right? to try to calm them down. yet the cia director twice in recent months, i know, and here

is one of them, has said the opposite. here's mike pompeo. >> it would be a great thing to denuclearize the pennsylvaninsu get those weapons off of it, but the thing most dangerous about it is the character who holds the control over them today. so from the administration's perspective, the most important thing we can do is separate those two. >> so, jeffrey lord, which is it? separate those two, meaning regime change or no regime change? this is a crucial question. this administration should be on the same page, right? >> yeah. well, to slip into the american vernacular, i think we may be seeing an example of good cop/bad cop here. and the president has said in the past he wants to be unpredictable. that can be a good thing in a situation like this. because if you've got somebody who was threatening to attack the united states of america, you want to make sure he is very, very uncertain as to whether he can survive that attack. >> all right. i will leave it there. thank you all very much. next, the crucial question

here, right, north korea issuing threats tonight. what are they actually technically able and ready to do. we'll show you the latest intelligence here, virtual. plus, on the front lines of a potential threat from north korea. alaskan senator dan sullivan joins us next. i make it easy to save $600 on car insurance, so being cool comes naturally. hmm. i can't decide if this place is swag or bling. it's pretzels. word. ladies, you know when you switch, you get my bomb-diggity discounts automatically. ♪ no duh, right? [ chuckles ] sir, you forgot -- keep it. you're gonna need it when i make it precipitate. what, what? what?

what, what? we're drowning in information. where, in all of this, is the stuff that matters? the stakes are so high, your finances, your future. how do you solve this? you don't. you partner with a firm that advises governments and the fortune 500, and, can deliver insight person to person, on what matters to you. morgan stanley.

breaking news. north korea threatening to strike the u.s. territory of guam, as president trump is warning pyongyang of fire and fury if the threats continue. this all comes as sources tell cnn that u.s. intelligence has assessed that north korea has produced a nuclear warhead, small enough to fit on missiles, missiles that could, of course, potentially reach the united states. now tom foreman is "outfront" with more now to virtually look at this. tom, let's just start with the facts here. what exactly are these miniaturized missile -- or, you know, weapons, this payload. and what exactly is the range of the missile on which they are mounted? >> well, erin, this photo purports to show kim jong-un with a miniaturized nuke. when it was released last year, a lot of people laughed at it, said it was fake. maybe not so much. it would be about 2 feet across, several hundred pounds, maybe

500, 600. and it would have the destructive potential of the bombs that were dropped 72 years ago this week on japan. but look at the difference here. each of these were 10 feet or longer. they were around 10,000 pounds. these had to be carried in by a heavy bomber. this, a whole different equation here. small enough, light enough, it could fit in the nose cone of some of those missiles we've seen tested lately. and that makes all the difference. because the latest test of a missile there, it went 2,300 miles up into space. that's way above the space station, way above many satellites out there. the land distance was only 621 miles, but that's because it went straight up and essentially came straight down. if you flatten out that trajectory and you fire it across the earth, then you're talking about something that very well could reach guam, it could reach hawaii. and depending on the weight of the payload, some scientists believe, technically, it might be able to reach the middle of

the country and some cities there, erin? >> so when you say some scientists and technically, obviously, huge caveats. what are the north koreans still missing? >> well, i think those are important caveats, because if you look at the entire equation, there's still some holes here that are important ones. let's give them the range. let's say they have enough thrust in one of these that it could reach to the mainland of the united states. we'll green light that. huge questions still around accuracy. when you flatten out that trajectory and you fire that way, technologically, it is a huge challenge to get it to go that far, to come back into the atmosphere without tearing up, and being able to target that warhead at something specific. these are big, big challenges out there. we don't know that they have that technology yet. that's a yellow light, for sure. but bear in mind, only a few weeks ago, erin, we were saying that nuclear warheads war red line, that nobody thought they had the technology or very few

thought that they could miniaturize it this much. now the opinion seems to be shifting there, >> thank you, very much tom tore foreman. general, you have spent a lot of time in south korea and you spent a lot of time in intelligence. how good is american intelligence in terms of assessing what north korea can and can't do right now? is it completely opaque, or is it possible there's been a break threw a through and the information is much more accurate? >> i doubt there's been a significant breakthrough, but it's not entirely opaque. the technical means by which the united states and some of our allies, imagery intelligence, albeit a little more difficult, because it's routinely cloud cover. you certainly can do measurements, intelligence,

those anomalies that occur in terms of coherent changes without getting too technical. we also have great collection that takes place among the different services, the navy, the air force. the human intelligence collection, however, is the long pole in the tent. it's difficult to extract good intelligence from those that have lived up north, those that have been part of the regime, those chose to the decision makers and can ex-filtrate out of north korea, make it out alive, and end up someplace where they can be debriefed and figure out what they know. >> thank you very much, general marks. i want to bring in republican senator dan sullivan from ala a alaska, a state that's 3500 miles from north korea and very well aware of the threats from a north korean missile. senator, thank you for your time. obviously, the president threatening north korea, saying

that if north korea continuing to threaten the united states, it will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. what is your response to what the president said, do you think that was the right thing to say? >> well, look, erin, you know, effective diplomacy has got to be backed up with credible military options. you know, the president's administration this week, and your previous panel mentioned that it was conducting some very effective diplomacy. i thought secretary tillerson and ambassador haley, but one of the options that they're looking at that would eventual hi materialize is a preemptive war on the korean peninsula launched by the u.s., that would require the authorization from congress. article i makes this very clear. so to me, the administration has done a good job up until now working closely with the congress on their broader

strategy. but we're going to play an important role here. >> so when the president says, if the threats continue, you know, he'll strike with fire and fury, it sounds like what you're saying is he's drawing a red line that he's not going to be able to enforce. >> look, i think you have a -- you don't want to get into too many hypotheticals, but you have very different se nar yocenarsc. a military option to launch by military forces has to be authorized by the congress. i have been raises this with the administration for some time now. and to be honest, there's not a lot of pushback, if any pushback. so that's one scenario. there are other scenarios that you can imagine if for some reason kim jong-un did try to launch something, well, first of all, and this is another very important element of this

strategy, the missile defense system, which is mostly based in alaska, would almost certainly shoot it down. but if there's some kind of attack on our forces or on our troops, you know, the president as commander in chief has more authority to react to that. >> what about the missile defense? it's gone through many tests so far this year. some of them have failed, others have been more successful. when you look at that missile defense system in alaska, are you confident that it would work if it was called into use right now? >> i am confident, erin. and it's something i've been very focused on as a senator. but i think we need to do more. so i introduced a bill, 27 u.s. senators have co-correspondent sword that's been moved out of committee, the armed services exitty. i'm very confident it's going to pass when we come back from recess. we need to do more on missile defense. you can't assume that kim

jong-un is rational, and that the alaska based system and missiles in california and a forward deployed missile defense with the thaad, these need to be integrated, upgraded, we need more of them. we need a space sensor that can integrate all of our missile defenses with our allies. that's what my bill would do, and i think the vast majority of americans, what you live in alaska or chicago, would agree with that. so whatever the strategy is, it has to include a much more robust missile defense. >> senator sullivan, thank you for calling in tonight. >> thank you, erin. next, country music legend glenn campbell died today. a look back at his incredible life.

i needed something more to help control my type 2 diabetes. my a1c wasn't were it needed to be. so i liked when my doctor told me that i may reach my blood sugar and a1c goals by activating what's within me with once-weekly trulicity. trulicity is not insulin. it helps activate my body to do what it's suppose to do, release its own insulin. i take it once a week, and it works 24/7. it comes in an easy-to-use pen and i may even lose a little weight. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. trulicity is not insulin. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes,

or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you or a family member has had medullary thyroid cancer, if you've had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have a lump or swelling in your neck, severe pain in your stomach, or symptoms such as itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may include pancreatitis, which can be fatal. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin, increases your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may make existing kidney problems worse. once-weekly trulicity may help me reach my blood sugar goals. with trulicity, i click to activate what's within me. if you want help improving your a1c and blood sugar, activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.

buried just under the surface, the answer to it all. ♪ we want to need each other. ♪

tonight, more breaking news to share on a side note. country music singer x eer glen campbell died today. his career and influence spanned decades. he had a spring of hits and learned to play on a $5 guitar. ♪ i can hear you through the wine ♪ >> campbell's death met by sorrow. dolly parton tweeting, glen campbell was one of the greatest voices of all time. i will always love you, glen. charlie daniels saying, thank you, glen campbell, for sharing your talents for so many years.

may you rest in peace, my friend. and his daughter, ashley, saying this about her dad. heart broken, i owe him everything i am and everything i will be. he will be remembered so well and with so much love. he revealed he had alzheimer's six years ago. he died at 81. thank you for joining us. anderson is next. >> >> good evening. we we xwin with tough talk from the be the directed a eed at no korea and a response from pyongyang that ratchets up the rhetoric. today on a day we learned that north korea may have managed to make nuclear warheads that can fit on a missile capable of strike thing country, here's the president's message to kim jong-un. >> north korea best not make any more threats to the united states. they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. he