reporting and we hope everything goes good for you on capitol hill. jordain: [indiscernible] >> the senate working for most of the day today, except for a holdup from kentucky senator rand paul. holding of the action on the senate floor in terms of allowing the senate to move forward on a two-year budget deal. and facing just a few hours away another deadline for a government shutdown. the house is in sort of a standby mode waiting for the senate to complete its work and send legislation back over to the house. we will keep you posted throughout the evening as things unfold on capitol hill. possibly be taking your phone calls and questions if we can. in the meantime, we did hear from the white house earlier today. most of the white house briefing has to do with some of the situations at the white house concerning one of the staff members. we will take a look at that. the deputy press secretary was the one who let this briefing,

raj sjhah. mr. shah: good afternoon, everyone. i want to start with a statement, then we'll take your questions. our normal policy, consistent with the policies of past administrations, is to not comment on background checks and security clearances. given the unusual nature of these circumstances, when a number of false reports floating around, we wanted to try to explain as best we can within our security limitations how the background investigation process works and then talk a little bit about rob porter and how the -- how his situation fits within that process. background investigation process is a process for evaluating

allegations about a white house staffer's conduct prior to joining the white house. it's run by the federal law enforcement and intelligence communities. it's used throughout the u.s. government. it's thorough, it's complex, and it takes time. it takes time because we want to get it right. it's also costly but it's absolutely worth it. over the course of any investigation, some information may arise that seems troubling or complicated and requires additional investigating. it's important to allow that process to continue in order for a fulsome understanding of the information. the whole u.s. government takes this process seriously. it's not politicized or interfered with. but we do not -- but we do push for -- we do push to obtain accurate, fulsome information, as quickly as possible. let me talk about rob porter. the allegations made against rob porter, as we understand them, involve incidents long before he

joined the white house. therefore they are best evaluated through the background check process. it's important to remember that rob porter has repeatedly denied these allegations and done so publicly. that doesn't change how serious and disturbing these allegations are. they're upsetting. and the background check investigates both the allegations and the denials. the investigation does not stop when allegations come to light. it continues to determine the truth. we should not short circuit an investigation just because allegations are made, unless they could compromise national security or interfere with operations at the white house. the truth must be determined. and that was what was going on with rob porter. his background investigation was ongoing. he was operating on an interim security clearance. his clearance was never denied and he resigned.

to summarize, the allegations against rob porter are serious and deeply troubling. he did deny them. the incidents took place long before he joined the white house. therefore they were investigated as part of the background check. as this process is meant for such allegations. it was not completed and rob porter has since resigned. during his time at the white house, rob received no waivers and no special treatment. and this is the tried and true process. it was followed meticulously. we hope this helps explain how seriously these matters are taken and how the process works to investigate such allegations. with that, i'll take your questions. reporter: can you tell us when the white house first became aware of the allegations? mr. shah: there's been some reports about the chief of staff. he became fully aware about these allegations yesterday. i'm not going to get into the specifics.

they were all part of a background check investigation. reporter: you say fully aware, was he partially aware? mr. shah: i think we were ail aware of the news reports that emerged on wednesday morning. reporter: did he know any of this back in november? mr. shah: i'm not going to get into specifics. reporter: the statement changed from john kelly yesterday morning to yesterday evening, he said based on new allegations. what changed yesterday after the photograph in terms of new allegations? mr. shah: i think what i referenced, the reports had additional allegations. they had more information. reporter: you're saying the initial information was two former wives accused him of violence, physical and verbal abuse was not sufficient? mr. shah: there were a number of statements from the press secretary, from the chief of staff, from others that reflected the rob porter that we've come to know working here for over a year and the chief of staff for about the last six months.

but the reports are troubling and i think the statement from , wednesday night reflects the rob porter that we have seen in these news reports and credible allegations. reporter: what was so shocking that it changed? he said it was shocking. mr. shah: it's the full nature of the allegations, particularly the images. reporter: just answer one more thing. you talked about the fact that there weren't any concerns that could compromise national security or interfere with operations here at the white house. we speck to one of porter's ex-wives who said she warned the fbi that he could be susceptible to blackmail because of the allegations against him. mr. shah: i'm not going to get into the specifics of the investigation itself. i think that's a question for the fbi and others. this is not our process even this is the process the u.s. government uses across agencies and has existed over numerous administrations. reporter: i want to clarify what you're saying. are you saying the chief of staff of this white house had no idea that rob porter's two ex-wives had domestic violence

allegations against him when they made those claims to the fbi that john kelly did not know that? how is that possible he did not know that? mr. shah: again this is part of , an ongoing investigation. we trust the background process. the chief of staff doesn't get detailed updates about what may or may not have been alleged. this is a process that involves thorough investigation. as i went through the process, it involves looking at in the -- not just accusations but denials. reporter: the white house said yesterday porter's leaving was a personal one, wasn't pressured to do so. would rob porter still be on the job today had he not resigned? mr. shah: rob porter was terminated yesterday. his last day was yesterday. i know he came in earlier today to clear out his stauf. reporter: but would he still be on the job? mr. shah: he offered his resignation and it was accepted. reporter: so in terms of the chief of staff's handling of all this no regrets?

,mr. shah: i think the second statement that he sent out reflected his thoughts which is that these allegations are deeply troubling. they are shocking. and i think the first statement reflected, you know, the rob porter that we have known. reporter: let me ask you, if i can follow up on that, as you were coming out here yesterday, or sarah sanders was coming out here yesterday, you were releasing a statement from rob porter saying he took those photographs. that appears to be an acknowledgment that this abuse took place. that he helped document it. how can the white house chief of staff or how can the press secretary, how can this white house still be standing behind him when mr. porter appeared to be knowledge and that he had -- mr. shah: i think it's fair to say that we all could have done better over the last few hours, or last few days, in dealing with the situation. but this is the rob porter that i and many others have dealt with, sarah dealt with, that other officials including the chief of staff had dealt with

and the emerging reports were not reflective of the individual who we had come to know. reporter: can i just one followup? reporter: did the president know rob was working on a temporary clearance? mr. shah: no, the president saw the news report on tuesday night and was informed on the resignation on wednesday. he was saddened by it. saddened for all the individuals involved. reporter: other the last year is that something he was concerned about? mr. shah: he was not informed of the specifics regarding rob porter's security clearance. reporter: do you have any information on how many senior white house staffers are working under a tempora -- temporary security clearance? mr. shah: i will not discuss it further. reporter: what are your comments about when omarosa described the situation inside the white house as bad and said it's not going

to be ok. mr. shah: not very seriously. she was fired three times on the apprentice. this is the fourth time we let her go. she had limited contact with the president well here. she has no contact now. peter. reporter: we were initially told that rob porter was going to stay on a while and oversee a transition period. now you're telling us he was terminated yesterday. what changed? mr. shah: i think that we have looked at the things that are necessary to ensure a smooth transition. there will be a new acting staff secretary that we can name later on. operations can continue smoothly. reporter: over the last week, they were seeking a limit on green ards. everyone has been talking about illegal immigrants. these have been talk about legal immigrants.

what are the decisions about this? mr. shah: i think the president wants to see legal immigration reform. wants to see us move from a process that currently exists in law of extended family, chain migration, toward merrit-based immigration reforms. we want to ensure people coming into the country are the best and brightest, regardless of nationality, creed, religion, or anything else in between. we want to look at educational background, ability to contribute to the work force in a way that helps american workers. so the president wants to see reforms that improve america's economy. reporter: normally when you hire people you wait for the investigation to come back before hiring them? is the burden of proof not on the people seeking the job to prove they're qualified and don't have any skeletons in their closet? or do they get to come aboard and you wait and see? mr. shah: the process tends to be a little bit different with the white house because there's a lot of officials coming in with the new administration and

a lot of individuals coming in have an interim clearance. reporter: also, what about women who don't have photographs? do you trust their stories? because a lot of times you haven't been at the podium but sarah said that allegations weren't credible from other people. do you need a photograph? how should women feel if they don't have a photograph? mr. shah: i don't think any standard applies. we do take allegations of misconduct, of domestic violence, other issues like that very seriously. we are very concerned about them. in this instance, in the case of rob porter, we relied on the background check investigative process. that process hadn't been completed. we're relying on the information that we had. reporter: they follow up on a few questions. you used the term "fully aware." i don't understand what that means. what does that mean john kelly knew or didn't know? mr. shah: i do know for instance he hadn't seen images prior to his statement the statement on , tuesday night.

reporter: did he know of some of the allegations? mr. shah: i'm not getting into the spovegs what may have emerged from the investigation. reporter: you used the term fully aware. mr. shah: i'm not going to get into every single specific. we relied on a proprocess. this is a process used throughout the u.s. government. it's a process used by every agency for an individual seeking a security clearance. rob porter was never denied a security clearance. he was never given special treat. the process was still ongoing and we relied upon it. reporter: i have one on a different topic. on capitol hill, members and their staffs are saying that because the court case involving daca is now -- meaning the administration is accepting daca applications again they feel there's breathing room and that march 5 is no long they are edeadline. -- deadline. mr. shah: march 5 is the deadline. reporter: what's going to happen if they haven't done anything by then? if congress hasn't acted by march 5, what is going to

happen? mr. shah: we fully expect congress to take action on the president's immigration reform framework. reporter: two questions. i want to follow up on them. you said the president takes the issue of violence against women seriously. why did this administration close the violence against women office when he became president last year? defunded it and everything. also he shut down the women and girls office as well. and i have another question. mr. shah: i don't know specifically why those specific offices may have been closed. i did talk to the president earlier today. he told me he was saddened by these reports and by the information he saw. by the image he is saw. we do take violence against women and these types of allegations very seriously. your second question? reporter: the interim security clearance. does that allow rob porter to be able to touch and see classified materials? mr. shah: it would, yes.

reporter: let me turn your attention back to the spending deal going on. republican for years said there needs to be fiscal restraint. years and years. now we know the deficit for this fiscal year is going to reach $1 trillion. we've got the house freedom caucus saying about this deal, growing the size of government by 13% adds to the swamp instead of draining it. this is not what the american people sent us to do. essentially they're saying, some within their party are being hypocritical. is the president concerned about all this spending? and what exactly is your plan to pay for it? mr. shah: he is concerned about spending in washington. he's expressed that for years. let me just say off the bat, we do support the two-year spending bill that is being discussed and voted on in the house and senate. it lifts the caps on defense spending, which is something that the secretary of defense, the president's generals, have told him they need to ensure that we rebuild our military and

protect our national security. with respect to deficits, we're going to be releasing a budget on monday. the budget does move us toward a path of restoring fiscal responseability. it reduces our deficit by trillions of dollars. i'm not going to get more specific. you guys will get more on monday. it does incorporate budget cap, incorporates the tax bill, incorporates other priorities. so we do think that budget will outline a path toward fiscal responsibility. reporter: you're still going to be running deficits at that point. now you've got this $300 billion cap to raise. so it just economic growth? mr. shah: economic growth is essential to cutting deficits and to restoring fiscal responsibility. again, the budget will outline a lot more destale. reporter: what can you tell us about the involvement of the white house communications director at your office yesterday? among them you asked the statement sarah red read from the podium which rob porter calls the allegations against

him vile and outrageous. what can you tell us about the extent to which the communications director was involved in tracking those? mr. shah: i will not get into specifics but i would say all the statements were crafted by a number of senior white house officials. reporter: one more question. you have repeatedly referred to the denials rob porter issued. how much weight were those denials given by the white house? mr. shah: i think you have to take allegations seriously, you have to take denials seriously. again the statements reflected , our experience with rob porter and other officials' experience with rob porter. again looking at more of the , reporting and looking at more facts emerge you saw the chief of staff's statement and the white house did accept his resignation. reporter: a couple more questions about the issue. can you -- it sounds like you are saying the investigation is ongoing? mr. shah: now that he's been terminated i don't think it continues. i can get back to you on the specifics. reporter: what i was going to

ask you, could you elaborate more specifically on the first time anyone mentioned this to the president? when, you know -- mr. shah: i know that any issues regarding his security clearance weren't made available to the president prior to tuesday. reporter: hang on a second, please. does the president retain full confidence in the chief of staff and his white house counsel and his new communications director? mr. shah: yes, absolutely. the president has confidence. reporter: if i may, quickly. on the senate plan as i , understand it, and notwithstanding whatever the budget is going to say, the u.s. is going to have to borrow more than $1 trillion this year. that could affect markets globely. does the president feel confident that that's still the right thing to do? they can candidate mitigated in the budget plans? mr. shah: i would refer you to

treasury on the specifics. i know some of those numbers have more to do with the previous administration's accounting than it has to do with this administration's policies, but i would say we are committed to fiscal discipline and the budget next week will show that in greater detail. reporter: back to mr. porter. if i understood your description of the background check process correctly, the fact that the two ex-wives had made statements to the fbi about alleged abuse during that investigation was not a disqualifying factor in his initial hiring. does the white house regret that? and going forward, do you plan to change the way you consider allegations of domestic abuse? mr. shah: again, understand that the background investigation was not completed. there was no determination made about rob porter's security compleerns. -- clearance. there was not a thumbs up or thumbs down. there was no denial of security clearance. he was operating off an interim clearance. that's the clearance that many

individual who was never had a security clearance would get when they first come to the white house. with respect to allegations made, again, every allegation has to be investigated. any denial has to be thoroughly and fully investigated. we allow that process to play out. you.ter: thank i want to clear up a few things he said. first you said the president wasn't aware of mr. porter's security clearance status but when was the president aware of the allegations of abuse? mr. shah: on tuesday night when there was a report issued. reporter: and secondly you had said that rob porter was terminated twice in this briefing. is the white house saying that mr. porter was fired? mr. shah: i just mean the process by which your employment status ends is termination. reporter: the last thing on that is you said that there are things this white house could have done better with respect to this. could you please detail that? what could the white house have done better? mr. shah: i'm not going to get

into a ticktock and all the detailed specifics. i think a lot of individuals were involved with bewhite house -- what the white house response to this. a lot of us could have done better. thister: just clarifying and i have two questions for you. rob porter was not fired by the trump administration? mr. shah: he resigned and we accepted his resignation. reporter: you said the president was saddened. can you give us a better idea of concerns the president had? this is a gentleman who was in the oval office, close to the president numerous times throughout the first year of the administration. what did the president specifically have to say? mr. shah: he was surprised. he, like many of us, did not see that in rob porter. did not see what these allegations have brought forward. so he was surprised by it. he was disheartened by it and he was saddened by it. reporter: do you have an update on the timeline has the

, president made a decision and where does the review process stand? mr. shah: the review process is ongoing. we are using the same standards and the same process by which the republican-drafted memo that was voted out of the house intelligence committee. it's going through both a legal and national security review. the president -- i think we previously mentioned the president was briefed by the deputy attorney general the other day. when we have more information we will make that available. reporter: thank you, raj. two brief questions. first, can you roughly say are there a lot of other people, highest levels in the white house, operating under a temporary security badge? mr. shah: i can't get into that. reporter: the other question very simply will there be , further resignations by friday or over the weekend? mr. shah: i have no personnel announcements. reporter: the dow is off about 1,000 points or more. can you give us the president's reaction to the stock market

volatility this week and will the white house view the stock market as a barometer? mr. shah: well, the president is concerned about the long-term economic indicators and factors. the fundamentals in terms of long-term are strong. again, unemployment and the labor market is strong. unemployment is 4.1%. we saw wages rise on friday for the first time -- not for the first time but at a measurable level for the first time in nearly eight years or nine years. believe these long-term -- corporate earnings are high. and we believe these long-term fundamentals demonstrate a healthy economy. reporter: there have been reports president trump is asking for preemptive military options for north korea amid concerns from some pentagon officials. yesterday here secretary mattis said north korea is firmly in the diplomatic lane. has president trump asked for preempted military options and what about the expressions by victor cha and by others this

will lead to catastrophic casualties? i'm not going to get ahead of anything the president may consider. we don't telegraph and the president doesn't telegraph his potential actions. but our strategy with respect to north korea is denuclearization. it's to provide as much economic and political pressure on that regime so it would end its nuclear program, and we had a considerable amount of success over the last year pursuing that strategy. we've had dozens of countries reduce economic or -- economic or diplomatic ties to north korea. trade with north korea, with countries in the region have been reduced. we continue to apply as much pressure, maximum pressure on the regime and as the secretary of defense said, we keep all options on the table but the path we would prefer is diplomatic. i'll get to you in a second. go ahead.

i wonder if you could give us an idea of the president's involvement in this and whether you have any indication there were any russian personnel involved in the strike against the attack on u.s. personnel? mr. shah: well, the president was involved and briefed. i don't know the answer on russian engagement but i'll get back to you on that. kelly. reporter: when you consider the porter matter now, do you think there were personal feelings, relationships in the white house among the senior staff collegial and friendship , relationships that caused judgment on how this would handle? mr. shah: i would point you to a number of statements that indicate white house was prepared to defend rob porter based on initial accusations that we heard and his denial and that was based on our experiences with rob porter. so to answer your question, i think the initial response is based upon that. reporter: did any recuse

themselves from participating? mr. shah: the communications director did recuse herself from some matters. reporter: back to reports. sarah has said that the texts are evidence of political bias. everyone has opinions. if persons who are not fans of the president should not be able to investigate him -- can you point to any evidence, other than the text messages, that the investigation was conducted by people who were biased, other than these texts? mr. shah: you bring up an issue that the president and others

have talked about within the administration about political bias. this predates this investigation. questions --umber of questions about how the code that is not the considered judgment of the president or others, but it is the judgment of the special counsel. there are a number of issues. expect a general report that we have heard about that will look into this issue. go ahead. reporter: two questions. president trump and dr. kissinger's meeting, president trump tweeted about china and other areas. can you tell us more about that meeting? mr. shah: we will have more information later. asked question.

as a willing to meet with kim jong-un's sister adela becks? -- at the olympics? mr. shah: there are no plans for a meeting. i do a lot everyone. -- thank you a lot, everyone. announcer: hearing from the white house earlier today, we will show president trump from earlier at the national prayer breakfast. update you onto where things are at capitol hill.

facing another government shutdown three hours from now, midnight eastern time. the senate trying to make some headway earlier today on a continuing resolution that was passed in the house earlier this week and also on a full, two-year budget deal. -- $300 billion over those caps of the next two years, funding the pentagon for a year and some domestic programs for two years. that is stalled in the senate right now partially because of rand paul. congress is stumbling towards a second shutdown with resistance from rand paul and house democrats could push the government over the brink. preparing for a government shutdown at midnight as a budget .eal stalled on capitol hill

one of the deals that was trying to move forward was actually scott wall reporting having to do with the democratic whip in the house. moving forward with a 24 hour short-term funding deal, but nix.got the part of the problem in the senate is senator rand paul in kentucky, holding up any action on the floor. fox news reporting that another tillis said we can play this game until 1:00 a.m., i think we should vote right now. if we want to go through the theater and we want to go in at that is going to be the end result. i apologize on behalf of people that i cannot give you

certainty. over in the house, waiting for the senate to take action. the senate finding itself unable to move forward throughout the day today. it looked like they were coming together on a bipartisan agreement for a two-year budget deal that would take congress thethe president past midterm elections, funding the government for a longer period of time. on the the resistance part of democrats is that there is nothing in this deal concerning immigration. a march deadline facing the dreamers on march 5. the white house telling agencies to prepare for a possible shutdown. office ofhouse management and budget is telling agencies to prepare for a lapse in funding. i have a possible government shutdown as congress attempts to pass a two-year budget deal. preparing for a lapse in

officials. we support the bipartisan budget act, trying to make its way through the senate and urge congress to send it to the president's desk without delay. we will keep you updated on what is going on at capitol hill. there could be action in the early hours, past the funding deadline. presidentr from the earlier. he joined lawmakers and other religious leaders for the national prayer breakfast. this is about an hour and a half. we will bring you updates on the other end.