this sunday, growing tensions with russia. the u.s. and russia trade expulsions of diplomats. the russians test a new missile. many worry about renewed moscow/washington tensions. >> there's a great mistrust between the united states and russia. >> this morning my interview with senator ron johnson o wisconsin of the foreign relations committee. plus the president and the special counsel. what are the limits to what bob mueller can investigate? should president trump testify under oath? i will talk to former harvard law professor alen dershowitz and bob bauer. presidential reset. mr. trump feeling freer to follow his own instincts.

>> let the other people take care of it now. >> at home, firing his secretary of veterans affairs david shulkin. this morning, i ask shulkin what he thinks is the real reason he was fired. roseanne's ratings. >> look at her ratings. >> what does the successful reboot of roseanne tell us about the disconnect between hollywood the coast and the rest of america. joining me for insight and analysis are george will, dan knell pletka, joshua johnson, and political analyst elise jordan. welcome to sunday, it's "meet the press." >> from nbc news in washington, the longest running show in television history, this is "meet the press" with chuck todd. good sunday morning and happy easter. it's not exactly a new cold war, but there's no denying that

relations between the u.s. and russia are clearly at a low ebb. in just the fast pugh wefew wee u.s. and the uk accused russia with the poisoning of a former spy and his daughter. russia expels diplomats. now russia laufrnched a missile without notifying the u.s. in advance. president trump named mike pompeo and john bolton, both of whom are more hawkish on russia. despite the tough steps, president trump has remained remarkably muted in his public statements about vladimir putin. his n will the new team change the tune? mr. trump seemed confident in the job. this week it was the department of veterans affairs that found itself in the president's sights. >> i made some changes. i wasn't happy with the speed

with which our veterans were taken care of. >> president trump firing his v.a. second david shulkin on wednesday after what was months of uncertainty. >> that would be david. we will never have to use those words. >> this week on twitter, president trump did, naming the personal white house physician ron johnson who trumpeted the president's health. >> good genes. >> to lead the federal government's second largest department. jackson is facing scrutiny for his lack of managerial experience. >> it's going to be tough. i will be frank with you. the odds are not with him. >> the third firing by tweet this month as mr. trump reshapes his cabinet bringing on more combative advisers who he believes will be loyal to him above all. mr. trump is freeing himself from constraints, making it clear he intends to write his

own rules. >> nobody knows the system better me. which is why i alone can fix it. >> he announced at a political-style rally in ohio that the united states may leave the battlefield against isis. >> we will come out of syria very soon. let the other people take care of it. >> that's raising concerns from allies nervous the u.s. will cre cede syria to russia and iran and it contradicts the president. >> exactly what are you going to do to beat isis? tell me exactly, what is your plan. i said, i have a real chance of winning. i don't like telling you my plan. >> still unclear to what degree mr. trump will shift to a more aggressive rhetorical stance on russia. after a friendly call with putin last week against the advice of advisers. >> i had a call with president putin and congratulated him on the victory, his electoral

victory. >> this week, the u.s. expelled 60 top russian diplomats, punishment for the kremlin's alleged poisoning of a former russian spy and his daughter in england. some officials are pressing for more action, including additional sanctions, as the special counsel's probe into contact between russia and trump and his aides hang over the white house. >> did you ever discuss pardons? >> joining me now is republican senator ron johnson of wisconsin. he is chairman of the senate homeland security committee. welcome back to "meet the press." >> happy easter. >> happy easter to you as well. let me start with the state of u.s./russia relations. on one hand, you can look at it and say, my god, this looks worse than the cold war. on the other hand, if you look on rhetoric with president trump, he gets criticized because it seems like he has nogueithing nothinegative to sa

russia. >> i wish russia were nothing more than an unfriendly rival. it's their provocations that have really resulted in a relationship that is not healthy for the world. for world peace. whether you look at the invasion of georgia, eastern ukraine, syria is not helpful. we need them to work with us in terms of enforcing sanctions on north korea. we need to work with russia. they have nuclear weapons. i understand the president's desire to try and improve relations with russia. you have to look at the reality and react accordingly. >> most putin analysts, particularly ex-pats, they will say, he doesn't respect diplomacy. he respects strength.

president trump has not punched him in the nose, to be blunt. that's the only thing putin respects. >> putin is very opportunistic. he will fill voids. of course, russia can do nothing in terms of improving the economic situation, for example, of eastern europe. they can destabilize. a tragedy -- historic tragedy is the transfer of power to putin and then having russia go down the path to try and reconstitute the soviet union as opposed to if it would have been boris nebsov we would be in a different situation. >> does the west have the resolve to stand up to putin right now? >> we have to have the resolve. >> i understand. >> it doesn't look like we do. >> because there are economic interests. look at the pipeline that germany is trying to promote. that will give russia more power. it's ridiculous.

>> it's clear the president when we did retaliate on the russians for what they did in the uk, he chose what was the medium response, leaving one tougher response later. do you think he should have left that on the table? should we get tougher with russia now? >> long-term, we have got to have better relations with russia. we do. you have to respond -- i think the better way to respond is build up troop strength in eastern european countries to make sure russia goes no further. that's my concern is they make some move in one of the baltic states. >> do you think the president's actions have anything to do with the russia probe? the way he talks or doesn't talk about russia, that he is influenced by what's happening with mueller? >> i have no idea. i have no idea. >> do you think he would be in a better place if he would get tougher on putin? >> we as a world, western democracies have got to show greater strength and resolve. what president trump did is prod our european partners. more are reaching their 2%

spending in nato. we need europe to step up to the plate and help us work with russia. >> as a senator, you have to provide advice and consent on cabinet nominees. we have another opening at v.a. secretary shulkin, should he have been fired? >> the report is troubling. presidents deserve to have advisers to agree with them. >> you think it was justified? >> it's a thankless job. we have had some high quality individuals in that position. and they haven't made a lot of progress in terms of reforming the v.a. >> is that a reflection on what? on the agency, the bureaucracy? >> the fact that the v.a. health care system is a government run single payer bureaucratic health care system and doesn't work. one of the last reports talked about how the v.a. system in -- on average doctors have 1,200 cases. we have spent so much money on the v.a., and we have increased

funding overall 2.3 times on health care spending, 1.5 and still a mess. >> what about the way it was done? the third person the president fired by twitter, just in the last -- >> not the way i would do it. >> this isn't the way to recruit good people to replace them, is it? >> it's not the way i would do it. >> you would under if people were like, i don't know if i want to take this job. >> the president does need to understand the effect it has on attracting other people. >> you think that this could lead to a drain? >> i'm concerned about all kinds of things, chuck. >> you seem to be hesitant. you seem to bes at t hesitant w your criticism. he seem annoyed with how he is doing some of the things. you hold back. why? >> i don't envy any president their task. we have enormous challenges. i tried to work with president obama. i want to see any president succeed in their mission of keeping this nation safe and secure. it doesn't help to be overly

critical of any president if you are trying to help them accomplish their goals. >> last october you thought special counsel robert mueller should be fired, be replaced. >> what i have said -- special counsel was named too soon. i would have had the senate and house intelligence committees complete their report. i no he what happens when you have a criminal investigation, it's that much more difficult for congress to get information to allow the american public to understand what's happening. they are different goals of a special counsel versus congressional oversight. i think in this case, the most important thing is public disclosure. that is harmed when you start having special counsel and all the information is gathered and held close. >> what you are seeing you feel as if the congressional investigations have been hampered by special counsel? >> my concern with special counsel mueller is he is so close to the fbi, i have been conducting an investigation.

i think we're seeing problem. i didn't think former director mueller would be the right type of person to investigate that. i'm pleased with the appointment of john huber. he is a disinterested u.s. attorney to work -- >> you are okay with jeff sessions not appointing special counsel counsel? >> that's the best case. inspector general is independent of the agency. horowitz has done a good job. we will get his report in the next month. we asked him to testify before our committee. i hope does he so as soon as the report is issued. >> where are you on mueller? finish his investigation? >> i thought he was appointed too soon. i would have rather had the process play out. i think public disclosure -- the public's right to know trumps everything else. >> i will leave it there. it's easter weekend. enjoy the holiday. >> i will. same to you. special counsel robert mule he is mueller's investigation looms over the white house.

what are the limits to what mueller can investigate should president trump testify under oath? joining me now allen dershowitz, professor at harvard law school and author of "trumped up." and bob bauer, a former white house counsel to president obama. welcome to both of you. on this spring holiday season. mr. dershowitz, i want to pick up on something we learned this week from a "new york times" report, the now former lawyer to the president -- lead lawyer, john dowd, who ended up resigning last week, there were reports he talked of pardons, potential pardons with the attorneys of michael flynn and paul manafort. if that pardon was dangled out there in your opinion, could that be used in an obstruction of justice case? >> look, i think there are three categories of cases being investigated. the first and most important are constitutionally authorized acts by the president which include

pardoning, offering pardons, firing, directing the prosecution. if he were to be charged or impeached for any of those acts, that would be a real constitutional conflict. we would have arguments on both sides, constitutionally. the second category are private acts that preceded his presidency, allegations by women that may require him to testify. his business relations. he would have no defense for that except factual or argue it was beyond the scope of the investigation. the third category, a hybrid, including whether there was collusion. those are the three categories. i do think that anything relating to pardon he would have a strong constitutional defense. i think he is most vulnerable when it comes to women, if he testifies under oath and gets into a she said he said which puts him in clinton land and the basis clinton was impeached. >> what do you say?

>> i don't think there's any question. i have to disagree. if the president uses the pardon pard for corrupt purpose, then he is exposed to that. i don't see any basis for saying the president doesn't have to answer in the criminal justice system. >> if the president believes that this investigation is trumped up, that mr. mueller's investigation is out of control, then why wouldn't he offer pardons? >> he may believe that. he may also believe it's out of control because he fears for himself, because he is concerned about his own exposurexposure. it's that element that threatens the legality of the offer of the pardons, that brings that into question. >> there's a real problem with that. that is president bush, the first, did exactly that. he pardoned casper weinberger and five people on the eve of the trial to end the investigation. special counsel at that time

accused him of doing that. said he had succeeded in ending the investigation. yet, nobody, nobody suggested obstruction of justice at that point. thomas jefferson gave pardons to people in order to help the prosecution of his political enemy aaron burr. throughout history we see presidents offering and granting pardons. once you get into the area of inquiring as to what the motive of a pardon was, you are really getting into constitutionally difficult areas. of course, the president were to take a bribe and give a pardon, taking of the bribe itself would be the crime. the granting would not be a crime. i do not believe that engaging in a con sti toustitutio ststitd act can be the basis of a charge. >> i want to move the conversation. bob, let me start with you. the fact that flynn decided to cooperate and plead guilty and not accept the dangling of a pardon, did it -- does that tell you something? and is paul manafort's decision

not to cooperate tell you something with this pardon? what do you read into it? >> i don't know i read a whole lot into it. it may be mr. flynn wasn't con if fident it was something he would count on. the iran contra matter did involve questions of high palsy. i don't see that here at all. what's at issue here is whether or not a presidential campaign coordinated with a foreign power to affect the outcome of an election. that is a core criminal concern. it's been part of our statutory framework since 1966, repeatedly strengthened by the congress. i don't see that bears analogy to iran contra. >> except that the pardon was offered to stop a criminal investigation by a special prosecutor. under your theory that would be obstruction of justice. it never occurred to anybody -- it doesn't matter what the subject matter was. if you obstruct justice for any subject matter, you are guilty.

whether granting a pardon to stop an investigation can be the basis for criminal or prosecution. i think the answer to that presliden presidentially is no. >> you guys are bright legal minds. there is no legal standard for impeachment. >> there is. there is a legal standard. >> it doesn't matter what you interpret as obstruction of justice, what bob interprets. the end of the day, it's what 100 members of the united states senate think. >> i don't agree with that. the constitution provides specifically, you can only be impeached for bribery, treason or ohhigh crimes or misdemeanor. they put the chief justice in charge. if i were ever or any lawyers -- if he got impeached for something that was not specified in the constitution, first motion is to the chief justice to dismiss it.

this is not purely a political decision. otherwise the chief justice, who is not political would not be put in charge of the trial of a person who has been impeached. it overstates it to say it's political, unbound by the words of the constitution. >> can i just bring this back to the criminal justice system? congress could act on an obstruction that didn't fit the criminal elements in the law. still was enough for impeachment. let's be clear what we're talking about. we're talking about the potential that a presidential campaign in the united states aided a foreign government in influencing the outcome of the federal election. that's a crime. it's a crime. it's not correct, as the professor has said from time to time, that collaboration with a foreign government to help in an american presidential candidate selection is not criminal. it is. >> what's the statute? >> the federal election -- >> i searched the statute books over and over. the word collusion appears once in the federal criminal code. it only applies to when businesses include with each other in violation of the antitrust laws. collusion between a candidate

and a foreign government is a political sin . in and of itself it wouldn't be a crime t. could involve criminal activity if you accepted campaign contributions and did things of that kind. the collusion itself would not be a crime. i have seen no evidence it occurred. >> professor, the president wants to talk to mueller, he says so. what parameters would you advise him to accept? >> any he can get. >> would you advise him to do it? >> mueller has the ultimate authority to call him without his lawyer and to limitations on time. he has to come to a compromise. i would surly suggest he never take testify in any of the cases involving women, that he not make the mistake that bill clinton made advised by bob bennett that he testify about his sex life. as far as the special counsel is concerned, he doesn't control that. the special counsel controls that. any compromise that could be made sitting with his lawyer, it doesn't matter whether it's under oath or not, because

either is a crime. con stranlt straints on time, s matter, anything would be a plus, because the special prosecutor has the power to call him in front of the grand jury. >> i would simply say, since donald trump may have known that a criminal sent emissaries to talk about support for his campaign, he might take the advice he gave bill clinton in 1999, take the fifth. >> very interesting. >> any chance you will lead the president's legal team or join it if he asks? >> no. i want to remain independent. i want to say what i sgay. >> has he asked you? >> no lawyer can comment about whether he has been asked. >> fair enough. >> i would have said the same thing if hillary clinton had been elected and they were saying lock her up. i'm making the same position now that i have made for 50 years. >> professor, i appreciate you coming on during this holiday week. appreciate it. same to you, mr. bauer.

when we come back, we will break down the escalating tensions between the united states antd rud russia with the panel. >> most of all, lord, thank you for making america great again. >> what did roseanne's successful reboot tell us about a ♪ (music plays throughout) ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ hey allergy muddlers: are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool?

try zyrtec® zyrtec® starts working hard at hour one and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec®. muddle no more®. and try children's zyrtec® for consistently powerful relief of your kid's allergies. hey ron! they're finally taking down that schwab billboard. oh, not so fast, carl. ♪ oh no. schwab, again? index investing for that low? that's three times less than fidelity...

...and four times less than vanguard. what's next, no minimums? ...no minimums. schwab has lowered the cost of investing again. introducing the lowest cost index funds in the industry with no minimums. i bet they're calling about the schwab news. schwab. a modern approach to wealth management. welcome back. pantists here, george will, elise jordan. danielle, you are an international affairs expert. since we are talking about policy with russia, i will give you the first shot at this. it was interesting to hear ron johnson call him an unfriendly adversary. you have made the case that the administration is tough. what about the president? does that matter? >> so one of the things that troubles me about the whole discussion on russia is that

when someone in the administration does something bad, we all say, the president owns that. his administration. this is the trump administration. when the administration does something good on russia, all of a sudden it's trump probably disagrees with this. no. that doesn't happen in an administration. you do not expel 60 diplomats, impose sanctions, you do not do the things the administration has done if the president isn't okay with it. what he thinks in his heart of hearts, i have honestly no idea. but i think the administration has represented a stronger line on russia policy than the obama administration did. >> joshua, the argument some will make is the president, without the rhetorical backbone that putin sees its a wink. >> might see it as a wink. part of what i'm concerned about is not just the rhetoric of it, but how this will resolve itself. there's only two ways it can go, it can get better it can get worse. >> if the president and mr. putin are not the ones to relieve some of the tension, who

will it be? maybe is somebody that both of them have dealings with. maybe business dealings with. you look at the countries that say russia does the most business with, belarus, not a big international player. germany, a big international player but not someone the president gets along with. and china. number one import, number two export destination. it opens the door for someone else to save the day. for another rising power to possibly say, guys, calm down, i will handle this. nature hates a vacuum. part of this opens the door for different destabilization, that just as an american leave me won did wondering what's going on? >> we're not in charge is his argument. >> my guess is putin is profoundly uninterested in tweets. he strikes me as someone interested in tanks and green soldiers and all that stuff. the fact is, putin is dismembering a european nation geographically, the largest european nation, ukraine.

this is a serious business. the late scoop jackson 30 years ago said of the soviet union, it's like a burglar walking down a hotel corridor trying doorknobs. when he finds one that is unlocked, he goes in. if he decides the baltic states are unlocked and he reads the polls that show diminishing support for article 5 of the nato agreement, that is the -- attack on one is an attack on all, that's when it will get dangerous. >> elise, i had a producer friend saying, sounds like the president is leading from behind on russia. i'm sure that phrase is not one he would like to hear. >> well, also on syria. look at the sudden announcement this week that he wants to withdraw all of our troops from syria is something that left his own national security apparatus flabbergasted. although he might think that way and they know he thinks that way, the timing wasn't there for necessarily how the strategy is going to be implemented. what i find amazing that looking

at donald trump and russia, the great unsolved mystery of his administration is how he might get tougher but his rhetoric is going to be friend lly towards vladimir putin. that's something his administration, people who work for him don't even understand. >> is it fair to say let's see what john bolton does and see where the president's rhetoric is or not? >> it's interesting to see that he has chosen two new national security people without regard to their very tough views on russia. that suggests to us that perhaps he is comfortable with that. we want the president to change his rhetoric. at a certain point, you have to choose what matters more, the rhetoric or the action. i'm for action all the way. >> we have been going back there literally, seriously, rhetoric, action. i want to move to his cabinet. you have two cabinet secretaries, shulkin, veterans afairs secretary, we will talk to him. policy disagreements and

unethical violations. scott pruitt, ethical issues but no policy disagreement. one is office. one isn't. what does that tell you ? >> every time i talk about this, i say the same thing. the president runs the administration the way he ran the trump organization. he has an inner circle who make him look good. i think in that regard, especially if david shulkin's arguments about why he was removed, about the concerns over the v.a. are to be believed, that kind of makes sense. it's getting to the point where the policy moves in the administration touch people in real ways. the v.a. is keeping my father alive. this is one of those parts of the government where i think at least for me i sit up straighter. wait a minute, why are you -- is this about a $31,000 dinner set or about decisions that actually

keep people who serve the country alive? >> you conflated -- ben carson is the 31,000 -- there's something about scott pruitt. i think he has been cheerleading well for deregulation, is he becoming icherus? >> there's the chief pruitt is floating himself for a new job. we learn about him renting a residence from the wife of an energy lobbiest. she has not lobbied in the last two years. >> mr. pruitt offends the sensibilities of lots of people in washington. he doesn't care. he was an attorney general. he was the leader of the 27 republican attorneys general who made lots of progress suing the previous administration. he is for reason a hero to the conservative movement.

he is doing what the president wants to be done, which is what he is there to do. >> i talked to somebody in the white house that there's an exhaustion at how many pruitt ethics articles they're going to get. this is harder for them to defend. >> it's just another line of coverage that happens with so many of these cabinet seconds. everyone is exhausted by all these ethical violations. scott pruitt certainly really seems to have risen to the forefront of being out there with his private travel, with his security detail, because someone was mean to him once on a flight, with staying at this incredible rate that if anyone wanted to extend to me in d.c., that would be great, friends like that. i think the tolerance level is pretty low. >> i think the president believes what george said about him, which is that he is getting picked on a little bit. for now, it probably gives him some job security. when we come back, my conversation with david shulkin. why does he think he was fired

as secretary of veterans affa affairs? on wednesday it will be 50 years since dr. king was assassinated. in an appearance, dr. king explained his advocacy of non-violent disobedience. he said that while we all have a moral obligation to obey just l laws, we have a moral obligation to not obey unjust laws. >> he must do it openly, he must do it cheerfully, he must do it lovingly, he must do it civilly and with a wil ♪ (daniel jacob) for every hour that you're idling in your car, you're sending about half a gallon of gasoline up in the air. that amounts to about 10 pounds of carbon dioxide every week

(malo hutson) growth is good, but when it starts impacting our quality of air and quality of life, that's a problem. so forward-thinking cities like sacramento are investing in streets that are smarter and greener. the solution was right under our feet. asphalt. to be more precise, intelligent asphalt. by embedding sensors into the pavement, as well as installing cameras on traffic lights, we will be able to analyze the flow of traffic. then that data runs across our network, and we use it to optimize the timing of lights, so that travel times are shorter. who knew asphalt could help save the environment? ♪ ♪ traders -- they're always looking for advantages. the smart ones look to fidelity to find them. we give you research and data-visualization tools to help identify potential opportunities. so, you can do it this way... or get everything you need to help capture investment ideas

and make smarter trading decisions with fidelity for just $4.95 per online u.s. equity trade. fidelity. open an account today. ♪ open an account today. you're more than just a bathroom disease.. you're a life of unpredictable symptoms. crohn's, you've tried to own us. but now it's our turn to take control with stelara® stelara® works differently for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease. studies showed relief and remission, with dosing every 8 weeks. stelara® may lower the ability of your immune system to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before or during treatment, always tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop any new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion, and vision problems. these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition.

some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. we're fed up with your unpredictability. remission can start with stelara®. talk to your doctor today. janssen wants to help you explore cost support options for stelara®. - there's a common thread i see every time i'm in the field. while this was burning, you were saving other homes. neighbors helping neighbors and strangers alike. - this is what america's about. - sometimes it's nice to see all the good that's out there. bringing folks out, we have seen it in community after community. welcome back. few were surprised when president trump fired v ed davil skin n shulkin, nor when he notified him in a tweet. the president said he did a poor job. shulkin claims he was let go because he opposed the privatization of the v.a. and this was a political push. david shulkin joins me now.

welcome to "meet the press." >> good morning. >> let me start with just a simple question. were you fired or resigned? the white house claims you resigned. >> you know, i came to the v.a. because our men and women in the country fight for us and don't give up. i came to fight for our veterans. i had no intention of giving up. there would be no reason for me to resign. i made a commitment. i took an oath. i was here to fight for our veterans. >> why would the white house say technically you resigned? did you submit a letter of resignation? were you asked to submit a letter of resignation? >> no, i was not. >> you were just terminated? >> i received the information the way that you talked about it and general kelly gave me a can call shortly before the tweet came out. >> you said you had a call with the president a week before, after i guess -- did you brief him on the context of the inspector general report? >> we spoke the day he sent the tweet out. just a few hours before.

we talked a lot about issues at v.a. that were important and how we could continue to make progress on policy issues. >> did you know after the conversation you were going to be fired? you expected it? did you think you had a shot at keeping your job? >> we set up a meeting for next day where i was going to meet with him at 11:00 in the morning. >> you had a meeting on the calendar thursday morning and you are fired by tweet on wednesday? >> yes. >> what do you think changed in your relationship. >> i've always had a good relationship. our discussions have been focused on how we can do better, how we can do things in a better way to serve our veterans. this was somewhat of a surprise. >> you keep saying that you were -- you were the one sta standing between privatization of the v.a. and the white house a little bit there. during your confirmation hearing you knew that you had a different philosophy about the future of the v.a. than the president had campaigned on when it came to the issue of privatization. are you shocked that there's

policy disagreements between you and the white house? sg >> the president and i agreed we needed to do better for our veterans. that's the reason why i took the job. he campaigned strongly on that issue. i had been at the v.a. under the obama administration. i knew ways that we needed to be able to move forward and transform the v.a. it wasn't to simply privatize. it was to begin to start modernizing, give veterans greater choice, which we have done. this was a path forward that i thought and i believe that we are making great success in. >> how do we get to a point where you say -- where you stop speaking with some political appointees at the v.a.? there was a report you had an armed guard outside your office. how did you get to that point? >> first of all, simply not true. >> you never had an armed guard outside of your office? >> every cabinet secretary has security detail that are armed. we're in presidential

succession. there was never any change to my security detail. it's been that way for years. >> did you have somebody standing outside your office preventing certain political aides from having access to you? >> i always have my security detail on my floor outside my office. there was no change in protocol there. >> was there a change in who was allowed in to see you? >> well, when the political appointees decided that they were no longer going to participate as an effective member of my team, when they had memos showing that they wanted to have me removed, my deputy secretary removed, my chief of staff removed, of course i limited access to those people. they no longer were willing to be working effectively with us in a way to improve care for veterans. >> did you go to the chief of staff about these issueissues? >> absolutely. >> what did john kelly say? >> he said he understands. he has been in the military. you can't have people on your team that are going in a different direction. everyone needs to get back on

track. we talked about the way -- >> who was going in the wrong direction, your staff from you or you from the president? >> i think it was my staff from where i was leading this agency. >> you believe had you the president's confidence? >> absolutely. >> those appointees thought they had the president's confidence. >> i suspect you are right. >> who is -- this is where i'm confused. who is off message here, both of you? >> look, i think ultimately it's up to the president to decide. the president probably had different points of view. the president made a decision last wednesday. look, every day that i came to work i was focused on making this system work better for veterans. we were making good progress. >> yourpayer funds, you were claiming it was trumped up. do you think there's some sort of conspiracy here to tarnish your reputation to get you -- make it easier to fire you? >> i don't think there's a conspiracy going on.

i will tell you, i do not believe there was any misuse of government funds. unfortunately, after the inspector general report came out, i was prohibited from giving my point of view on this. i had prepared a statement. it was removed from the v.a. website. i was told that i was not allowed to go out and talk to the press about this. i went to a conference in europe that the u.s. has attended for 43 years, all about veterans issues. >> you mix personal and professional, fair? you took half the time for personal? >> no, absolutely not. >> it was -- >> 40 hours of meetings and lectures with our allies. >> you went to wimbledon. >> 100% of the meetings were attended to. i went to wimbledon on a saturday. i went to see some sites in the evenings, after. we didn't miss a single minute of conference. everybody, every american has their weekends. >> i understand that. >> there was no misuse. there was no mixing.

this was i didn't sit in my hotel room after hours on my private time. we went out. we walked outside the hotel and saw sites. >> do you believe if you were carrying out the president's agenda at the v.a. that this would not have been a fireable offense? the president, would he have kept you on? do you believe would you have survived this report had you been on the same page with him on privatization? >> i do believe that there were no ethical violations here. that this was being used in the political context to exploit the situation. i do believe that the issue at hand is the future of v.a. and whether it's going to be privatized or not. >> any advice for your potential success successor? >> i think dr. jackson is a good man. i think that he should continue to have the veterans' interests at heart. this is a very -- this is a very tough job. i'm not sure that anybody realizes how complex this is. a $200 billion budget, 370,000

people working with congress and representing veterans. i wish him the best. i will do everything i can to make sure that he is successful. >> doesn't sound like you think he has the skill set. >> i think he is going to need to have a good team around him like everybody will to be successful. >> secretary shulkin, i will leave it there. i appreciate you coming in. >> thank you. up next, how did this supposedly a political process of counting americans for the census suddenly become so politicized? kevin, meet your father. kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin trusted advice for life. kevin, how's your mom? life well planned. see what a raymond james financial advisor can do for you.

♪ ♪ where's jack? he's on holiday. what do you need? i need the temperature for pipe five. ask the new guy. the new guy? jack trained him. jack's guidance would be to maintain the temperature at negative 160 degrees celsius. that doesn't sound like jack. actually, jack would say, hey mate, just cool it to minus 160 and we're set. good on ya. oh yeah. that's jack. aveeno® positively radiant body lotion... it's time to get your glow on! with the moisture-rich power of soy. it transforms dull, dry skin to leave you glowing. positively radiant® body collection from aveeno®. if yorheumatoid arthritisevere and you're talking to your rheumatologist about a medication, this is humira. this is humira helping to relieve my pain and protect my joints from further irreversible damage. this is humira helping me reach for more.

humira has been clinically studied for over 20 years. humira works for many adults. it targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. talk to your doctor and visit humira.com. this is humira at work. brushing only reaches 25% of your mouth. listerine® cleans virtually 100%. helping to prevent gum disease and bad breath. never settle for 25%. always go for 100. bring out the bold™

welcome back. data download time. the census was in the news this week, not just for data it releases. the trump administration proposed adding a question on citizenship to the questionnaire that is taken every ten years. democrats are up in arms worried the question will depress response rates to the census itself, particularly among non-citizens as well as hispanics who tend to vote democratic. the fact is, we already have this data. the government asked this question. the census bureau asks it every single year. here is what we know. there are 22.5 million

non-citizens in the united states. they are concentrated in a few areas. more than half of them, 12 million, live in four states, california, texas, new york and florida. more than 1.7 million live in just one county, los angeles. followed by houston, miami, chicago and queens, new york. the trump administration says adding the question will help better protect americans under the voting rights act. democrats make the argument that if fewer people response, the next congressional reapportionment won't be accurate. non-citizens tend to live in democratic leaning areas. if fewer of them respond to the cens census, congressional lines could be redrawn to hurt democrats. there are 107 congressional districts where more than 10% of the population are not u.s. citizens. 21 are held by republicans. all of those democratic districts are considered safe by the cook political report. if non-citizens aren't counted, there could be fewer of the safe

democratic districts. 13 of the 21 held by republicans are rated as battleground. if you don't count non-citizens, the lines could get redrawn to include more reliable republican voters. it's unclear how big of an actual political impact this could have or if president trump is interested in simply a rhetorical debate over a policy debate. changes may not have a huge impact on the actual partisan makeup of congress. here is where it may change the ethnic makeup of congress. if who gets a chance to serve. when we come back, what did roseanne teach hollywood abou to most people, i look like... ...most people. but on the inside, i feel chronic, widespread pain. fibromyalgia may be invisible to others, but my pain is real. fibromyalgia is thought to be caused by overactive nerves. lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. i'm glad my doctor prescribed lyrica. for some, lyrica delivers effective relief from

moderate to even severe fibromyalgia pain, and improves function. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions, suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worse depression, unusual changes in mood or behavior, swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects: dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain, swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who've had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. with less pain i can do more with my family. talk to your doctor today. see if lyrica can help. talk to your doctor today. why do people put why does your tummy go "grumbily, grumbily, grumbily"? no more questions for you! ouph, that milk in your cereal was messing with you, wasn't it? try lactaid, it's real milk without that annoying lactose. good, right? -mmm, yeah. lactaid. the milk that doesn't mess with you. their leadership is instinctive.

they're experts in things you haven't heard of - researchers of technologies that one day, you will. some call them the best of the best. some call them veterans. we call them our team. could light up the room? new aveeno® positively radiant sheer daily moisturizer. lightweight hydration for positively radiant skin that lasts. aveeno®. naturally beautiful results®

back now with end game. there were more protests last night in sacramento after the release of a family autopsy on friday showing that unarmed 22-year-old stephon clark was shot eight times, six in the back. two weeks ago in his grandmother's backyard. police video of the shooting showed that police thought, incorrectly, that clark was holding a gun. it is sparking the debate about law enforcement and tactics. i want to read something -- there's a political reaction in the relative silence of the president. jamal buoy on slate writes this. trump is so vocal about what he likes and dislikes in the national conversation that his omissions are more revealing than his comments on the rare

occasions when this president is silent it is consistent when confronted with violence against nonwhites. that's a pretty strong statement. >> it's a strong statement i think made more worrisome by the fact that this part of california should know how to deal with these protests because these kinds of shootings have happened a lot. mario woods in san francisco. andy lopez in santa rosa. oscar grant in 209, the movie fruitveil was based on. and for the sacramento county sheriff's office to have no idea how to, not know how to deal with protests and not know how to get a vehicle out of a crowd without hitting a woman on the way out seems kind of crazy to me. this is a moment where you need the justice department. you need the federal government to say, listen, this is a trend, this is a larger problem. we need to be able to step in and help local jurisdictions deal with this. i'm waiting to see if jeff sessions would do something about this. now is the time when it's needed. >> george? >> we also need more -- you mentioned video. we need more body cameras. because that changes the entire

conversation. and we need -- >> they shut off their audio. should they have been allowed -- should you let them shut off audio? >> don't know. but doubt it. i'm for more information at all times. read the census, et cetera. but also, there should be a national discussion about -- it's going to one led by the kato institution, about qualified immunity for public officials, including policemen. >> david french writes something i want to introduce in this conversation. he writes about the training of cops. they're shown when cops are trained they're shown video after video and told story after story about routine calls that immediately escalate into fatal encounters. this truth leads to a deception, to a mind-set that enhances the risk way out of proportion to the actual threat. he is basically making the argument, we have heard this forever that cops will tell you there's no such thing as a routine traffic stop. david french is arguing we train cops to assume that they have to assume the worst, that they are trained like members of the

military. when actually they should let the percentages dictate policing. >> i found that very interesting coming from david french, who is an iraq war vet. i think that it's a trend that we have seen escalate over the last, you know, 10, i guess 1 years since basically the war on terror started. the militarization of our police force. you look at how republicans have tried to -- i worked for rand paul. he's been outspoken about the need for criminal justice reform. i think this has to come from republicans to try to change this. >> the training of a -- part of the conversation, i thought that was an interesting way. use the analytics. >> part of the problem is that we have become afraid of police. we watch their every move. we assume they're going to do the wrong thing. the biggest victims of that, of course, are people who need the police most. the poor, people would live in underprivileged neighborhoods. so on the one side you worry about this. on the other side, you worry about this excessive

use of force, this assumption everybody will make you will get out of your car with a gun. when you are probably just going to sit -- >> most people get out of their car with a cell phone. >> you are not supposed to get out of your car. i just want to tell you that. don't get out of your car. that's where things always go wrong. >> i would say that i don't think people are becoming afraid of the police. a lot of people who look like me have been afraid of the police our whole lives. so i think this conversation has evolved in a way that makes the rest of the nation aware of some of the concerns that people of color have had for quite some time. the larger injustice of it is the inability after time after time after time with body cameras, the need for audio for us as a society not to have any traction in making things better. >> the missing piece is leadership. that's what is common about what everybody said. the missing piece is whatever this national conversation is, whatever the terms ought to be, there's no leadership here. instead we just have incident after incident, reaction after reaction. that's no way to run a government. >> before i go, we teased it. i wanted to get to it before we end the show.

roseanne was -- has set a cultural firestorm a little bit. i want to put the markets here. this was one the coastal elites miss, the roseanne reboots. may not be as popular in l.a. and new york, but look at the middle of the country. how well -- these are the best markets roseanne rated. total audience may be bigger than the oscars. >> you could say that the era of obama culture is over. you know, we've gone from girls on hbo to roseanne, you know, bursting out of the seams the most watched network sitcom in the last four years. are we going to start to see more coverage reflecting the trump era? i think this is perhaps an indication. also, a really successful revival to people like roseanne in the '90s, they like it too. >> you have that look, george, of like, am i really having to comment on roseanne barr? there's no doubt you were a big

fan back in the day. >> if the program isn't on the major league baseball network, i don't see it. like margaret mead among the samoans, the anthropologists of hollywood venture among the lost tribes of america and they discover these. they discovered archie bunker in queens, for pete's sake. he was the reagan democrat at the time. if this makes money, it will change their behavior. >> that's the most important -- if it makes money. >> i would say i did watch the roseanne season premiere. it was very good. it was funny. john goodman and laurie metcalf stole every seen they were in. there's an interracial relationship. there's a little boy experimenting with gender. they deal with it in a very compassionate way. i think people should give the show a shot. >> that's all we have for today. there you go. we even give you entertainment listings. thanks for watching. happy easter. hope you enjoy the spring holidays. happy passover. we will be back next week because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." t's sunday, it t's sunday, it

captions paid for by nbc-universal television less than two months after hosting et cetera first super bowl parade, today philadelphia's hockey team looks to move closer to securing a playoff birth. it is star sunday and the flyers are going to have to deal with four-time trophy winner patrice bergeron and the boston bruins. stepping into the spotlight today wayne simmonds, who will look to showcase a rare blend of talent and toughness against the top team in the east.