>> president trump marks his first month in office, boasting about his successes and shifting blame for his setbacks. i'm suzanne malveaux. we examine the truth and consequences of lies, leaks and alternative facts, tonight on "washington week." >> i inherited a mess. >> president trump insists his administration is a fine-tuned machine and that reports of disarray inside the west wing are simply not true. >> the leaks are absolutely real. the news is fake. >> but less than a month in office, the national security advisor, michael flynn, is forced to resign over his conversation about u.s. sanctions with russia before the president was sworn in. >> i said i don't think he did anything wrong. if anything, he did something right. i didn't direct him, but i would

have directed him, because that's his job. >> as the fallout over flynn's resignation continues, the white house is facing new questions about its relationship with russia. >> russia is fake news. this is fake news put out by the media. >> but defense secretary james mattis sees things differently. calling russia's action in the u.s. election an elections overseas aggressive and destabilizing. we'll get analysis on the first 30 days of the trump administration, from dan balz of the washington post, alexis simendinger of real clear politics, nancy youssef of buzzfeed news, and ed o'keefe of the washington post. >> celebrating 50 years. this is "washington week." funding is provided by... ♪[music]

>> additional funding is provided by... the xq institute. newman's own foundation. donating all profits from newman's own products to charity and nourishing the common good. the yuen foundation. committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities. the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you! >> once again, from washington, suzanne malveaux of cnn.

>> good evening. it was one hour and 17 minutes, press conference, described as epic. at times, feeling like a one-man improv. well, i have attended my share of press conferences in the east room, covering presidents clinton, bush and obama, but i have never experienced or seen anything quite like this. >> this administration is running like a fine-tuned machine. we had a very smooth roll-out of the travel ban. but we had a bad court. speaking for myself, i own nothing in russia. i have no loans in russia. i don't have any deals in russia. the whole russian thing, that's a ruse. that's a ruse. the press, honestly, is out of control. the level of dishonesty is out of control. >> but late friday, the president racin -- ramp cheted s attacks against the media. nbc news, abc, cbs, cnn, is not

my enemy. this is the enemy of the american people. so, dan, i gotta go to you first, because the fact-checkers, of course, have their hands full with all of this in the press conference. but react to this first, this tweet. what does this hearken back to, the times you hear that the press now, the media, is the enemy of the american people? >> it's one thing to say the media is dishonest. all presidents have had their problems with the press. but to declare that the press is the enemy of the american people ratchets this up in a dangerous way, because it seems to give license to anybody who has a grievance with the press, to take it out in some hostile way. we get phone calls, we get e-mails that go in that direction. now you have the president of the united states saying the same kind of thing. it's a scary moment to hear him or to see him tweet that out. >> and what do you think he was trying to accomplish with this press conference, the tone of it, and even just in a hastily

managed way, rushing to get reporters to the east room? >> i thought it was a classic effort to reset, to change the discussion. he's been through a very tumultuous opening of his presidency. this was a very bad week. he had to dismiss his national security advisor, one of the real loyalists in the campaign and administration. his labor secretary withdrew. he's frustrated by the coverage that he's getting, that suggests his administration is in disarray. he wanted to come out and take control of it himself. he wanted to say everything he wanted to say about what he thinks he's accomplishing and he particularly just wanted to take on the press. >> alexis, you were there, inside that room. it was like no other press conference we had seen before. take us behind the scenes a little bit, even from the seating arrangement to how this was done, just an hour before. i understand some aides didn't even realize what was going on. >> it was interesting, because the day was set the night before. and the president obviously in the morning decided he wanted to

do something different and indicated to his staff he did. we had -- many of our colleagues that we all know were doing other things, in other places. and all of us had to rush to show up at the white house for what we knew was gonna be something very interesting, but we had already seen the president in news conferences with heads of state. so we were scratching our heads about, why would he want to be, right after meeting with benjamin native o netanyahu or e minister from canada or japan -- there was this rush to the room. there were no labels on the chairs, so it was a free-for-all. usually we have place cards, kind of. most journalists didn't have that. everybody was just trying to find their seats. reporters were not even sure this was really going to be a question and answer session, buzz we thought that -- because we thought what he wanted to do was introduce the replacement laborer secretary, because he had lost the one the night before, because the senate was not going to vote to confirm.

in fact, that secretary nominee designee was not even there. >> the labor secretary, right? usually it's rolled out with the wife, the family. >> his name is alexander acosta. cnn got a lot of mileage out of the name. >> the name reference. to relation to my colleague, jim. >> humor for that. it was a very unscripted, in every possible way, in terms of the duration, how he called on reporters, and i just wanna add, we all are aware from the obama years that he got a list of people he was gonna call in. he usually was there 45 minutes to an hour and he called an eight news organizations usually, president obama. we had an hour and 17 minutes and the president called on 17 news organization. he packed a lot into not only what he was saying but calling on a lot of people. >> i want you to talk about the fact -- this is wide-ranging but this is something in terms of the style of the president, how this came together. it was chaotic, fractured.

a lot of people in the white house, staffers and aides talking to you, telling you about how difficult it is inside that building as well as on capitol hill to get organized. do you think this is a sign of how the president is going to govern? >> well, it's not much different than how he run his campaign. i can remember a hastily arranged press conference, that, dan, you and i sat through in a gymnasium in iowa. it was freewheeling. he took about a dozen questions. he was doing that almost every day. you heard several colleagues who covered him say this is like last year, like we were out on the trail again with him. some suggesting, you know, maybe this is what we're going to see more of. maybe this is what we should expect. i don't think any of us hear should fault the guy for taking questions from 17 different news organizations. that's a good something; we want that. but it was very much a departure from what we've seen before. people in the white house are

exhausted, we know that. but this is what he promised. he promised to shake it up. he promised it would be different and chaotic. and it's certainly been that way. >> from your perch, the republicans covering congress, how do the republicans see this press conference unfold? what was their reaction? >> they do a lot of this. [laughter] >> they keep their head down, and -- oh, i didn't see it, i'm sorry. look, as long as he is committed to revamping the affordable care act, putting together a tax reform plan, making sure that neil gorsuch gets to the court, the supreme court, and moving on all sorts of republican priorities, lawmakers for the most part are going to be okay. i think the only place we continue to see a really big departure is on questions about russia and the american standing in the world. we saw john mccain today at a conference in europe go after the president, without using his name but very clearly making it apparent that he remains strongly in disagreement with him. i suspect we'll start to see a

@flynn resignation really didthe ratchet up pressure among republicans to be investigating this whole situation. >> i think what was interesting too, it wasn't just the usual suspects, mccain and lindsay, but you saw senators blunt and corker joining in. that really to me seems like a departure, that they are willing to put themselves out out there. i want you to talk about the timetable here, when you listen to ed and you wonder, what's that window, that very limited window that republicans have to get things done? because obama, he was able to get that economic stimulus quickly. but that window is going to close. >> he had the economic stimulus package by this point in his administration. the interesting thing to me is that this white house has been so consumed by the problems that have been created, many by their own doing, that there's -- it's questionable how much real work is getting done and therefore how much the hill will be able to do. the president said in his press

conference yesterday they will finally have their plan for revamping the affordable care act by early next month. well, you know, we would have expected that, you know, they were promising on day one they were gonna repeal and replace. they've had six years in the congress to come up with a consensus plan. we know they're struggling on tax reform. both of these are enormously complex issues. and they basically gotta get them done this year. they're frankly off to a slow start. >> just a week ago, the washington post broke out the story about the national security advisor, michael flynn's phone conversations about u.s. sanctions with russia's ambassador. then we saw four days later that the president asked him to resign. but the following day, trump blamed flynn's firing on the media. so late this week, we also learned that flynn reportedly lied to the f.b.i. when he was questioned, not to mention misleading the vice president. so take us inside the pentagon, nancy. tell us how they received this. and what were they hearing when this unfolded, that this was

such a crisis that was happening in the fourth week? >> well, it was interesting, because the pentagon is desperate to stay out of politics. yet you have all these generals, many who are colleagues with pentagon officials now and seen this turmoil -- seeing this turmoil happening. for them, i think the big surprise, more in a way than flynn's firing was that vice admiral harwood didn't take the job as his successor, because there's such a feeling of service that comes within the military, that when the commander in chief asks you to step up, you step up. the idea that a retired vice admiral would turn down a job from the president i think was almost more shocking than flynn's firing, because it was so unprecedented. >> was that because of the disorganization within the administration or was it something else? >> we've heard a couple reasons. in his letter, he said it was about the fact that he wanted to spend time working on his

finances and his family. and yet we started to hear murmurs that he was concerned about the disorganization, that he wouldn't be able to put in the kind of staff he wanted. he was not gonna use the same staffers that retired general flynn had put in, which are very, very different and sort of -- in sort of approach and tenor. he wanted the ability to replace people who had been in some cases loyal to president trump throughout the campaign. seemed like that was a source of friction. >> and alexis, what does it mean not to have a national security advisor? i mean, you have pence overseas, mattis, various administration officials. you don't have your national security advisor, who is there to assemble and bring this before the president to make some very tough decisions. >> it's such an interesting question, because president trump campaigned to be a law and order and security president. and he was trying to explain to the voters that he was going to take charge and lead in a way that would make america safe. and the national security

council is a large entity that is full of not only appointees from the president who are politically loyal to the president but also career professionals who really know their stuff around the world. and the concern always was, from the very beginning, about whether general flynn was going to be a good fit there. and i have to agree that the idea that someone who was the president described yesterday -- it made it so much easier to fire general flynn because i thought i had this great guy in the wings, ready to go, and it turned out, we found out that he was telling the president i'd like to think about it for a few days. president trump was surprised by that. >> he's not used to that. >> he's not used to that. then to be turned down, i think part of the collateral damage of this is not just to the national security council and how they sort out the organizational chart inside the white house but it also sends a message to good,

skilled people around washington who really know their stuff, beware of this place, don't come near it, because these questions have not been sorted out. it's like a warning sign to really talented people. don't come in. >> and they still have a lot of vacancies. this is pretty unusual, wouldn't you say, dan, the level of vacancies, the difficulty that they're having? >> it's a terrible situation that they've got themselves into. the transition was chaotic, the campaign was chaotic. but successful. the transition was chaotic. he got very impressive people into the cabinet. but the sub-cabinet level doesn't exist at this point. so, you know, secretary tillerson at state was turned down on his hope to try to get elliott abrams in there. he doesn't have a real senior staff. most of these departments don't. and there's nothing in the pipeline. i mean, there are very few of these sub-cabinet nominations that have been put forward. so they're way, way behind on

that. and we know the confirmation process has been slowed down by the democrats. simply putting a functioning government together -- i mean, he finally got his omb director. but i was told that most of those other key appointment jobs are not filled at this point. and they've got to do something about putting a budget together. >> he's got nine of his 15 confirmed. sorry. 10 of the 15 cabinet-level positions, if we count the u.s. ambassador as some do. all these deputies, the reason they matter is they're the ones who actually run things. tillerson, general mattis, general kelly. they go to the press conference, the ribbon cutting. these are the folks underneath who actually run things. the fact that qualified people all across the country have said no, competent managers who have done this work before are saying no, is a sign of real trouble. the labor secretary pick that he brought in, the replacement, is a guy who served george w. bush

in the justice department. but that was hastily done. they made a few phone calls. he said, would you like the job? the guy basically said yes. we'll see whether he sticks with it. >> weigh in on the fact that you have potentially multiple investigations against this administration potentially about the leaks, not necessarily in russia but you have intelligence, congressional. you have this independent guy that trump decided, the billionaire buddy of his he's bringing in. how does that complicate matters in terms of just trying to get something done? >> one of the things that i think was really fascinating to watch in the fuse conference is to listen to the president talk about the things that have surprised him about washington. we're watching in realtime, a leader learn to be a leader in government, transfer his business skill or -- he talked about he was surprised that the intelligence community might have information that would leak out and would be detrimental to him as the president of the united states. he was surprised that the judicial branch would challenge

his power over immigration and national security. you know, he's been surprised at the idea that congress might not have been in total sync with him and that he can't dictate to the house or not exactly. the only thing he didn't seem to be surprised about was how to use the media as a foil. and he did that for most of the time. >> quite successfully. [laughter] >> at least for his supporters. nancy, we know the defense secretary, mattis, really -- i mean, he was the one who really spoke out this week. and he seems to be an independent person. how did that -- how did he manage that role, and how did that play itself out in front of nato? >> it's fascinating. he went to nato, said we're gonna stick by you. he started by saying we need you to step up and then came back and said, we're gonna stick by you. which seemed to be a contradiction of what trump was saying. he was offering a message of stability to an alliance that's very uncertain about the u.s. commitment to the alliance. >> we understand that over the weekend too, we're gonna see a trump that perhaps is

invigorated and revitalized. again, he's going off to central florida. he's gonna get a little bit of his mojo, his juice, from people at this rally here. what does that mean to him? i know that, at least for president obama, the first couple of months, he needed that too, that energy to get out there and feel supported. >> yeah. this is an event that the white house says is being paid for by the campaign, which we presume is the 2020 re-election campaign imcampaign. >> didn't he announce that the day of his inauguration? >> send your checks, i guess, is what he's been telling supporters. he's been sending text messages this week, raising money still. it will be a primarily political rally. the white house went out of their way to say that air force one would not be in the backdrop. it's designed, yes, to give him exactly that, juice, energy, put him back in touch with his supporters who really made his campaign possible. it will be very interesting to see all the different officials overseas, what he gets into and what he says at that event.

>> i thought he looked more himself starting with that press conference. and then today, in south carolina, and i presume tomorrow. then he has looked, since he was inaugurated. he's looked unhappy, caged up. he's been overly scripted. he hasn't communicated until this week in the way he's used to communicating. in one way or another, that press conference was the authentic donald trump, the sort of let trump be trump that all of his loyalists wanted to see. >> the other thing i would add is the familiarity. we were just talking about someone who has never been in government, had not been in washington. and the fall-back for someone like that is, what are they familiar with? what makes them comfortable? you're describing the feeling of candlecaged in. it's also his unfamiliarity, policy after policy, executive action. who is in charge? how is the government organized? who do we need to have in? his idea that maybe we shouldn't

approve someone to come into the government because they weren't for him during the election and people trying to persuade him, no, no, you need certain skill sets. so this -- going out to campaign is what makes him comfortable. it's what he knows. and he feels so confident about. >> and how did the military respond to this? are they starting to get a sense that they are being politicized in some way? because it has become so political, everything he does. >> it's hard for them not to feel that way. we have so many generals being brought in. even the names we're hearing for national security advisor, almost exclusively retired generals. you're starting to see a very gray line between the military and national security council. we've now seen a major military operation, this raid in yemen carried out january 29, in which we saw the absence of a national security council that didn't have the ability to sort of ask the military the questions that sometimes need to be asked to sort of make sure that they're asking themselves the right

questions. sometimes you can be too fixed on sort of the intelligence you have and the plan you have, and you need a national security council that sort of challenges those assumptions. i think the absence of that has sort of left the military a little disoriented in terms of how to approach military matters when it's not clear who is the checks and balances, what is the role of the white house, the role of the national security council and who is the civilian who didn't come in with a military mind-set towards everything that they do? because sometimes that outsider view is exactly what's needed. >> and now we're seeing -- members of congress have gone on recess. they're going back home. before, it was the republicans who were faced with these big town halls and boos, demands about repealing obamacare. talk about the democrats, what they're going to be faced with now. >> they'll face it as well. there's various movements that have been sparked by trump's victory that are concerned about the future of health care in this country, and just the idea that in general everything trump

wants to do should be stopped in its tracks to whatever extent democrats can do it. you will see hundreds of town halls and coffees and other public events held across the country next week. republicans in the house were advised to make sure they had sufficient security at their events, just given the rancorous nature of our politics right now. but there are democrats concerned about this as well. there was a meeting earlier this week of the top senate democratic leadership. they kind of leaned on bernie sanders, said, look, you're close to these groups, groups called indif advisable, taking up the mantra of the resistance. he said, look, make sure they train their fire on republicans and not on us. we are in lock-step on protecting obamacare and fighting against his nominees and other issues. the real focus should be on republicans. and we'll see next week what kind of public response they get and how republicans really deal with this, especially if the

crowds are predominantly republican voters. >> dan, do you think that's gonna work? they've been in office for just four weeks now. >> the brob for the democrats -- problem for the democrats is there is so much energy that has been unleashed on the left because of president trump, that they don't quite know how to deal with it. a, on the one hand, they want to harness it. b, they don't want it aimed at them. but they are hearing so much more than they ever expected to hear at this point in a new administration. they're trying to get their arms around it. i think next week will be interesting to see, not just the kind of flak that the republicans get, because i think in some ways that's predictable, but what happens with these democrats and how they try to channel things. >> also, if we looked at the president, look how he is trying to describe the democrats, the face of the democrats is either chuck schumer or hillary clinton. he used that news conference to talk about both of them and denigrate them as the obstructionists. and hillary clinton is not, you know, in office. in any office.

>> it is trump. ha ha! it is trump. thank you, everyone. really appreciate it. of course our conversation continues online on the "washington week" extra, where we'll discuss why many democrats are turning to bernie sanders, of course, to help them with their constituent town halls. you can find that at pbs.org/washingtonweek, friday nights after 10 and all week long. test your news knowledge on the "washington week" news quiz. i'm suzanne malveaux. have a good weekend! >> funding for "washington week" is provided by...

>> xq institute. ♪[music] >> additional funding is provided by... boeing. newman's own foundation. donating all profits from newman's own products to charity and nourishing the common good. the yuen foundation. committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities. the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you! >> you're watching pbs.

tonight... man: there's no question that james garfield could have been a great president. woman: garfield raised our sights and made us more tolerant and open-minded. charles guiteau: to the american people, i conceived the idea of removing the president. (gunshot) "murder of a president," american experience. nasa announcer: lift-off, the clock is running. ringside announcer: schmeling is down!