♪ robert: president trumppl dos disagreements over intelligence and declares no wall, no i'm robert costa. welcome to "washington week." president trump t ls his intelligence chiefs to go back to school. following their stark assessment of thats from north korea. >> north korea will seek to retain its wmd depainlts and is unlikely to completely give up its nuclear production capabilities. isis is intent on resurging and still commands thousands of fighters in iraq and sia. robert: which -- and russian interference. >> not only hav the russians continued to do it in 2018 but receive wenal -- seen indication that they're continuing to adapo

their model aer countries are taking an interested eye. robert: pres, the pdent called bipartisan boarder talks a waste of time. we cover it. all, ne announcer: hithis is "wton week." funding is provided by -- >> i was able to turn the aircraft around and mission around and was able to save two men's lives thatight. >> my first job helped me to grow up pretty quickly.il that happen when you're asked to respond to a coup. >> in 2001 i signed up for the air force. two days later, 9/11 happened. >> babel, a language program that teaching real-life conversations in a new language, such as spanish, french, german,

italian a more. babel's 15 minute lessons are available as an app onion line. more information at babel.com. >> funding is provided by koo and patricia yuen through the yuen foundation. committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities. the corporation for public broadcasting and from contributions to your pbs station from viewers leou. thank you. once again, from washington, model rator robert costa. robert: good evening, there were cracks this week between president trump and phlegm republicans. by an overwhelming bipartisan vote, thep. g.ontrolled senate opposed the president's plan to withdraw u.s. forces fromyria and afghanistan. peter alexander wrote this week thatthe disconnect between president trump and the republican establishment on foren policy has rarely been

as stark." the move by majority lder mcconnell comes as the president also diverged fr his intelligence chiefs. joining me are peter alexander, from the "new york times," bob woodward, plults 34ru9ser prize winning autr at the "washington post." shawna thomas for vials news and nancy cordes, chief congressional correspondent for cbs news. bob, welcome back to "washington week." bob: thank you. robert: watching tho clips of director of national intelligence, dan coates, we see all these conclusions but yet there's this gap between he and president trump. why this gap? bob: yes, and of course the intel community is in many w as priest hood and it's a closed system.t in fact,he c.i.a., they call the president the first

customer and everythin is to be funneled to him and then to have the president,nd com in chief, the first customer, kick them so harmed and say you need you're k to school, naive is insulting and is we find in the trump presidency, it's not in trump's own interests, even if he feels that. he should call them in and say hey, guys, go back to school or something ke tha and as we are just a little month or -- at some point here's going to be a trump kim jung unsummit againyou can't go into that divided and you have to have some knowledge about why does north korea have nuclea weapons? they have nuclear weapons because they believe it's a deternls -- deterrent and it

gives them leverage in a very impoant way and the intel people have been telling trump for a long time, hey, they're not going to give up their nuclear weapons so there's a divide. robert: shawna, you were there in singapore during the last summit. what happens for the next one m lath? shawna: the president wanted to do that summit and they made that summits happen for him. he has said he wants to do another one. reporting and what we're hearini from our interal partners is that it's probably going to be in vietnam. he has an entire infrastructure to make another oneappen and clearly kim wants to do it as well. so i thinke'll see another summit. i think the problem about what president trump vs. the intelligence was saying. also, what is actually true? should we believe anything that the ambassadors or anyone else

tells them if the president is saying that? robert: what dimmed you learn when you sat down w h your colleague magui with the president in the oval office week? is he isolated from his own inteigence officials? peter: he told us no. he brought them in andhi ever turned out to be fine. the only problem was the media, of course, misinterpreted things. at was fascinating is how he operates. he brings in coates, haspel, and he said i understand what you're saying. a 're saying iran is wonderful place. oriental is not a wonderful place.ay they sir, we don't trip iran is a wonderful place. well, therefore, the media misinterpreted that. we reported correctly what e they said arybody saw it live on television. they said iran is currently and ing a nuclear weapon the presidents sort of has

created thist srahmen, well, they didn't say this thing which they never said and therefore it must be the media. it talks about how the president lives in his open space and the people around him are trying to keep him happy, more or less, without having to sacrifice what the professionals tell him at langley and across the c.i.a. and intelligence network. >> we're not talking about the big thing that actually got talked about in they are haing, from china fmen and russia. we're litigating did they say what they said because we heard them say it? that's going to affect this ection. it could affect our power grids and so many other things and we don't have room for that conversation for some reason. robert: you had an exchange, nancy withjo senate ty leader mcconnell about all of this. what has been the reaction among republicans on capitol hill? nancy: he claim to have no

inea that had happened in the hearing. airness, i did him about it on the day of the hearing but this was all or the new and talked about in the halls of congress so the notion he was unaware that the president's hand-picked intelligence advisors were saying something om markedly different from what the president has said in the pastso iwhat not believable. another thing that got buried in this hearing was something very striking that the intelligence advisors all said. at the same time that russia and cloib are more united thanth sie 1950's, u.s. allies are pulling away from us and the reasons they cit are because of u.s. policies on security ask trade. those are tre pdent's policies a it's a pretty striking indictment coming from his own tomnc intelli officials. bob: but what can triple trump in this is he goes to a summits gth kim jong un and he has this

expectation, i c him to give up his nukes and he doesn't. and beware of somebody like trump when he isap dinted and when he feels somebody has pulled the rug out from under him and even if he's been told by the world and hisce intelligeople don't expect orea is ook, north k there for -- gives him tremendous leverage. countrieson't give up nuclear weapons. libya did and look what happened there. robert: and the democrats were prettylarmed. senate minorities leader chuck humer urged them to hold an intervention for the president. he wrote "youow cannot a the president's ill-advised andun rranted excellent to stand." speaker pelosi responded this way. >> the president just doesn't seem to have the attention span or the desire to hear what the

intelligence community has been telling him. robert: bob was talking about how north korea sees i own deterrent with its own nuclear wsenal butt about the rest of the world talking about the u.s.'s role in it? >> for itance in moscow, you hear vladimir putin basically idplaying to prt trump's own dust distrust of hisncies. this is bit on the fact of two years or more oa sophistication between president trump and these organizations, which started business -- his presidency by telling him it was not valid. that's the way they see it. he didn't trust the ones who came from them now, the obama appoint eyes and doesn't trust the ones now, even though they were appointed by him. his view is they got the iraq warrong, the weapons of mass destruction wrong.

them?ould i trust i don't believe my election was fake. bert: secretary mattis is gone, gary co-len is gone from inside the whoums. who is going toheull president back towards the center, back towards the mainstream snleds bob: i don't know but they have to do it. collectively smouse -- somehow, the intelligencchief and make that argument. look,ju mr. president, we'r telling you what we find. let's have a discussion about this. this impulse decision making is very dangerous in this climate and remember, it was predent ama in his last months in autopsy -- actually considered maybe we have to launch a preemptive strike on north korea to get rid o all their nuclear weapons and the intelligence people told obama we won't get

them all and obama said quite naturally no so this is kind of one of these moments where, for in the road. it can take the dangerous fork where we go off a cliff. robert: it's not just what we saw from the intelligence testimony. there's more news on this front day in, day out. secretary of state mike pompeo announced friday that the isu.s ulling out of a nuclear arms control treaty with russia. >> russia has jpardized the united states' security interests and we can no longer be restricted by the treaty while russia shamelesslyol es it. robert: shawna with see the u.s. moving away from its cold war stance. yes, naysay russia was violating the treaty but what to make of this development? awna: this is something they've been hinting at for a while, that they wanted to get out of the treative.

obama's state department multiple times said that russia was violating this tat a. nato has said russia is righting -- violating this treatm. critic the question is, is the right reaction for the u to say we are going to pull out of it? presumably we could also build different times of weapons and things like that. the problems that just creates an arm rails, doesn't really solve the problem. but how else do we sanction them, put pressure on them? interestg that they're not using any of those diplomati tactics but what else could we do to russia? bert: peter, stepping back, this is about the u.s. andnd russia at the same time is it also about cloyne? peter: yes. in, there's no real desire at this point to put missiles in europe as was happeningn the 1980's. reagan and gorbachev siphonned this treaty in a very voth

volume fil situation. that's not where we're at today butor a trump administration, there's a worry about china deloping weapons we're not able to counter. they're not part of this treaty. maybe the solution is to china into a treaty like that. president trump is a skementic of by lateral agreements and so is john bolton, his security advisor. the i.n.f. treaty may not be that viable in thisay but where does it lead? bob: the real issue i nameo and as mattis said before he left and said many times, nato didn't exist we would have to invent it and russia will never ren a war in europe as long as nato is t so if you can hold that together, but again, trump is repeatedly denouncing nato and saying they're not paying

enough money. we're suckers. and khat's the, keep nato together and i think strategically that's very s powerful but yrt -- nat toverbings o y go in the wrong direction. peter: roip you think about senate majority leader mitch h mcconnels also rebuking president trump. bob: no one ever calls me. [laughter] >> they're calling bob woodwar right now. >> the president did not like something you just said. robert: bob woodward, even on friday night, never sto reporting. so back to majority leader mcconnell. bob: i apologize. robert: that's fine. it's all good. you're bob woodward. majority leader mcconnell steps back on a lotf fronts. he steps back and says i don't

want to met well this president but on syria and afghanistan, the senate republicans rebuke their own president. what is going on? >> i mean, look, as we discussed a few minutes agoccnell is very reluctant to criticize this president on a whole host of issues. i ask him about the president every emwoo week. he does whatever he can to avoid critiquing the with the. yet on syria, it was his amendment. introduce it would amendment himself rebuking the president's position o pullingroops out of syria and afghanistan and that just shows, this amendment doesn't have teeth. it can't force the president to do anything but it is a very strong signal to the white house, republicans be in congress believe you are going down the wrong path.l robert: r quick is mcconnell pushing this or is he getting pressure from rank and file? >> i think it's both. i think they're very concerned

that the president is going to kind of go ouch -- off without a plan and yank troops t and they've heard very worrying things about the prospect of doing that. they sawry the secref definition, who they greatly admired, resignn w the president made in policy. robert: so we'll keep an eye on all this foreign policy but the other stand off in washington is over the budget and funding for border wall. as the deadline knee, the president is skeptical that the partisan committee can cut a deal that he would sign. mr. trump said "se wall ta are a waste of time." and he continues to strike out at speaker pelosi. president trump: i think nancy pelosi is hut hurting our -- hurting our country very badly in what she's doing and ultimately i think i've set the table very nicely. robert: set the table, for a national emergency?

>> that's his imply occasion. and the- - implication. and the national emergency is his way out. it's a vy controversial idea. they've been critical of president obama for presidential overreach and said it's a danger if president trump tries it. >> i think the interesting thing is i went to the firstng mee of the conference committee with republicans and the democrats' house and senate and in that room they did not soundthat far apart on funding the department of homeland security. they allant border security, more border patrol agents. they all wants to do something about trafficking and drugs. the only thing keeping these two parties apart was the wall and the idea of the wal and funding and republicans were saying we have to figure out a way to give them something. democrats right now are saying their opening bid has no money

for a wall but it's -- if he could actually leave it along and -- alone and w he wasilling to sign what they gave him, i think those parties could comee togend fund the department of homeland security. robert would a national emergency ruin those talks? >> these are appropriators. they can do this in their sleepo they are useorking out the nitty-gritty and they can come up with a deal. the problem is going to come at the d when republicans are trying to sell this to the president and they can't tell whether he's on board or not because they're going to be unwilling to sign off if they don't know where he's going to because that levels them out on a limb crossise to thease if they present this and the president says not good enough. no wall funding. robert: is in governing crisis? bob: it sure could be. what's interesting in this, and it has to get on the table, i p itsible that nancy pelosi

and the democrats will give and say,o l, it's not that much money. we're the ones that are going to break the gridlock? we will show a little flexibility and we'll give you something here, pllt -- mr. president? now, they have made it a matter of life and death, which is always bad in a negotiation. >> this is the problem for them. a lot of them have voted for a wall in the past but by makin it immoral, which is what nancy pelosiaid would look very bad to their bails. they're bot locked in and hard to compromise on. robert: and the republicans seem -- waryin of h another shutdown. 35 days, they took a beating on it and now they're trying to make sure it doesn't happen again. >> everyone on the hill noles

the government shutdown was bad. 35 days, hundreds of thousands not getting paid and many of them working whi not getting paid. and we saw what they can do when they rise up and say we're foot necessarily coming to wor nobody wants to cause a shutdown. but if you don't know what the presgoent ig to sign, what do you do? i think in some ways maybe they give enough money on border security and thenhopefully the president will figure out a way to spend it and call it a win for himself. >> this all comes i down think to your defense of a wall. if you have a wall-like fence or a fence-like wall or some kind of barrier as everyone now describes it. can democrats say we didt give on the wall and can republicans sell it to the president as it's barrier, it's going to keep people out. it may not beut made of the material you like but it's enough? b: i don't know whether it's

just tragic or sick that we're having this kind of aebate in washington over an issue where -- it doesn't take o a l data or investigation to puncture of this ide somehow the wall is necessary. it's not. riley the intelligence chiefs didn't even mention the crisis at theorder or the need for a wall. coming ed about drugs across the border. >> it is definitely not the focus of the worldwide threats hearing or the assessment but it's one of the things that when, during the government shutdown, my team talked to prison guards and one of the things they said to us was, you know, some of them were trump supporters and they said walls work. on we're pruards. walls work but they don't work without the people there. they were so rational about it. you can build all the walls youi

want b someone is not watching those walls, people are still going to come over. >> the problem is the debate is now ideology cal rather than practical. let's look tthis 2,000-michael border and evaluate what could work best here or there. it's become a question of manhood, that's wha pelosi said on the president. robert: a big test, tuesday night. the president, brinkmanship or more of a conciliatory tone? >> that's in his wheelhouse so i'm assuming there will be some brincksmanship and as we've heard in hist puple of state of the yoifpbles, about the dangerous of illegal immigration and the rampant crime that is resulting fm it. so i think especially right now as we're stang at this february 15 deadline, he's going to be making that case in a more

-- way than ever. bob: big trouble possibly and e idea -- again, i hate to go back to the overall what's this about? this is about small aunts of money in a fixed idea that trump has and you spend enough time, as all of you know talking to people who meet with trump and he'll say these are my ideas and they'll try to challenge him and where did you get that idea? oh, well, i've had that idea for 30 years and if you disagree with me, you're wrong. he gets his feet in cement on something like that and if he declares an emergency and i goes to the courts, you know who's also going to pay? the people in this countrynd the democrats because the's no victory in the court these days because it takes too long. robert: we shall see. we'll be watching tuesday.

thanks, everybody for joining us. next tuesday, tune in to the pbs our for coverage of the president's state of the union addrs. i'll join judy wood rough and the team. for now our conversation continues on the "washington week" podcast. i findt on your favorite app or on our website. i'm robert costa. have a great weekend. ♪ announcer: corporate funding is provided by -- >> i was able to turn the aircraft around and the mission around ande was a save two men's lives that night. >> my first job helped me to grow up pretty quickly. that will happen when you're asked to resnd to a coom. >> in 2001 i signed up for the air force.

ato days, 9/11 happened. >> babel, a language program that teaches real-life conversations in a new language, as much as spanish, french, german, italian and more. babel's 10 to 15 minute lessons are available as an app or online. more information at babel.com 6. announcer: funding is provided by -- koo and patricia yuen through the yuen foundation, committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities. the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs ation from viewers like you. thank you. >> you're watching pbs.

♪ the corporation for public broadcasting...