tougher than before they start or before they make an announcement so i want to thank united technologies, but we've been meeting with a lot of companies, but what really is happening is the word is now out that when you want to move your plant to mexico or some other place, and you want to fire all of your workers from michigan and ohio and all these places that i won, for good reason, it's not going to happen that way anymore. you want to move your plant and you think as an example you're going to build that plant in mexico and you're going to make your air conditioners or cars or whatever you're making and you're going to sell through what will be a very, very strong border, not a weak border like it is now. we don't even have a border. it's an open seive. not going to happen. you're going to pay a very large border tax, so if you want to move to another country and if you want to fire all of our great american workers, that got you there in the first place,

you can move from michigan to tennessee and to north carolina and south carolina, you can move from south carolina back to michigan, you can do anywhere, you got a lot of states at play, a lot of competition. so it's not like oh, gee, i'm taking the competition. we got a lot of places you can move and i don't care, as long as it's within the united states, the borders of the united states. there will be a major border tax on these companies that are leaving and getting away with murder, and if our politicians had what it takes, they would have done this years ago, and you'd have millions more workers right now in the united states that are 96 million really wanting a job and they can't get. you know that story, that's the real number. so that's the way it is. okay, go ahead. >> i have a question [ inaudible ] about the border security but i also wanted to ask you about something you said on twitter this morning. are we living in nazi germany?

what were you driving at there? do you have a problem with the intelligence community? and the supreme court what's your time line. you said a while ago you were down to four. have you conducted those interviews yet, what is your time line for nominating and the border fence it appears clear u.s. taxpayers will have to pay for it up front. what is your plan -- >> okay, i got it. do you have any more? [ laughter ] on the fence, it's not a fence, it's a wall. you just misreported it. wee going to build a wall. i could wait about a year and a half until we finish our negotiations with mexico which will start immediately after we get to office but i don't want to wait. mike pence is leading an effort to get final approvals through various agencies and through congress for the wall to begin. i don't feel like waiting a year or year and a half. we're going to start building. mexico in some form and there are many different forms will reimburse us and they will reimburse us for the cost of the wall.

that will happen. whether it's a tax or whether it's a payment, probably less likely that it's a payment, but it will happen. so remember this, okay? i would say we are going to build a wall and people would go crazy. i would then say who's going to pay for the wall? and people would all scream out, 25,000, 30,000 people because nobody's had crowds like trump has had. you know that but don't like to report that. finally he agrees now. i say who is going to pay for the wall and they will scream out "mexico." now, reports went out last week, oh, mexico's not going to pay for the wall because of a reimbursement. what's the difference? i want to get the wall started. i don't want to wait a year and a half until i make my deal with mexico. and we probably will have a deal sooner than that and by the way, mexico has been so nice, so nice. i respect the government of mexico, i respect the people of mexico. i love the people of mexico. i have many people from mexico

working for me. they're phenomenal people. the government of mexico is terrific. i don't blame them for what's happened. i don't blame them for taking advantage of the united states. i wish our politicians were so smart. mexico has taken advantage of the united states. i don't blame the representatives and various presidents, et cetera, of mexico. what i say is we shouldn't have allowed that to happen. it's not going to happen anymore, so in order to get the wall started, mexico will pay for the wall, but it will be reimbursed, okay? supreme court judge. so as you know i have a list of 20. i've gone through them. we've met with numerous candidates. they're outstanding in every case. they were largely recommended and highly recommended by federalist society, jim demint was also very much involved in this group, which is fantastic and he's a fantastic guy.

so between leo and jim demint and some senators and some congresspeople, we have a great group of people. i'll be making the decision on who we will put up for justice of the united states supreme court, a replacement for the great, great justice scalia. that will be probably within two weeks of the 20th, so within about two weeks, probably the second week. i consider the first day because we'll also be doing some pretty good signings and i think what we'll do is we'll wait until monday, that will be our first business day as opposed to doing it on friday, because on friday, people are going to have a very good time at the inauguration, and then saturday as you know we're having a big church service and lots of good things are happening so our first day and you'll all be invited to the signings, but we'll be doing some pretty good signings on monday, tuesday, wednesday and thursday and friday, and then also the next week, and you're

all invited, but on the supreme court i'll be making that decision, and it will be a decision which i very strongly believe in. i think it's one of the reasons i got elected. i think the people of this country did not want to see what was happening with the supreme court. so i think it was a very, very big decision as to why i was elected. >> are we living in nazi germany, what were you driving at there? >> i think it was disgraceful, disgraceful that the intelligence agencies allowed any information that turned out to be so false and fake out. i think it's a disgrace, and i say that, and i say that, and that's something that nazi germany would have done and did do. i think it's a disgrace. that infortion that s false and fake and never happened got released to the public. as far as buzzfeed, which is a failing pile of garbage, writing it, i think they're going to suffer the consequences.

they already are and as far as cnn going out of their way to build it up, and by the way, we just found out, i was coming down, michael kohn is a very talented lawyer, a good lawyer in my firm, was just reported it wasn't this michael kohn they were talking about. so all night long it's michael kohn. i said i want to see your passport. he brings his passport to my office. i say hey, wait a minute, he didn't leave the country. he wasn't out of the country. they had michael kohn of the trump organization was in prague. it turned out to be a different michael kohn. it's a disgrace what took place. it's a disgrace and i think they ought to apologize to start with to michael kohn. [ applause ] >> mr. president-elect, since you are attacking our news organization -- >> not you. >> could you give us a chance, you're attacking our news organization, can you give us a chance to ask a question, sir? >> go ahead. >> mr. president-elect, can you state categorically -- >> don't be rude.

>> can you give us a question? >> don't be rude. i'm not going to give you a question. i am not going to give you a question. you are fake news. go ahead. >> can you state categorically that nobody. [ applause ] mr. president-elect that is not appropriate. >> do you think. obama went too far with the sampgss he put on russia after the hacking? >> no. >> what do you think of lindsay gram gra ham's plan to send you a bill for tougher ones. >> plans to send me a bill for what? i hadn't heard lindsey graham was going to do that. lindsey graham. i've been competing with him for a long time, and he's going to crack that 1% barrier one day. i didn't realize lindsey graham's still at it. it's all right. i think lindsey graham is a nice guy. i've heard he's a nice guy and i've been hearing it. go ahead. go ahead, you've been waiting. >> as far as we understand the

intelligence community, ian panel from bbc news. >> bbc news, i love it. >> thank you. as far as we understand the intelligence community are still looking at these allegations, it's false news, as you describe it. if they come back with any kind of conclusion that if any of it stands up and is true, will you consider your position? >> this is something i can come back. yes, go ahead. >> -- publish fake news and the problems we've seen throughout the media over the course of the election, what refo do you recommend for this indust here? >> i don't recommend reforms. i recommend people that are, that have some moral compass, you know i've been hearing more and more about a thing called fake news, talking about people that go and say all sorts of things, but i will tell you, some of the media outlets that i deal with are fake news, more so than anybody. i could name them but i won't

bother. you have a few sitting right in front of us p sew they're very, very dishonest people, but i think just something we're going to have to live with. i guess the advantage i have is that i can speak back. when it happens to somebody that doesn't have this, doesn't have that kind of a mega phone, they can't speak back. it's a very sad thing. i've seen people destroyed. i've seen people absolutely destroyed and i think it's very unfair. so all i can ask for is honest reporters. yes? >> i just want to follow up on the questions about the u.s. intelligence community and be clear about what you're saying. do you trust your u.s. intelligence officials and what do you say to foreign policy experts who say you're actually weakening national security by waging this war of words against that community? >> intelligence agencies are vital and very, very important. we are going to be putting in, as you know, mr. pompeo, and others. you know the senator, dan

coates. we're going to be putting in some outstanding people. within 90 days they're going to be coming back to me with a major report on hacking. i want them to cover this situation. i also want them, however, to cover maybe most importantly, because we're hacked by everybody. you know, the united states, our government out of a list of 17 in terms of intel is the worst. it's number 17 in terms of protection if you look at the retail industry and banking industry, various industries, out of 17 industries, they put us in the category of an industry, the united states is last in terms of protecting, let's say hacking defense. like we had a great hacking defense at the republican national committee. that's why we weren't hacked. by the way, we were told they were trying to hack us, but they aren't able to hack and i think i get some credit because i told reince and reince did a

phenomenal job. i said i want strong hacking defense. the democratic national committee didn't do that. maybe that's why the country runs so badly that way but i will tell you, wait, wait, let me finish. within 90 days, we will be coming up with a major report on hacking defense. how do we stop this new phenomena, fairly new phenomena, because the united states is hacked by everybody. that includes russia, and china, and everybody, everybody. okay. go ahead. go ahead. >> you said just now that you believe that russia indeed was responsible for the hacking of the dnc and emails, et cetera. >> well you know what? it could have been others also. >> why did you spend weeks undermining u.s. intelligence community before simply getting the facts and then making a public statement? >> well i think it's pretty sad when intelligence reports get

leaked out to the press. it's pretty sad. first of all it's illegal. these are classified and certified meetings and reports. i'll tell you what does happen. i have many meetings with intelligence, and every time i meet, people are reading about it. somebody's leaking it out. so i said maybe it's my office. maybe my office, because i have a lot of great people, maybe it's them. and what i did is i said i won't tell anybody. i'm going to have a meeting and i won't tell anybody about my meeting with intelligence, and wh happened is i had my meeting, nobody knew. not even rona, my executive assistant for years. she didn't know. i didn't tell her. nobody knew. the meeting was had, the meeting was over, they left, and immediately the word got out that i had a meeting. so i don't want that. i don't want that. it's very unfair to the country. it's very unfair to our country

what's happened. that report should have never -- first of all it shouldn't have been printed because it's not worth the paper it's written on and i thank the "new york times" for saying that, i thank a lot of different people for saying that, but i will tell you, that should never, ever happen. okay. >> thank you, mr. president-elect. can you stand here today once and for all and say that no one connected to you or your campaign had any contact with russia leading up to or during the presidential campaign and if you indeed do believe that russia was behind the hacking, what is your message to vladimir putin right now? >> he shouldn't be doing it. he won't be doing it. russia will have much greater respect for our country when i'm leading it than when other people have led it. you will see that. russia will respect our country more. he shouldn't have done it. i don't believe he'll be doing it more now. we have to work somethingout, but it's not just russia. take a look at what's happened.

you don't report it the same way. 22 million accounts were hacked in this country by china, and that's because we have no defense. that's because we're run by people that don't know what they're doing. russia will have far greater respect for our country when i'm leading it, and i believe, and i hope, maybe it won't happen, it's possible, but i won't be given a little reset button like hillary. press this piece of plastic. guy looked at her like what is she doing? there's no reset button. we're either going to get along or we're not. i hope we get along but if we don't, that's possible, too, but russia and other countries and other countries, including china, which has taken total advantage of us economically, totally advantage of us in the south china sea, by building their massive fortress, total. russia, china, japan, mexico, all countries will respect us far more, far more than they do

under past administrations. i want to thank everybody. so this is all just so you understand, these papers, because i'm not sure that was explained properly, but these papers are all just a piece of the many, many companies that are being put into trust to be run by my two sons and i hope at the end of eight years i'll come back and i'll say, oh, you did a good job. other wiles if ty do a bad job i'll say, you're fired. good-bye, everybody. good-bye. [ applause ] >> an extensive wide-ranging and then some news conference and appearance interrupted by a statement from a woman with a law firm about this trust that donald trump has talked about. there is a lot here, and with us in our studio here in new york,

katy tur who has covered donald trump since the beginning and ali velshi who we often turn to, to explain business to a lay audience. ali, because, well there's so much here, it's going to take us a little bit. >> yes. >> what stood out to you in what was intended here? this was the december press conference that was put off to announce the new business arrangement. >> right, that was sherry dillon who spoke. she is a lawyer with morgan lewis, a big philadelphia law firm, 2,000 lawyers, 2,000 staff, notable ted cruz was a partner at that firm. basically she laid out a big fat nothing cake. it was never an option to hand over the business to the sons and consider that any sort of separation from donald trump's interests in the company. that was floated right from the beginning and everybody said that's not a trust. it's not a blind trust. it's nothing. he's basically established a trust. any american can go into their local bank and establish a trust. it just means you're putting a

business into an entity. the concept that he won't know about decisions that are being made is just not legally viable, so that's number one. she's said that he's putting it into a trust. number two, she gave an opinion on the emoluments clause, the idea that the president cannot accept gifts from others, and she used the hotel in d.c. as the example, that that is not what the framers of the constitution intended when they said that that wouldn't be a gift. donald trump, she said, wanted to go above and beyond that, has decided they will calculate the profits made on any foreign entity staying at those hotels and donate them to the treasury so there is a profit and that can, in the opinion of some, be construed as a gift. so that business, that whole layout of his financial plan doesn't make any sense. we're no further than we were a month ago when he first said that he was going to make an announcement. this is for those who were not satisfied, this isn't going to be satisfactory.

what i thought was interesting was the degree to which that lawyer went to try and sort of muddy the waters. this is an either is or isn't situation. it is not a blind trust. it's not even a shadowed trust. it's just a trust. >> so what happens? will constitutional lawyers raise an objection? we have eight, nine days to go before the inauguration. >> yes, it's a very big question as to who actually end up doing anything about this, and i think our best bet is congress. now, listening to rex tillerson's confirmation hearings this morning, he was getting far tougher questions from republican senators than i expected he would. so congress may have to look at this, and it is going to be up to the media to sort of say where these things are falling flat. he did say no foreign deals, no new foreign deals and that they've canceled some foreign deals. again, we'll have to keep on digging and evaluating because we haven't had this situation in a very long time. we've never had this type of a situation so we have to see what deals look like they're not meeting the standards set out.

>> the real fireworks, if people were watching this with us, the raised voices came, i think most especially when jim acosta of cnn rose to say you've invoked the name of our network. you've accused us of being fake news, at least allow me to have a question. and donald trump according to my notes looked at jim acosta and said, of cnn "you are fake news." there was a lot of talk about the intelligence community. andrea mitchell is standing by in washington with more on that. andrea, this was from extraordinary when donald trump invoked the intelligence community, all but directly accusing them of leaking the substance of meetings he has. >> reporter: he did. he actually said that he believed that very suspect

so-called russian dossier was leaked by the intelligence community and also meetings that he's held with the intelligence leaders, private meetings with intelligence briefers have been leaked, when no one in his office knew about them, not even his executive assistant. he tweeted today against the intelligence community about that very suspicious, very salacious dossier that was reported by buzzfeed and cnn, not as the president-elect pointed out by other news organizations, including this one. he said that you know, frankly that he feels that the intelligence community in leaking this, what are we doing living in nazi germany? he was asked questions about that athe news conference. he did accuse jim acosta, our colleague from cnn, of representing fake news, and said i'm not going to give you a question. he was savage in his criticism of buzzfeed, the first news organization that put this out. this document has been floating around washington. it did get to members of the

so-called big eight, the top leaders in congress, in both houses. i've been told that senator harry reid, one of the big eight members actually did notify the clinton team about it in august, so that was their first warning that there was this so-called document about donald trump's private behavior. you heard him at his news conference say he never did those things, he warned his bodyguards the one time he went for the miss universe pageant and others who travel with him to be careful, that there are always little cameras on you, so he claimed that he had no behavior at all in this. with me here is a member of the foreign relations committee. this has become an issue also at the hearing of rex tillerson because of his long relationship with vladimir putin and russia. he was questioned about whether or not sanctions would still be on vladimir putin, the obama sanctions over the russian hacking.

today was the if tirs dfirst da did concede almost grudgingly russia was behind the hacking but did not stop that. he also said china hacked the office of personnel management. that happened two years ago and it did get extensive coverage despite what the president-elect said. with me senator coombs from delaware. you heard marco rubio, the republican member of the committee, whose vote could be critical if this does become a firefight in there over this confirmation of rex tillerson, and he was not happy with the answers because he asked rex tillerson, do you think that putin was behind this, and he said yes, most likely. he would have been behind the russian hacking, but he would not concede that putin was responsible for russia was responsible for war crimes in aleppo, that putin is responsible for murdering political opponents, so there was a lot of focus on vladimir putin and russia at the tillerson confirmation here. >> that's right, andrea. number of members of the foreign relations committee, republican and democrat, have really honed

in on rex tillerson's long, close relationship with vladimir putin, his business dealings in russia, and whether or not he has a clear eyed view of how putin controls his own country, the cases where he's murdered journalists, where his political opponents have disappeared and his responsibility for the heinous murders of civilians in aleppo and invasion occupation of crimea and frankly many members of the committee were noticeably visibly unsatisfied with his responses. >> now the counter argument came from one of his introducers who was former democratic senator armed services chairman sam nunn, an icon in the defense establisent, national security establishment. he said that tillerson's knowledge of putin and russia is as an asset and his business experience is an asset, an advantage, because we need to engage russia if we're going to safeguard our nuclear weapons. >> that's right. my concern out of trump's press conference is that he sort of waved his hands after recognizing russia, most likely was responsible for attacking our democracy and said, we'll have to work something out. mr. tillerson's been asked

pointedly about sanctions, and i hope we'll still come to a point of embracing the bipartisan sanctions bill that's being introduced in congress this week and that he will have a clear view of putin and the threat that he poses to america's democracy that apparently our president-elect does. >> senator coombs, thank you very much. brian, remains to be seen where this confirmation hearing is going but russia has certainly complicated the prospects for rex tillerson. >> it sure has. there is so much to get to, just reviewing the quotes that came out of this news conference, which we will do, but we also want to take advantage of a guest who has been very patient and waiting for us, and that is "washington post" foreign affairs column iist of david ignatius. veteran journalist. have you ever heard anything approaching what we just heard? >> it was i thought he was almost ebullient in kind of

denouncing those who had been responsible for the leaks against him. he was saying nice things about the newspapers, news organizations that hadn't reported. i found his comments about the intelligence community, it's an ongoing theme for him, more try dent even than i can remember. he was asked do you really mean that the united states is like nazi germany in that you have intelligence agencies in effect going after political leaders. he seemed almost to say, yes, that it was disgraceful to note that people were leaking the fact he was having meetings. he did say that he's calling for a 90-day review of hacking by the intelligence community as soon as he takes office. that's a chance to mend fences i think. >> david, in my memory, we have not heard a president or president-elect go after news organizations by name, certainly like this, going back to the

time of nixon, a vital time certainly for yourewspaper in washington. i'm looking at the quotes here. they called buzzfeed among other things a "failing pile of garbage," and he directly accused jim acosta on behalf of his network, cnn, "you are fake news." so you have a fight going on with the intelligence community, something, like it or not, that is a valuable asset when you're president of the united states. you have a fight going on with what is considered in our constitution to be a free press. >> well, welcome to the trump presidency. this is going to be a contact sport. people in our business, brian, people in the news business are going to have to take our job of accountability seriously and sometimes that's going to mean getting sharply criticized for reporting things that the white house doesn't want to hear.

my own news organization, "the washington post" did not feel that this story was ready for print. i have to make make clear we felt it was in the unsubstantiated information category so we held back. i think that's probably true of many news organizations including nbc, so i don't mean to be making a comment about the decision to publish it last night. i just think that we're going to be in a combative situation with this white house. that's just part of the deal. it shouldn't worry us. we're not, don't want to have people's arms around our shoulder. the criticism today i thought of cnn was unusually sharp, but again, i think that's going to go with this territory. >> david ignatius, thank you very much. we'll be watching along with you what david ignatius appropriately refers to as a contactort. hallie jacksas in the room

as well. hallie, i'm just looking at the quotes here. all over the map. lot of car companies are going to be moving in. our drug industry has been disastrous, they are getting away with murder. he said he will be the greatest jobs producer that god ever created. he has promised an elegant day on the day of the inauguration. he said that the hacking was probably russia, but "there was much hacking going on." he did the deflection and the pivot, adding in other countries and the possibility that china was involved as well. and he said about conflict of interest as president, "i'd be the only one who'd be able to do that." that was before fake news and that was before russia. so have at it. what stood out to you? >> reporter: when you lay it out like that, brian, it's really unclear where we should begin. i will say this broadly as

somebody who covered donald trump on the campaign trail along with his other republican primary opponents. this was similar to what we saw from donald trump as candidate. reiterating promises and pledges he's made on the campaign trail publicly in his first press conference in president-elect and first in nearly six months. there is a lot to unpack. obviously the two biggest topics we went in wanting to ask questions about were russia and how he was going to separate himself from his business interest from the trump organization. on russia, he delivered a rather direct message to vladimir putin saying essentially he shouldn't do that. that's not something that he should be doing, which is frankly one of the first times that he has spoken in even mildly strong terms against obviously the russian leader. i think that there are some questions though that he left on the table, specifically the question about sanctions, will he continue to enforce the sanctions that the obama administration recently put in place or will he roll those back? he was asked a couple of times

about that. he was asked if he thought that the hacking was justified, given that he brought up the dnc. he brought up some of the information that had been contained in these leaks and the stolen information, and he did not answer that question either. on the conflicts of interest issue there wasn't a discussion whether this would have teeth, whether appointing some sort of ethics individual to oversee this trust is enough, frankly, to appoint somebody who would run an ethics consideration that you then hire to watch your own ethics, if that is satisfactory, but the president-elect knows and believes that he's correct, that he is not privy to conflict of interest laws. he is privy to the constitutional emoluments clause and you heard his lawyer come out and speak about that. you know, that's an interesting one, because i think it's going to take some dissection from a constitutional lawyer whether foreign governments paying for hotel rooms is not emolument which she clearly argued here today. the health care news obviously

will have reverberations on capitol hill, the president-elect says he wants to almost simultaneously repeal and replace the health care law, maybe same day, same week, same hour perhaps. i think that house speaker paul ryan might be frantically trying to figure out how to actually make that happen, given republicans still have not coalesced around some cohesive plan to replace the affordable care act and the time to repeal it is in wheels in motion. of course the fake news discussion and his back and forth with a cnn reporter in the front row and his taking aim at buzzfeed, a news organization that had come out with some of this reporting you heard both his incoming press secretary and others fire away at the top of the press conference, brian. there is a lot to unpack here. if i look at my watch it lasted an hour, just under 90 minutes, an hour and 15 minutes perhaps so it was substantive as far as length. he did not take two questions and leave, if you will. i think a question for a lot of folks is will he continue to

hold these as president, in nine days when he's inaugurated. how frequently will be holding these then presidential news conferences to face questions like the ones he faced today. >> an incredible tour of the mind of donald trump, could have gone exactly double the time it is it and still not have exhausted the questions in the room. let's reset our studio here in new york. ali velshi, katy tur, chuck todd our political director all with us. katy, you go back the furthest. i'm just still looking at my quotes. lindsey graham, he took a swing at senator lindsey graham. >> he did. >> still relitigating the election, the primary season. i wrote down "he's going to crack that 1% barrier someday. i guess he's talking about public opinion in the primary season, and then on intel, he said "there's nothing they can come up with." >> you know, what struck me the most about this, and hallie briefly touched on it, he did go

the furthest that he's gone in repudiating putin by saying that he shouldn't be doing what he did and won't be doing it when i'm president, but he still went out of his way to be gracious toward the russian president. he didn't truly criticize him in any way. he talked about if putin likes trump, he used himself in third person there, that he considers it an asset, not a liability, and then when talking about the hacks himself, themselves, he praised what was learned from the hacks. he praised that they were able to find out that hillary clinton got questions in advance for one of the town halls. so instead of fully repudiating russia and saying this cannot stand, this is not something that we can allow in our democracy to have a foreign government come in and try to in any way meddle with our system, he again praised what he was able to learn from it, because it in effect helped him during the presidency.

and i would also note that he didn't answer a major question there at the end, when he was talking about how putin shouldn't be doing it. the question that he was asked was, can you definitively say that none of your people have had contact or meetings with russia during the course of this election? he didn't answer that. and that is a major piece in this puzzle that is still unknown, not to mention the fact that he's not going to release his tax returns. we don't know if they're under audit. the irs isn't going to comment on that. we have not heard from his tax attorneys since that letter we got so many months ago, so we have no way to verify that. we have no way to know five, six, seven years from now, six months from now even if he says they're under audit. it's safe to say we're not going to see the taxes and not going to find out definitively what sort of holdings and financial entanglements he might have overseas, unless somebody leaks something like that. >> you're the political director

around here. this first chance we have hey to talk to you about what we just witnessed. what did we just witness? >> first of all our colague hallie jackson said that donald trump ter he went to the elevator did come back and apparently there is going to be tape of this, he did come back and answer that final question and definitively did say no. said no, it is, you know, but we don't -- >> no contact. >> it wasn't, you know, it was notable that he didn't say it, and that was, it was notable for instance what he didn't say on sanctions. it was notable what he didn't say about russia. there's no doubt about that, but i was struck big picture wise which is of how normal a circus is now to us. this was a circus. we've never seen a president-elect a transition like we saw today where the press conference gets interrupted, you have a lawyer in here, the lawyer does half legal talk, half political spin. i've never seen that, using the

lawyer to say he's here to make america great again and by the waive i'm going to play constitutional lawyer. i don't think this but clearly a constitutional lawyer told us we better not accept any of this money so they made that exception. so i am struck at how normal crazy looked to us today. this was just a crazy scene, but this is the norm of donald trump, and in fact, this is where he's most comfortable and i will say this. just as a political show. if you're donald trump, you want these press conferences, because it made the press look disjointed, unorganized, all this stuff, and his people, you know, he just, it was a performance for his supporters and his people, so i would say this. if you're looking for answers out of donald trump, it's the one on one interviews, and i don't just say that because i'm biased about one on one interviews at "meet the press." he is very good at deflection and his press conferences, he doesn't want to answer and there was a lot of that deflection here and there. i don't think this was a good

day for rex tillerson because of donald trump's press conference. i think he was too soft on putin, and being too soft on putin, tillerson is being hurt a little bit. he's already had a very uncomfortable back and forth with not only marco rubio but also claimed i don't think i personally lobbied against the sanctions and then bob corker having to say well i believe you made a phone call to me. so russia's the centerpiece of tillerson. he's getting essentially softened up for being too soft on putin and on this, and then donald trump today didn't come, didn't sound like i wan to g to the bottom of thi with putin, and then of course there's the intel community. thrift now -- >> wow. >> if we were again, if this were turkey, okay, and we saw that the turkish intelligence officials were leaking stuff on erdogan, we'd say there's a political crisis going on in that country.

the next commander in chief and the best and biggest and most powerful intelligence services in the world, the united states of america, are at war with each other? this is a problem, and this we would say our intel people would assess a country situation right now as there's an unstable leadership situation. >> that's just a weird fight to continue to make public. if he really thinks the five people in the room leaked something or someone in there leaked them that is a serious conversation for the president-elect to have with the people in the room. not with this. >> he did all about -- look, somebody decided to leak this. let's be honest here. politically buzzfeed did donald trump a political favor today by doing what they did, by going ahead and making it all public, because it allowed them to deny a specific without having to deal with the bigger picture. >> ali velshi, back to this word emoluments. >> right. >> we've never had so many people google a phrase in the constitution before. let me give you a possibility.

>> right. >> it is said starting january 20th, donald trump becomes his own landlord because of this hotel, on the mall in washington. it's right across from the smithsonian, part of the old post office complex. this is a hype they willical. let's say the government of dubai rents out the entire hotel for the month of march, and they have a conference there, they make a big public show of it, and at the end, because it's a big ticket item, they write a check to the hotel organization. >> correct. >> with the trump name on it. is that a violation? >> well, it's interesting that chuck said that this lawyer sherry dillon from morgan lewis voiced an opinion on a matter similar to that to say that wouldn't be considered a violation of the emoluments clause because it's not what she says the framers had in mind, but donald trump wants to go further than what the constitution says, so as a result, he is going to donate that money to the treasury. so someone has told them that there's something awkward about

taking money from foreign dignitaries -- >> they do have a constitutional problem. >> so yes, that's exactly what you lay out is exactly the type of thing that can happen. we actually had some indian businesspeople who said very clearly they would stay at donald trump's hotel because they think it will be nice when they meet the president to say "i'm staying at your hotel." this is a small version of the type of problem we're going to have. donald trump and sherry dillon, the lawyer, are direct in saying that the president doesn't find himself subject to many of the laws that govern federal employees but the emoluments law is constitutional. >> let me explain that for some viewers. there is a separation of powers clause. the legislative branch, congress cannot basically pass a law that pro vents the head of another branch of government from being able to do, you know, personally being able to do some things. that said, the head of the executive branch, in this case

the office of the president, he could sign an executive order that said the following, i've asked a lawyer about this and i think i've asked your next guest about this. you could the head of the executive branch could say the president and vice president will also be subject to the same rules that apply to all executive branch employees. that is something that he also has the power to do. that was left out today. >> norm eisen, your name, at least your title has been invoked. norm eisen is indeed listening to us and is our next guest, former chief white house ethics lawyer, now fellow of governance studies at brookings. norm, you've been listening to our entire conversation. you can begin where you wish, starting with trust, blind trust, emoluments or chuck todd's last point. >> thanks, brian. the president-elect's disregard for ethics and precedent and the nstitution in his press

conference t i going to precipitate an ethics and a constitutional crisis from the day he's sworn in. >> well norm, i'm going to stop you right there. who raises, where does it originate if that is true? >> well, brian, you are going to -- we have three coequal branches of government, and what he -- the course he's set upon is going to offend all of them. let me explain why that is. bipartisan experts laid out a five-part test for what he needed to do. he failed all five parts. he didn't transfer ownership of his businesses. he didn't set up a blind trust. he doesn't have an independent trustee. he has his kids in an employee. he's only peeling out one small part of the prohibited foreign government payments and benefits. he's only taking so-called hotel profit. we'll talk about how those are

impossible to separate anyhow. so he fails the emoluments test and he hasn't set up a true ethics wall. who is going to enforce that? it will start with the courts. you're going to see litigation from day one, substantial litigation i'm predicting. we can't have a president who is in violation who is continuing to collect all the other emoluments. we can't have that from day one, so the judicial branch will act. the legislative branch is not going toe able to tolerate this and we've seen them back off, the republican majority, on two ethics issues in the past week, shutting down the office of congressional ethics in the house, they packed off at the public outcry, and the hearings without ethics papers disclosures for the nominees, four of them pushed back. again that was a bipartisan outcry, so you will see action in the legislature. eliz pet warren already has a bill moving and then finally, you're going to see investigations i predict in donald trump's own executive

branch, the fbi is not going to tolerate some of this conduct. the career federal corruption prosecutors are not going to tolerate it either. we are one scandal away from a full blown triparthied investigation of our federal government and the states will get into it, too, because the state attorney generals have the right to enforce the emoluments clause. >> you say it will begin in the judiciary. who, i guess my question is who has standing? where does that case come from? who says hey, this looks wrong to me, and i'm going to try to stop it >> our standing doctrine in the united states is based on injury. who is hurt by this? so you're going to see competitors who don't have the benefits of the attraction of the white house. we heard incredibly the president-elect was actually proud that he was offered $2

billion, $2 billion opportunity roontly in connection with his offic office. there's going to be a flow of benefits that will injure competitors. that doesn't just include large hotels, small hotels, restaurants, anybody who is near his businesses, so competitors have standing. i think there will be broader standing documents the courts will want to look at. the courts will not tolerate naked violation of the constitution from the first day, the first hour, the first minute of a president taking office. how could he take the oath of office? he promises to uphold the constitution. he's received bad constitutional advice and i'll take larry tribe's view of the emoluments over donald trump's lawyer any way. >> i guess i'm wondering, he hired a high profile white house counsel from the firm jones day, which i know you know well. we just heard him, if i'm

correct, in addition to saying that he turned down over the weekend a $2 billion proposition, i think he was trying to make the argument he didn't have to. i do have him quoted about conflict of interest, "i'd be the only one able to do that." >> it's a complete misunderstanding, professor tribe, america's most distinguished constitutionalist, professor painter, the republican bush ethics czar and myself have released 20-page paper explaining why that's wrong. it's bipartisan consensus. he cannot do that. it's prohibited by the constitution. other aspects, this is another error in what he and his lawyers are selling. there is more to conflicts of interest than just the section 208, one strand of our statutes that they talked about at this press conference. that 18 usc section has many

provisions in it. section 201, the prohibition on bribery, quid pro quos perhaps of the kind that either was dangled, who knows the intent, or will be dangled, quid pro o quos are prohinted by section 201. there are other statutory regulatory gift limitations that apply to donald trump. he has disclosure obligations. he can't do insider trading under the stock act. so if he's making business deals based on inside information, there's potential criminal liability there. he's walking through a mine field blindfolded, and i'm very sorry that he doesn't have better seeing eye dogs. that's the only thing that's blind about this arrangement, because he certainly isn't entering a blind trust. >> to listen to you, it sounds like the guy would be in jeopardy of a ricoh charge against him the first day of his presidency, and to listen to you, this is going to be a young

presidency enshrouded in scandal and concurrent investigations. is that what you're saying? >> i'm sad today to have listened to the president-elect in that he didn't take a different course of action that would have saved him from that myasthma, like the cloud of dirt that used to float above pig ben's head in the peanuts comics, brian. it's important to me as an american. obviously i was not a trump supporter. since he's not my president, he's all our presidents. i want him to succeed as long as he does so in accordance with the constitution and american values and principles. but this is a guarantee of scandal, corruption, controversy. he's already had more of that in a little over eight weeks of transition than president obama had in eight years, the most

scandal-free white house in modern presidential mystery because president obama understood something donald trump does not and i was very privileged to help at the president's, president obama's direction set up this system. you've got to have tough rules. you've got to have clear rules. you've got to stay well away from the lines. donald trump has gone over the line and it's going to be catastrophic for him and for the white house and for our country, and i'm sorry to have to say that. >> norm eisen for our viewers who have joined us, a former top ethics lawyer for president obama, special assistant, special counsel for the government ethics and reform, happens to be a formerist ambassador from the czech republic from 201 to 2014, a two-decade veteran as litigation partner in d.c. and fellow of governance studies at brookings institute, in case our viewers

fear we grabbed this guy off k street in washington. counselor, you've given us some chilling words. the quote we'll live on, this is a guarantee of scandal corruption and controversy. we're going to take your comments and talk about them and rely upon your counsel in the future. thank you very much for being patient and for joining us today. chuck todd, as chilled as our lawyer was, it's chilling to hear his assessment. >> it is, and look, norm eisen and rich painter i might have them both on at 5:00 today, we're going to dig through this. >> promotion for your broadcast? >> absolutely. 100%. no doubt about it. 5:00 p.m., ding ding, hit the buzzer. but i think, i am curious to see here if they -- if he tries to do some things that sort of -- >> take the edge off? >> take the edge off of this. number one let the government hire the ethics officer at trump organization. that can't be that -- >> wouldn't be so bad. >> how is that not a no-brainer

or even ask congress to appoint it. whatever. >> he doesn't want more people involved in his business that he doesn't know or trust. >> i'm just saying i think my guess is somebody will try to push him on that end and doesn't seem to me any reason why you wouldn't -- the other thing he did and it was a throw-away line at the end, i hope my sons are running this well because when i come back after eight years i'm going to joke with them and say you' fred. i think in that joke he's saying i'm going back to run the trump organization. >> right. >> would it have been better and make a lot of people feel better, not only am i handing over the reins, i'm never going back. i'm done. i'm never profiting off of it anymore. i am done. i did build it for my kids. this is my family business, i didn't know how to disentang tell any other way. i do think that it would be some empathy, sympathy, whatever you want to call it, saying it is hard, a family business, to

somehow tell you divest completely. you can't let your family be involved in it. i think that you could have worked, you can work something out there that would be some empathetic certainly and also follows the law but i think if he it said i'm never going back, i think that, too, could help alleviate some of this. i think he has more to do here, even to meet minimum standards that he's publicly saying he wants to meet. >> ali velshi, on top of members of trump's base who may be watching, let me say devil's advocate the following. why should mr. trump have to walk away from his life's work that bears his name? you and i might know that it's mostly a licensing operation as has been accused. >> hour. >> why should he have to recuse himself for the rest of his days on earth? >> it's a good, deep question. you don't want to scare people who have made money and been successful in their lives from getting into government.

but there is an understanding when you, from any profession, for many professions if you go into government you have to separate yourself from some of these things and the worry i've got, are the people giving you advice or making decisions on your behalf about potential conflicts being paid by you. this is the point that chuck brought up which is important, the perception with this lawyer who he brought up, sherry dillon, they're doing the work on his behalf, so if he's preserving his bigs for later and people not advising him what is in the people's best interest but his best interest later on, i've said it on your show before and if chuck invited me i'd say it on his, this may be the sing the most lucrative things donald trump has done. i get i'm going to get tweets about that. if you are primarily in a licensing business where why you are name is the greatest part of the value of your business. >> what's better than being president? >> what's better than being president of the united states,

in the news all the time every day, calling the shots, holding press conferences everybody has to go to and setting the agenda with advisers who get paid by you. >> did you notice -- >> this is a good business to be in. >> did you notice during the presser when his lawyer said he's not going to know anything about this. >> that's not possible. >> unless he sees it in the news or the papers. the fact that he's going to learn about it, period, doesn't that -- >> first of all it will be in the news and paper, even when we didn't care about what donald trump did. >> how can you not be accepted by it if you know about it. >> he talks all the time about this. >> be creative, we're doing a huge deal with the trump organization. we're excited about it. the people who are in the deals may want him to do it. >> the influence is very easy to get if you come out publicly and say it. donald trump doesn't have to respond to that influence, but his actions, i mean it's going to be a question throughout his entire presidency, quwhat he is

doing, on behalf of the american public or on the behalf of his own wallet? >> another angle to this and it's been talked about a little bit but still needs to be addressed, things that have his name on it overseas. >> terrorist targets. >> and who is responsible for the security and who pays for the security? that is a whole other set of mess here that is not insignificant. >> i know. let's go to moscow, nbc news correspondent bill neely has been watching and listening there. more importantly, this news conference was carried on various news outlets live in mosc moscow, so many time zones away and bill, i'm looking through my quotes. if putin likes donald trump, guess what, folks, i consider that an asset, not a liability. also trump said he respects the fact that putin released the statement they did today. we're talking to you because of this overarching news story that

caused such a backlash and hubbub at this press conference, the allegation was that russia, that putin had information that would greatly compromise donald trump. so what's the report from your perspective in moscow? >> so the entire news conference was covered live on russian state rttv, and rossier tv. any official worth their salt in this city would have been watching donald trump's press conference. we don't have it confirmed yet that vladimir putin was watching. two extraordinary things at the top of the news conference that would have struck home here in moscow. first of all donald trump saying he respected the kremlin for coming out and defending him. that's absolutely extraordinary, and unprecedented for an incoming u.s. president to use a kremlin statement to defend himself. secondly, he said in attacking

the intelligence agencies, you know, brian, the hawks in the city and this country would have loved the disarray and the division they can see in the united states. you know, as donald trump said, russia is no friend of the united states, and for people here who want to see america brought down a peg or two, they will have loved this news conference, and loved the divisions between donald trump and the u.s. intelligence agencies. yes, as you said, he said there's a good chance i won't get along with putin, but if putin likes me, that's called an asset, not a liable. i think as our katy tur pointed out donald trump was really quite gentle towards vladimir putin. he didn't call him a war criminal. he didn't call him out over aleppo or anything else in syria. and i think, brian, one other thing will have struck people here. this was a news conference by an incoming president that was all about his likes and his

dislikes, his friendships. it wasn't really about deep issues of foreign policy, and i think for leaders in this city who have gone through so many. s and gone through a cold war, it will have struck them, the thinness, if you like, of the discussion in that news conference, not about the great international issues or the issues of state, but sometimes simply about his behavior, his likes, his dislikes and his friends, but no question, brian that, news conference will have been watched very, very closely here. >> bill neely in moscow, we assure our viewers that background is indeed not fake news, it is actually a light snow, just an extraordinary picture that is so evocative and indicative of the surroundings there, a winter night in moscow. bill, thank you very much. important points there regarding the use of the word "respect" at all concerning anything uttered

by the kremlin, an important point as well in the way donald trump painted his relationship with intelligence agencies in this country vis-a-vis how it could be taken overseas. right now is the start of the 1:00 p.m. hour here in the east. imagine the role of this man right now. this is a live picture in front of the senate foreign relations committee, and that is the ceo of exxonmobil, a multinational company so large, while it's said they can't change the weather, they can forecast it. they have their own weather bureau, a sprawling organization of 70,000 employees. rex tillerson is the nominee to be our next secretary of state, a job offer that came to him. it's been said in the public domain in part because of his relationship with ru