broadcaster, to a very happy retirement from broadcasting to brent musberger, the one and only. i will miss that guy. that's going to do it for us here this hour, i'm steve kornacki. reminder, chris matthews special town hall on president trump's first days in office. mtp daily starts right now. if it's wednesday and the white house tries to get iran's attention. tonight, the trump white house sounds the alarm on iran's missile test. >> we are officially putting iran on notice. >> what happens now? plus the democrats dilemma over the trump supreme court pick. do leaders on the left have the desire or the discipline to be straight up obstructionist, knowing they'll still lose the ultimate fight. >> are they going to live up to the same standards that they imposed on republicans. >> we'll hear from both sides of the senate judiciary committee.

pat lei i had. plus the president's pick for education secretary is now in serious jeopardy. how do you spell no majority? this is mtp daily and it starts right now. good evening, i'm chuck todd and welcome to mtp daily, we begin with breaking news. the national security advisor, michael flynn, made his first public appearance and statement in quite some time. he did so in the briefing room this afternoon. and announced the trump administration is putting iran on notice. >> president trump has severely criticized the various agreements reached between iran, the obama administration, as well as the united nations as being weak and ineffective. instead of being thankful to the united states in the agreements, iran is feeling emboldened, as of today, we are officially putting iran on notice.

>> and just moments ago, when asked about reporters what it means, senior administration official would not address if a specific message was communicated directly to iran. of course, what about the other parties that were in the negotiations for the iran deal itself? where do they stand on this? all of this comes after iran launched a ballistic missile test on sunday. after refusing to confirm the launch initially, iran's foreign minister said the launch did indeed happen. teheran says the test was legal. the trump administration disagrees. also contributing to this move by the trump administration on monday, hewty rebel group attacked a saudi warship off the coast of yemen. michael flynn say us the hewties are backed by iran. iran denies that, but that has been an accusation flying around for years in this proxy war between iran and saudi arabia. flynn says both contributed to destabilizing behavior. much more on thescin attentions later in the show, but we're going to begin with

the battle on the supreme court and the impact on dmix politics. folks with, there's no sugar coating it, democrats are going to lose this fight over president trump's supreme court pick, neil gorsuch, the question is how. but here's their dilemma, do they lose in a blaze of glory and possibly break the senate and sending the message to the base or do they lose more quietly which would protect the institution in the senate for now, risk of civil war with their own base, or is all of this a black swan event on the horizon that no one can predict and suddenly obstruction works? there are no good answers and no good options. democrats are staring down a president who appears to have few qualms about steam rolling a democratic filibuster by destroying the traditions. the 60 vote threshold. democrats already destroyed the 60 vote for cabinet picks and lower court picks back when they had the majority. losing a threshold for the supreme court pick is a really big deal.

which is why it's called the nuclear option. who knows, it could lead to getting rid of the filibuster altogether which actually some liberals and conservatives would team up and like that idea. that's a longer story. still, the threshold is what makes the senate the senate. and if you get rid of it, it's nothing more than the house with six year terms. anyway. is the broad consensus dead? so you could understood why mitch mcconnell, an institutionalist does not want to go nuclear to force through judge gorsuch, but today, the president told him to do it. in so many words he said, too bad. >> i would say, if you can, mitch, go nuclear. because that would be an absolute shame if a man of this quality was caught up in the web. so i would say, it's up to mitch, but i would say, go for it. >> by the way, there's a lot of unprecedentedness that happened so far in the first 12 days of the trump admistration.

a sitting president essentially dabbling in congressional rules, publicly been is something you don't see every day. when he's dealing with colleagues, we're talking like this. >> that's never been done in u.s. history before. to let this become normal just invites a complete partisan polarization of the court from here to eternity. >> again, if if you're a democrat, what do you do? it appears you're going to lose. how do you do it? if democrats want to lose that puts them in the strongest point politically, they can just go out all obstructionists.

number one, why wait? the senate is careening towards the edge. now or later is a moot point. and number two, politically, obstruction works. at least it did for republicans. they blocked president obama's court pick in this case, they made it harder for him to get legislation done. and it won them control of congress. they obstructed his court pick and got them neil gorsuch. they fought the opposite of the presidency tooth and nail and now they control it. this is the dilemma facing the democratic party. here's another thing, voters never punish obstructionists. they still punish the other side. let's dive in with our panel tonight. you're now a former radio host. >> that's right. >> recovering radio host. >> recovering. >> always good to see you, thanks for coming on. katherine ramable is a columnist and jonathan alter. mr. alter, i'm going to start with you, you were covering politics in the grand ole days of that. and now of course you're in the

comedy section these days. and look, scalia was unanimous, right? those days we know are over. what democrats should do and what they're going to do are probably two different things. what say you? what do you think? >> well, first of all they were fights in the past, and not just over robert bork, if you go back to the reagan administration, like doug ginsburg was nominated and they said his no, ma'am nax went up in smoke. because he smoked pot. >> back when that was a disqualifier. >> right. there are things that come up. i don't think the democrats are in that much of a dilemma. i don't see the eight votes. >> on paper, gorsuch more likes like roberts than scalia. somehow there not votes for

that? >> people think it's illegitimate. the democrats, and they have real reason to believe -- >> merrick garland's seat. and you know, when the president said well gorsuch was confirmed for appellate court 98-0, so was merrick garland. and the fact when mitch mcconnell says let the people decide, well the people did decide in the 2012 election. and there's nothing in the constitution that says that president has only a three year term. so now trump actually lost by three million, so that's the people deciding by eight million votes, i'm just -- the reason i mention that -- >> and i want to get the other side. >> it's the reason why democrats feel so strongly. nothing to do with gorsuch as a person. >> exactly. i feel like there's two fights, gorsuch, which i think if you put democrats in a sealed room, they'd say yeah, he's qualified, but there's a lot of scar tissue here. >> a lot of scar tissue, but it's like at the moment that the republicans are playing chess and the democrats are playing

checkers. from the republican point of view, they win either way. this is the that shall will unite the republicans, it will unite the conservative base,he pressure on both of the bases is going to be almost irresistible on all of this, but if you're the democrats, do you want to blow yourself up and lose the filibuster that you might want when you have the ruth bader ginsburg seat? do you want to go over the top on this one? the reality is this is a very been very attractive nominee who has a lot of -- is going to have liberal support, he's got a good track record on checks and balances and suspicion of limited government. >> executive authority by the way. >> he could be a trump nightmare down the road. >> there is a misunderstanding. this is not a conservative ie dee log, it is a conservative who might be willing to side with the constitution and the rule of law against the trump administration. >> katherine, i had a colleague that said to me. she wouldn't be surprised if neil gorsuch said i'm sorry mayor garland never got to be here and vote and that was

wrong. because he does personally have a high regard. >> he has a high regard for mayor garland, you know, as charlie was just saying, he's considered to be a very thoughtful, articulate, eloquent justice. or judge. and we've seen prominent liberals including the previous solicitor general under obama say hey, this guy is not so bad. this is not the situation which we should go all out. this is not the hill to die on, essentially. and if i would imagine that if we had a president romney, let's say, and in this were the nominee, we would not be having this conversation. >> both of you said this is not the hill today on. and the problem is, isn't -- if they don't use the nuclear option for this, if there's -- and let's say obviously the big speculation today has been oh, this should reassure justice kennedy it's okay to retire. that is a swing vote. >> right. and then hate it use the nuclear option then. >> that's right. that's the point --

>> they've lost both times. >> chess or checkers. >> and i understood charlie's point, it's a good one that, you know, it might not be that the hill to die on, but you've got a democratic base that's so riled up, they're already picketing chuck schumer's house in brooklyn. so the idea of that democrats have kind of a free hand the way they did in the old days to, you know, in the cloak room and in the club to do what they want here, they're really -- >> but you have to think longer term also. in that, trump's approval ratings are falling. and so, the optics of being really obstructionist and having a filibuster later on might be different than they are now. >> let me go to charlie's point, you made an interesting point, the republican party right now does unite on one issue, and it's the supreme court. but this is a republican party that might fracture the trump is trying sometimes it seems like he's actively trying to fracture it. do you actually help trump keep

the party together by fighting him too much? >> yes. >> that's your argument. >> i think there's a very real possibility the democrats will flip the script. we've been talking about the implosion and the problems of the trump administration. now the focus is going to shift to the antics and you know the attack ticks of the obstructionists, the democrats, running away and not showing up for committee hearings. >> this didn't hurt republicans. >> republicans did it too. >> this is the moment, this is the first time since the middle of 2015 that you see republicans and conservatives all on the same page. on this particular issue. now i know the democratic base feels very, very strongly about this. trust me the republican base feels just as strong. a lot of voters who held their nose and voted for donald trump over this one issue. >> speculation, was merrick garland the right pick, the right to get confirmed, but if president obama was trying too hard to play into the system that he should have done something that the democratic base could have rallied around? >> i think yeah in a close

election where everything makes a difference, if they'd had a nominee that really accentuated the stakes more for the supreme court and had become an issue and might have hped the democrats. >> no, i don't, just because look who was in control of the senate. i don't think that a more liberal pick would have convinced them. >> it wouldn't have changed the outcome, if you're trying to accentuate the stakes, there were a number of democrats who they might not have liked trump, but they didn't see what was on the line. >> republican base is always cared more about what judiciary could do. the democrat only cares after it's done. it's tough. and that seems to be the missing link here. let's take a pause. we're going to hear from two guys that love this topic. and probably know it as well as anybody on both sides of the aisle. tune in tomorrow, special event, chris matthews hosts a town hall called power of the presidency. that's tomorrow at 7:00 p.m. eastern right here on msnbc. stay tuned.

there are over 47 million ford vehicles out here. that has everything to do with the people in here. their training is developed by the same company who designed, engineered, and built the cars. they've got the parts, tools, and know-how to help keep your ford running strong. 35,000 specialists all across america. no one knows your ford better than ford. and ford service. right now, get the works! a synthetic blend oil change, tire rotation, brake inspection and more -- for $29.95 or less.

what's the level of concern in the white house that the nomination is going to fail? >> zero. i have 100% she will be the next secretary of possession. >> well despite what sean spicer toeporters this afternoon, one of president nominees is facing serious opposition now on the republican side. this afternoon, two prominent republican senators susan collins of maine and lisa murkowski announced they'll vote against betsy devos, the president's pick for secretary of education. both senators mentioned concerns about dew boes's experience with public schools. two independents, democrats opposing the nomination, throw in those two republicans and we're sitting at 50/50 at best. that's assuming it stays this way and no more republicans defect. it would mean vice president pence would end up being the tie breaking vote to confirm devos.

remember, president trump doesn't need 60 votes, he only need 50 plus one. in this case, some are still seeing trouble for devos, we'll be right back. what's it like to be in good hands? like finding new ways to be taken care of. home, car, life insurance obviously, ohhh... but with added touches you can't get everywhere else, like claim free rewards... or safe driving bonus checks. oh yes.... even a claim satisfaction guaranteeeeeeeeeee!

in means protection plus unique extras only from an expert allstate agent. it's good to be in, good hands. welcome back, i have two senators here to talk about how the fight will go over the nominee. mike leahy is a member of the judiciary committee. you'll see a lot of him during the gorsuch hearings. he argued on the appellate level. he knows him well, senator leahy, nice to see you sir. nice to see a camera that they tell me you're face is there. let me start with this, politically, why should senate democrats cooperate at all, given the bad blood of the last year over merrick garland just

as a political statement, why should they cooperate at all on this pick? politically, i understand senate rules, but why should they? >> they should have a look at this nominee. look at this nominee's qualifications. >> so is mayor garland. >> yes, and remember, this vacancy occurred during a presidency election year. >> very early. >> just a few months -- sure, early, but still just a few months away from the moment when the american people were going to be casting their votes to decide the next president. there is a difference there, i understand it's not a difference that everyone regards as persuasive, but this is where we are. we have a nominee from this president who is dually elected by the american people, and we're going to confirm this nominee. we would love to have as many democratic votes in this process as possible. that really is up to them. but we're going to confirm the nominee. >> let me ask you quickly why are you so convinced george gorsuch is in the mold of scalia

and do you put roberts in that same mold or do you think they're two different type of justices these days when you try to compare? where do you put gorsuch? >> i put judge gorsuch much more in the mold of justice scalia, alito, and thomas. >> kennedy and roberts less so? >> yes, less so of kennedy and roberts. there are also some difrences. and the reason i say that is having spent many, many hours pouring over the opinions of judge gorsuch, i see an unmistakable quality that focuses on the text. it's a textualist approach. this is hard to fake, it's also hard to do. it's hard to be a textualist. and it relates to something that judge gorsuch said last night in his speech. show me a judge that agrees with every decision he's ever rendered and the outcome in every case is handled. and i'll show you a bad judge.

>> i think we'd see a lot of that from judge gorsuch, once he's confirmed. >> what -- if we end up in a position where this so-called nuclear option is invoked and senator mcconnell decides to do. he basically said, that's it. senate's broken. if this happens that the world's greatest deliverive body is in the past tense. that moniker, you really no longer can apply to it. is he wrong?

>> secondly, it's not all clear to me that that's even going to become necessary. there are a lot of reasons why it might not be. senate democrats could still decide not to filibuster, if they do decide to filibuster, still very possible that we'll end up with 60 votes. even if that doesn't happen, we're still going to confirm this guy without regard to whether there's any need to deploy the nuclear option because we can invoke the two speech rule we stay in the same legitimative day and exhaust the ability of anyator to speak more than twice and there's no closure, we go straight to the final vote on the confirmation. >> let me ask you this as somebody who i think is you're well aware of article one versus article two. a lot of executive action coming out of the article two branch of government there in the executive branch, i assume a little too much for you? >> look, i want to be very clear about something, something that i spent a lot of time talking about while barack obama was president of the united states.

not all executive orders are bad. and it's not even the number of executive orders that a president issues that can be problematic. and more than the number or the use of them at all. it depends on the nature of the use of executive orders. if what the president is doing at any moment, whether it's a republican or a democrat, is to exercise power given to the president by the constitution or pursuant under statute, that's fine, to the extent it's not, that's not fine. that's what we look for. >> reappropriate money far wall deciding to unilaterally, when it comes to the vetting process that normally this would be something agreed upon multiple branchs and you don't think this has gotten to the point of writing new law? >> okay, let's talk about the immigration executive order, there is no dispute that section 212 f of the immigration

gnashalty act does give discretion to the president of the united states. to order the suspension on certain aliens wanting to come into the united states. there is no dispute because that is in fact what the law says. is going to be best earned and perhaps only disearned in it's implementation. as far as i can tell, this isn't necessarily officially envel lopped. there's nothing firm about it. >> i want to button up one other thing, what do you say to somebody whose liberal watching that says, oh gee, all right, republicans are okay when it's a republican president, they don't like it when it's a democratic president. and i say this in terms with the supreme court. you know, everybody wants to respect, right now republicans

want senate order, last year democrats wanted senate order. i mean, it does feel as if the results of the election dictate principles sometimes, sir. >> yeah, look, i appreciate the point, i want to be clear that i don't necessarily speak for every republican. and by the way -- >> you're not somebody that i think is somebody who always is can be accused of blowing in the wind. i don't to want say this is you, sir, but that is the environment that it looks like. >> i understand the point. let me say just emphasizing again the fact that i speak for myself and not anyone else. the partisan -- the party affiliation of the president at any given moment makes no difference to me in terms of my willingness to look critically at the executive order. what i'm worried about is whether or not the president of the united states is exceeding the president's power under the law and under the constitution of the united states. that's what i'm concerned with. now, i'd like to think that most

republicans feel the same way, but again, i don't have a right to speak for how they feel. i'll let them speak for themselves. >> senator mike lee, i will leave it there. judiciary issues, it's interesting to hear your point of view and appreciate ewe coming on. >> thank you. joining me now is democratic senator patrick leahy, vermont senior of the you dish area committee. he has cast votes on supreme court no, ma'am niece more than a dozen times andchx participatedn the of eecht current justices now serving on the court and on the last nine, senator leahy, nobody knows this better than you on the democratic side of the aisle, i think it's fair to say. >> well aye had experience, a lot of people know very, very well. >> the last time we had a nine-person supreme court before the death, the untimely of antonin scalia, you had voted to confirm seven of those nine.

two you voted no on were clarence thomas and sam alito. but i'm focussed on three of the republican nominees that you voted for. john roberts, scalia, by the way, and kennedy. when you look at neil gorsuch, is he more in the column of roberts with scalia, kennedy, or more in the thomas alito column for you? >> good question is what i'm asking myself. i don't know the answer. i'm going through a lot of the things he's written. i haven't met him. i look forward to meeting with him. i was a little bit disturbed last night, the president kind of did some rollout as far as a game show. i have two people behind the curtain, and, i picked this one. well, of course he was picked by some of the lit nis tests by the

right wing lobbyist organizations. i want him to be independent with those right wing lobbying organizations and be independent of the president who nominates him. >> what is independence mean anymore? i say that because i just saw a debate, i think it was on our channel where essentially the liberal was arguing this person's going to be -- gorsuch is going to be a activist and the conservative was essentially saying well yeah, you know, ruth bader ginsburg is an activist. obviously a conservative views a liberal justice as an activist. a liberal views an activist. you use the word independent. he's obviously i'd logically in a different space than you. define what that means. >> john roberts is different than i am. i voted for john roberts. in fact i announced my support him. a couple minutes after the democratic leader. and now it's his opposition to

him. obviously somebody who both democrats, republicans could have easily have voted for if he had been brought to vote is mayor garland. some of the most conservative republicans and democrats over the years have said he would be an ideal judge. it's unfortunate that that the republican leadership did not follow the constitution. blocked for a year. his nomination. becausthat would have en a consensus person. i think whether you're a liberal or conservative, you'd have to say not an ie dee log. he would have been an independent. now whether this nominee could be that, i don't know. i want to spend the weekend reading a lot of his opinions, a lot of his writings and i hope he'll be willing to sit down with democrats.

>> how much does the bad, essentially the bad relationship between the two parties right now in the senate over merrick garland and how that was done and how it helps neil gorsuch. >> there is a lot of bad feeling. it was a totally unprecedented thing. we've always had votes if there's been vacancies during a presidential election year. the most recent one was republican president, democratic controlled senate, and virtually unanimously confirmed the republican a break that's been done, it has lost some hard

feelings. i've served longer in the senate than any current senator. i've seen hard feelings come and hard feelings go. this is the supreme court. i hope everybody will sit down and take it very seriously. i intend to. i am worried as i said before, president trump had a lit nis test that he and from that list. that creates a heavy burden for judge gorsuch. >> let me ask ewe larger question, you made note, you're the senior senator, period. in the senator. i think elected a couple, if i'm not mistaken, four years before orin hatch. >> that's right. >> do you agree with the notion that the u.s. senate is broken as an institution or that it is breaking and you can repair it?

>> i think the latter, breaking can be repaired. if we go back to following our own rules, i think it'd be a lot better. i go back to where there was commenting. i've been able to pass, according to one study, more bipartisan legislation than anybody currently serving in the senate. and that's because i sit down with republicans and democrats, liberals, conservatives, and we work it it out. there is less and less of that being done. i think the country is hurt when we don't. i think the senate is hurt when we do not. >> senator patrick leahy, i have a feeling that last part of our conversation is one people want us to spend more and more time on and it's something i want to spend more time with you on later down the road. thank you for sharing your views, sir. >> thank you very much, chuck. >> appreciate it. still ahead, the white house puts iran, quote, on notice. what does that mean? what does that mean for the iran nuclear deal? stay tuned. with every early morning...

every late night... and moment away... with every click...call...punch... and paycheck... you've earned your medicare. it was a deal that was made long ago, and aarp believes it should be honored. thankfully, president trump does too. "i am going to protect and save your social security and your medicare. you made a deal a long time ago." now, it's congress' turn. tell them to protect medicare. and my life is basketball.west, but that doesn't stop my afib from leaving me at a higher risk of stroke. that'd be devastating. i took warfarin for over 15 years. until i learned more about once-daily xarelto®... a late-geration blood thinner. about once-daily xarelto®... then i made the switch. xarelto® significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. it has similar effectiveness to warfarin. warfarin interferes with vitamin k and at least six blood-clotting factors.

xarelto® is selective. targeting one critical factor of your body's natural clotting function. for people with afib currently well-managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® and warfarin compare in reducing the risk of stroke. like all blood thinners, don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of a blood clot or stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily, and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you have had spinal anesthesia while on xarelto®, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. to help protect yourself from a stroke, ask your doctor about xarelto®. insurance changes? xarelto® has you covered.

companies across the state are york sgrowing the economy,otion. with the help of the lowest taxes in decades, a talented workforce, and world-class innovations. like in plattsbuh, where the most advanced transportation is already en route. and in cning, where the future is materializing. let us help grow your company's tomorrow - today at esd.ny.gov

welcome back. this afternoon the senate did confirm cabinet secretaries, exxon ceo rex tillerson. it's a big title, secretary of state. the final vote was 56-43, three democrats did across party lines. and independent angus king also voted in favor of tillerson.

there's much more than mtp daily. we're going to dig into what putting iran on notice means. first here's today market wrap. hi there, chuck, stocks end with slight gains this day. the dow rising 26 points, s&p is up a fraction. the nasdaq climbs 26. the federal reserve as expected leaving interest rates unchanged in it's statement it said measure was consumer and business sentiment have improved. three rate hikes are expected this year. and facebook shares are higher after hours. social media network posting revenue and earnings that beat estimates. it also added more daily and monthly users than expected. and that's it from cnbc, first in business worldwide.

what makes thermacare different? two words: it heals. how? with heat. unlike creams and rubs that mask the pain, thermacare has patented heat cells that penetrate deep

to increase circulation and accelerate healing. let's review: heat, plus relief, plus healing, equals thermacare. the proof that it heals is you. but i keep it growing by making every dollar count. that's why i have the spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on all of my purchasing. and that unlimited 2% cash back from spark means thousands of dollars each year going back into my business... which adds fuel to my bottom line. what's in your wallet?

can you clarify what was meant by we're putting iran on notice? >> i think we wanted to make very clear that we felt as though that their actions were both provocative and in in a violation. and making sure that they

understood that we weren't going to sit by and not act on those actions. >> well, what we don't snow in violation of what. and is it the nuclear agreement or not? i'm going to walk you through everything. mike flynn's warning to iran is opening up more question. let's dissece consequences of the test and flynn's notice. nick burns, professor at the harvard kennedy school. veteran of the state department and multiple administration, bipartisan credentials through and through. ambassador burns, let's start with what you take as on notice because it's not -- we do not know if official notice has been given to the member nations and the eu that signed the nuclear agreement. it doesn't appear that has happened. this apparently has to do with what may be a violation of a u.n. resolution -- a u.n. resolution that was barring iran from making tests of any weapons

that could carry nuclear weapons. so what's your understanding of the phrase on notice, sir? >> chuck, in international diplomacy, that is a threat to use military force. that's how the iranians will understand it, that's how the arab and european governments will. i think the trump administration is right about one thing, chuck, they're right to be concerned about iran. iran is a violent, troublemaker in the middle east in yemen and general flynn cited yemen, syria, iraq, and lebanon. democrats agree with that, secretary clinton was very tough on iran on these questions and the campaign. but the wisdom of in the second week of an administration going out with a direct public rather bell coast threat against the iranians, you have to wonder if the administration is getting ahead of itself. there's two issues he that general flynn talked about, one is, and this is not germane to the nuclear deal, iranian development of ballistic

missiles, they are in violation, i think, of the u.n. security council resolution, and the other set of issues are iran running guns to the hewty rebels in yemen, iran helping us out of the ground in syria, that kind of thing. and i think the administration would be well advised to sit down, think about this, get with the allies, with israel, the europeans, make sure that we're altogether on the intelligence and also on what we might do about it. and i think there's a diplomatic option here. rex tillerson's just been confirmed this afternoon. we have a channel to the iranian leadership through the iranian foreign minister, rex tillerson can give a very tough message to him in that private channel. general mattis is an expert in the middle east, i just wonder about the staging here of this public confrontation so early. >> i was just going to say it sounds like you don't believe that they notified all of the key allies here when it comes to this nuclear agreement.

do you think that that notification didn't happen or that consensus wasn't there and that's why this administration decided to go out -- go it alone here on this? >> chuck, i just don't know what kind of diplomatic contacts the administration might have had with the europeans, russians, and chinese. it's clear that the three european countries, and russia and china want to continue with a nuclear agreement. that the iranians have more or less abided by that agreement. and so if the united states tried to walk out now as some in the trump administration have threatened, the europeans wouldn't walk out with us, iran would get sanctions relief, and they wouldn't have the restrictions we've imposed on them. that would be a bad deal for the united states. a separate issue are the issues in the gulf. and that's what general flynn was talking about today. and you know, we've learned lessons from iraq, from afghanistan, over the last 15 years, before you threaten military force, be absolutely sure what you're talking about. line up your allies and partners

around you, consult with senior members of the congress, some of them have great expertise on this. it just strikes me as rushing this forward in an unwise way. >> there's also a bizarre uncomfortable aspect to all of this. one of iran's most important allies, russia. and it does seem this administration has willing to savor with iran, if it has a problem with iran and wants to have a good relationship with russia. it seems like there's something missing here. >> well, and yes, and we know from the phone call that president trump had with president putin the other day, it appears that president trump didn't raise with putin. the russian interference in the elections or what russia is doing, we've seen an escalation in the fighting in eastern yauk. that's greater problem right now. if and you're going to spend political capital and send a tough message, it should be to contain president poouten in eastern europe and you'll

certainly get european and wide international support for that. >> it does seem like an odd first thing to draw blood on there, ambassador nick burns, as always sir, appreciate you sharing the views and expertise. >> thanks chuck. up next, you're looking at live at what i'm obsessed with tonight. safety doesn't come in a box. it's not a banner that goes on a wall. it's not something you do now and then. or when it's convenient. it's using state-of-the-art simulators to better prepare for any situation. it's giving offshore teams onshore support. and it's empowering anyone to stop a job if something doesn't seem right. at bp, safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better. at bp, safety is never being satisfied. youthat's why you drink ensure. sidelined. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the streth and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love.

enre. always be you. when i was too busy with the kids to get a repair estimate. i just snapped a photo and got an estimate in 24 hours. my insurance company definitely doesn't have that... you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance tonight i'm obsessed with brent musberger, first of all it's a career we all want.

he gets to retire and gamble. the long time sports personality called his final game last night. we saw it live. kentucky topping georgia in overtime. without a doubt, musberger's career impacted how we watched sports. he also changed the way we cover politics at least on television. stick with me here. musberger's nfl today was a pioneering show. it was the first true pregame show in the way we think about what they look like today. wasn't just x's and o's or what time does the game start. features and expert analysis. and a bit of in depth pundit ri. you see that same stuff 24 hours a day. rich eisen told me that. the nfl network has brent musberger to thank. same style can be seen during convention coverage and countdown shows and primary nights right here of course on a certain cable network. msnbc. and every now and then, you'll hear me bring out brent's

signature line, when on the road, you're looking live. well brent, we salute you,e wish you the best in your new venture in las vegas, if nobody's watching and seeing me, maybe i'll venture in there and get a tip or two from you as well. mr. musberger congrats on a great career. still bitter how you called the notre dame game, we'll be right back with the lid. so i asked about tresiba®. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ tresiba® is a once-daily, long-acting insulin that lasts even longer than 24 hours. i need to cut my a1c. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ tresiba® works like my body's insulin. releases slow and steady. providing powerful a1c reduction. my week? hectic. my weekends? my time. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ i can take tresiba® any time of day. so if i sleep in, and delay my dose, i take it as soon as i can, as long as there's at least 8 hours between doses. once in use, tresiba® lasts 8 weeks, with or without refrigeration, twice as long as the lantus® pen.

(announcer) tresiba® is used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. don't use tresiba® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. don't share needles or insulin pens. don't reuse needles. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause dizziness, sweating, confusion and headache. check your blood sugar. low blood sugar can be serious and may be life-threatening. injection site reactions may occur. tell your prescriber about all medicines you take and all your medical conditions. taking tzds with insulins like tresiba® may cause serious side effects like heart failure. your insulin dose shouldn't be changed without asking your prescriber. get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing, fast heartbeat, extreme drowsiness, swelling of your face, tongue or throat, dizziness or confusion. ask your health care provider if you're tresiba® ready. covered by most insurance and medicare plans. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪

time for the lid. our panel is back. charlie sykes, catherine rampo, jonathan alter. catherine, i don't know what else to call it, but when you put a country on notice, some might call that saber rattling. do you? >> we don't know what was meant by this, they didn't answer questions what was meant by this, if it's saber rattling it's ambiguous saber rattling, seemed only designed to freak people out rather than shedding light on where we stand vis-a-vis both our allies and enemies at this point. >> charlie?

>> keep in mind, we're on day 12 now of the presidency and it seems like they can't satisfy their appetite for chaos enough, they have to make it international. i don't know what it means. do we have a secretary of state yet who can explain exactly what our policy is, what are we going to do with iran treaty? these thing have konconsequence >> big consequences. >> big consequences. an erratic administration in some areas, no big deal, this could be. >> listen to what nick burns said to any, jonathan. he said "iran will view on notice as a military threat. okay, as a threat to use force. maybe that isn't what the administration meant. but words matter. >> of course they do. they always have in diplomacy. you know, michael flynn obviously sees iran as the big enemy, but donald trump says he sees isis as the big enemy and iran and russia are allies in fa fighting isis. so if you want to fight isis -- >> iran's an ally. >> right, why would you want to get into a fight with iran?

what's your priority? chaos, what joe biden told me, he called the rubik's cube of this foreign policy where, you know, rubik's cube is much more sensible, there's a controlling logic in the creators of the rubic's cube. this is just 52-card pickup in american foreign policy. >> the head scratcher, iran and russia, i mean, you could argue it's their most important ally outside of the middle east. >> right. the whole thing doesn't seem terribly well thought out. it's like -- >> what does? >> -- let's just blast this into the universe, see what happens, maybe we'll appease some of our base who doesn't understand what's going on. >> this is no longer a joke to say i'm worried about starting a war with a tweet. you knows, because these, again, we're dealing with people who are -- shoot and then think about it afterwards and they aim. we're getting to the point where there are going to be these

international consequences he cannot control. >> "guardian" is already reporting that secretary of defense mattis toned down the words, toned down flynn's statement, believe it or not. >> thank god, mattis. >> we don't know what the statement was going to say, maybe that is why it's missing context. by the ways, mattis is traveling in asia right now dealing with another potential nuclear threat, one that actually has nuclear weapons, north korea. >> then you have, you know, problems in the south china sea, so there are many hotspots that could erupt and wars start with taunts. wars start with miscommunication. >> what if iran decides it's going to basically show some military strength in the gulf? >> well -- >> then that's an escalation. then what? >> we don't know. i mean, what does being on notice even mean? on notice for what? is the question. >> nixon played around with that mad man theory, make them think you're crazy. >> yeah. >> of course that was an actual strategy. it was not simply because we are undisciplined and, in fact, we

can't keep, you know, the twitter handle away from the president. >> right. he was trying to get the north vietnamese to the table by king them think that he was a mad man who would bomb them into the stone age. >> right. >> but -- >> there's no clear objective, especially if you're trying to isolate isis but alienate one of your allies in that effort. >> this is a case where they need to have more explanation and this is why having problems with facts the first few days puts you in a bad situation when you need to speak to the rule. charlie, catherine, jonathan, yu thank you very much. after the break, we have a high-stakes senate wager. stay tuned. okay. ready? here's the story. >> got to run? >> we're having a weird night. >> don't miss a thing. listen to msnbc on sirius xm 118.

there are over 47 million ford vehicles out here. that has everything to do with the people in here. their training is developed by the same company who designed, engineered, and built the cars. they've got the parts, tools, and know-how to help keep your ford running strong. 35,000 specialists all across america. no one knows your ford better than ford. and ford service. right now, get the works! a synthetic blend oil change, tire rotation, brake inspection and more -- for $29.95 or less. tais really quite simple.est it comes in the mail, you pull out the tube and you spit in it, which is something southern girls are taught you're not supposed to do. you seal it and send it back and then you wait for your results. it's that simple.

...stop clicking around...travel sites to find a better price... the lowest prices on our hotels are always at hilton.com.

so pay less and get more only at hilton.com.

all right. in facase eyyou missed it politicians make dumb lake sports bets. they never bet money or don't tell us they bet money. the stakes involve a local food delicacy or regional beer. as the patriots and falcons prepare to face off in the super bowl, elizabeth warren jokingly suggested raising the stakes. >> i guess elizabeth warren and i need to talk about a gbet on the super bowl then. >> i'm ready. >> so is the senator from new hampshire. >> how about we put a vote for betsy devos on the line? [ laughter ] >> that's more than a gamble. >> how confident are you? >> as i said, that's more than a

gamble. >> uh-huh. >> oh, there you go. is that comedy for the u.s. senate these days? the closest you're going to get. speaking of the super bowl, we learned this afternoon president george h.w. bush and mrs. bush will be the honorary coin flippers at the game this sunday in their hometown of houston. that's all for tonight. "for the record with greta" starts right now. breaking news. going nuclear. wow. at least politically. president trump dropping that political bomb into the brutal battle over his supreme court nomin nominee. will republicans follow the new republican president's advice and will democrats put up a bruising fight? and brace yourself for this one. are decades of tradition about to disappear overnight? also, it's not just here in washington, the politicians are raising some verbal fists. a new warning from the trump white house directed right at iran. they're putting