good morning, everybody. i'm thomas roberts in new york at msnbc world headquarters. 9:00 a.m. here in the east, 6:00 a.m. out west, and new, critical overnight developments to talk about. day 16 of the trump administration, the white house striking back, but it was in the early-morning hours east coast time that a court denied a request to reinstate president trump's travel ban. meanwhile, in florida, the president is weighing in on what he thinks will happen in the end to his executive order. however, the immediate effect of friday's court ruling, which lifted the ban for travelers, is now reuniting family members who thought they would be denied

entry to the u.s. and then there is "saturday night live," lampooning the new trump administration's daily briefing. >> yeah, it's not a ban. >> i'm sorry? >> it's not a ban! the travel ban is not a ban, which makes it not a ban. >> but you just called it a ban. >> because i'm using your words. you said ban! you said ban. now i'm saying it back to you. >> so, melissa mccarthy there taking on an imstation of sean spicer. we'll have more on that in a moment. but the big news on day 16, an appeals court decision early this morning, they now denying the administration's request to immediately reinstate the travel ban. it happened just past 3:00 a.m. eastern time, hours after the justice department filed an appeal to lift the temporary restraining order put in place by federal judge james roeb robn friday. the trump administration cited a decades-old immigration case and says the ruling conflicts with the principle that "an alien seeking admission to the u.s. has no constitutional rights regarding his application."

in a moment, we'll have live reports on the next steps in this legal fight. meanwhile, vice president mike pence is defending the president for referring to judge robart as a "so-called judge." and here's what the vice president said in an interview that's going to air later this morning. >> is it right for the president to say "so-called judge"? doesn't that undermine the separation of the powers and the constitution were not right next door? >> well, i don't think it does. i think the american people are very accustomed to this president speaking his mind and speaking very straight with them. also new today, president trump standing by his unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud during the election. here's what he said in an interview that is going to air right before the super bowl tonight. >> well, many people have come out and said i'm right. you know that. >> i know, but you've got to have data to back that up. >> let me just tell you when you see illegals, people who are not citizens, and they're on the registration rolls -- look, we can be babies, but you take a look at the registration, you have illegals, you have dead

people, you have this. it's really a bad situation. it's really bad. >> all right, so, we have a lot to dig into for this super bowl sunday. nbc's kelly o'donnell is live in west palm beach, florida shqu just a short distance away from mar-a-lago, where the trump is for the weekend. president trump also making remarks about vladimir putin, which will air in that interview with bill o'reilly as well. >> reporter: lots of things to talk about today, thomas. and we know that president trump likes to project confident, likes to talk about being right, and so, having a setback from the court, two in just a couple of days, certainly undercuts that. the president insists, though, that his travel immigration ban that deals with refugees and focuses on certain countries, he says that is legal and it's necessary for homeland security. but when you look at how it was rolled out and now what's happening in the court cases and also protests, it's not turning out as planned. despite a night of high-style

glamour raising money for the american red cross, the president's feud with a federal judge was clearly on his mind, speaking hours before his administration's appeal was denied. the president told reporters, we'll win. >> for the safety of the country. >> reporter: the president had already argued his own case in a string of seven tweets saturday, even lashing out at the judge. "the opinion of this so-called judge is ridiculous and will be overturned." mr. trump was upset that seattle-based federal judge james robart temporarily stopped the ban on immigration and refugees from seven mostly muslim countries. >> love, not hate! make america great! >> reporter: protests against that ban from outside president trump's mar-a-lago estate to the white house, around the country, and cities around the world. beyond immigration, the president made provocative, new comments while talking about

russia's vladimir putin with bill o'reilly of fox news. >> will i get along with him? i have no idea. it's very possible -- >> he's a killer, though. putin's a killer. >> there are a lot of killers. we've got a lot of killers. what, do you think our country's so innocent? >> reporter: former u.s. ambassador to russia, michael mcfaul, bristled at the comparison. >> when he applies equivalency to what the united states does, our military forces abroad to putin, that's really objectionable to me. >> reporter: and president trump in that interview with bill o'reilly was talking again as he has in the past about the possible partnership with russia to try to fight isis. but as we've seen over many months, his comments about russia raise questions. and perhaps, again, it's that digging in where the president doesn't want to cede any ground on how he's approached something that perhaps fueled the new comments about russia that are certainly playing into the wider foreign policy. now, russia and the u.s. was part of the president's

conversation with the leader of ukraine yesterday. today he talks with the secretary-general of nato. we know there's a lot of concern in europe about aggression from russia, and so, that call will be important, too. thomas? >> kelly o'donnell reporting in west palm beach, florida, great to see you. thank you very much. we have more now on the new legal developments overnight. justice correspondent pete williams joins me now. explain to everybody, how does the denial of the doj's motion impact the current stfts travel ban? >> doesn't change it at all. and here's where things stand. just after midnight saturday, thomas, the justice department filly asked a federal appeals court on the west coast to immediately put the seattle ruling on hold after the president called it ridiculous and said it came from a so-called judge. the appeals court declined to act immediately, asking instead for a response from the two states that got the travel restrictions blocked. so, this morning the trump executive order remains on hold. border officials are proceeding as though it never existed. that means that travelers who

arrive from the seven countries that had been covered by the order are again allowed to come here. visas that had been suspended by the order are once again valid. so, that means travelers from iran, iraq, libya, somalia, sudan, syria and yemen are being allowed to board u.s.-bound flights. and when they get here, they can enter the country. after the justice department filed its motion last night, the appeals court asked for a response from washington and minnesota, the two states whose lawsuit prompted that seattle judge to issue his order friday night that stopped enforcement of the travel restrictions. their legal brief, their response is due at midnight tonight eastern time. then the justice department has until tomorrow at 6:00 p.m. eastern to file its reply. so, the appeals court is not going to act until it's received all those briefs, so that means monday night at the earliest for any further court action. the travel ban remains on hold. and whichever side fails to prevail before the appeals court can ask for an emergency order from the u.s. supreme court. so, we've got another couple of

days to get through this. >> meanwhile, pete, as we all do, watching the president's timeline on twitter for his reaction. we know he tweeted yesterday morning, but last night he tweeted about this specifically, the question of why aren't the lawyers looking at and using the federal court decision in boston, which is a conflict with ridiculous lift ban decision. so, there is a judge in boston that felt it did have legal standing. >> right. >> and they are in complete contrast with what happened in this ruling from the seattle judge. why is that, pete? >> well, and the lawyers, in fact, did call the court's attention, the appeals court attention to the ruling in boston. they said to the appeals court, look, a federal appeals court in boston, who has the same status in the federal courts as the judge in seattle, reached just the opposite conclusion. so they said that's another indication that this is not a slam dunk for the states. that's their argument. the appeals court is doing what

you would expect it to do, which is to ask for the other side to respond first before it decides on this emergency stay. so, the appeals court hasn't tipped its hand yet. it's just saying we want to hear from both sides first. >> is it apples to apples when we think of what judge robart was taking into consideration as opposed to what the judge in boston was taking into consideration? because we've seen different suits pop up that are taking apart different aspects of the executive order, say specifically in one case the effectiveness of people with green cards. so, were they looking at the same type of challenges in the same way? >> not exactly, but fundamentally, the issue's the same -- does the president have the authority to do this, or is what he's doing unconstitutional or illegal? that's the question here. and these two judges so far have come to opposite conclusions on that. now, i have to say, the judge in seattle hasn't finally decided that issue. all he is saying is, i think there's a good chance the states are going to prevail when i get to that question, so for now,

i'm going to put the executive order on hold while we try to sort through that. that, you may ask, well, if those two rulings are in conflict, why does the seattle judge control? and the answer is that the boston judge didn't change anything. all he said is, yeah, you can continue enforcing this. he didn't order the other side to stop trying to stop it. so that's the reason that the seattle order prevails at this point. >> all right. our pete williams explaining it all for us from washington. pete, greato have you on, sir. thank you. paul singer from "usa today" and tara palmieri from politico joining me now. paul, let me start with you. we know yesterday president trump attacked the judge, calling him the "so-called judge." is there a sense that that type of language is going to back fire on president trump? >> i don't know backfire. i mean, this is what donald trump has been doing for years is he has this tendency to lash out in a pretty personal and

direct way to anybody who disagrees with him. our question had been, while between the time when he was elected and when he was sworn in, was this going to change when he became president trump, instead of candidate trump, and thus far, there's been no indication this is going to change. this is still who donald trump is, and he doesn't seem interested in peeling back his sort of immediate nature to just respond and lash out. it's just how he rolls. >> we know as an executive order, this is a policy that's been set in stone by congress. paul, in a recent article, you talked about reaction from gop legislators and they think the immigration ban is too extreme. how is this going to affect their future? the political fallout for them. >> well, watch a bunch of these trump executive orders. a lot of them don't actually say what they think they say. and it is true so far that some of the republicans are already facing a lot of blowback from their constituents about this executive order, the travel ban. there have been several places where protesters have basically

shouted down the town hall meetings of even republican members of congress. so there's going to be a lot of back-and-forth on this, and a lot of members of congress, republican members of congress, are asking to review this order to make sure it doesn't go too far. >> tara, let's talk about one of the articles that you were researching and rohring on, the sdis rust from trump's white house and the leaks that have come out, also part of the confusion, especially when it comes to the immigration ban. is that indicative of something else that's taking place in the white house, the leaks? >> right. there's a sense of paranoia among the top people in trump's administration, and they were holding this executive order so close to vest that they weren't able to actually communicate with the agencies and the hill in a way that would help them roll it out, which is why you saw such a disaster. people didn't know how to even actually carry out the order or what was inside of it until it was actually signed, and that's a problem. i mean, they're so concerned about leaks. don't forget, trump made his

campaign staffers sign ndas. and when this executive order came out beforehand, you know, the people on the hill that were helping stephen miller, who's in charge of policy, they had to sign ndas. this is not the way you want to start your administration, in a way that there's so much secrecy and paranoia that you can't work with washington. now, they said on the record that we'll do better, but it's very concerning for anyone who has to work with the administration. the white house is not the only unit that moves the country forward. you have to work with the agencies and you have to work with the hill. >> well, and i know a lot of legal folks would look at those ndas and say they really wouldn't stand up. and also in consideration of the fact that these are federal employees, there is caution that goes, you know, goes in kind of baked in the cake of classified material or things as sensitive as this. but yeah, the leaks have been pretty amazing, and we certainly know that the other interesting aspect is going to be this super bowl interview with bill

o'reilly coming tonight, the vladimir putin comments, saying despite him being a killer, the u.s. isn't that innocent. so, tara, is this kind of lowering us in terms of a moral equivalency or the standards of what america looks like on the world stage? are we equal with russia? >> i think that it's interesting to see the president trying to equivocate our country with russia where they kill political dissidents, they kill, you know, they kill journalists. i wouldn't say we're on the same scale. and it's just amazing that for a president and a candidate who said america first, that he would bring america down to the level of russia. it's obviously very concerning, and you're going to hear leaders on the hill very much disagreeing with this. so, it was an offhand comment. we know that trump is not very careful with his words, but you have to be careful with your words when you're dealing with international relations. you saw that last week with the

call with the australian premier, when he actually got in a fight with him over accepting refugees and hung up. this is -- you have to be -- you can't -- you have to parse your words when you are the president of the united states. you are the chief diplomat. i mean, it's not good for our standing either to lower our human rights record to that level. that's not what america's about. >> well, i think as everybody tries to understand what this new form of presidential language means, language is a weapon or a tool, and we will see how it's used moving forward and people can make their own decisions. tara, great to see you. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> also paul, good to have you th me. i appreciate your time. we've got newinsight into president trump's relationship with his chief strategist. how much power does steve bannon have, and might he overplay his hand? there is a lot of palace intrigue going on at the white house. some answers coming up. ♪ everything your family touches sticks with them. make sure the germs they bring home don't stick around.

use clorox disinfecting products. because no one kills germs better than clorox.

afoot and light-hearted i take to the open road. healthy, free, the world before me, the long brown path before me leading wherever i choose. the east and the west are mine. the north and the south are mine. all seems beautiful to me.

we're very confident the president's operating within his authority as president, both under the constitution and under clear statutory law. that we'll accomplish the stay and win the case on the merits. >> there vice president mike pence reacting to a federal judge's temporary suspension of the travel ban. and in the overnight hours, we had an appeals court refusing to reinstate that ban, but the court wants additional information by tomorrow on the government's case. so, right now it is in a legal limbo situation, but the travel ban is halted. joining me from california is congressman eric swallow, member of the house intelligence committee and a democrat. sir, it's good to have you with me. i know you've been arguing that -- >> good early morning, thomas. >> early morning to you, for sure, certainly out there on the west coast. i know you've been arguing that the ban is making us less safe, but from your position as ranking member of the cia subcommittee of the house

permanent select money on intelligence, what can you say without political hyperbole that says without the travel ban in place, we are safe? >> the president is up against the constitution on this one, and he's finding that out. this travel ban not only is un-americ un-american, it makes us less safe, because we already have a tight screening process that's in place. it takes 18 to 24 months after background checks, after the fbi and homeland security looks at these individuals. and we have taken far fewer refugees than our allies. and it makes us less safe because it makes us less of a team player when our allies across the globe are taking refugees and then we go to them for help to fight terrorism and they're not going to see us now as wanting to cooperate. and it makes us less safe because this will inspire an enemy who is determined to put out a message that we are not welcoming to muslims. >> so, we know that president trump has been arguing that the ban really does make us more safe. in one of a series of tweets yesterday from him, he says

"what is our country coming to when a judge can halt a homeland security travel ban and anyone, even with bad intentions, can come into the u.s.?" the president seems to be acting with different intelligence, maybe, that he is not revealing to the rest of america, maybe to calculate why this travel ban is in place? from what you know and without revealing too much, does he actually have intelligence he is using to justify this ban? >> thomas, our country is coming to its senses. we're going through the courts, and that's what happens when you have three branches of government, and i think the president is learning that. and if he has intelligence that there are refugees who have slipped through the vetting process that we already have, he should share that with congress, and that has not, as far as i know, been shared with any of us. and so, right now his ban is just -- it's alienating our allies who need us the most. i met with the king of jordan earlier this week.

their country has taken over a million refugees. they've been a faithful ally to the united states in helping us fight terrorism. and if we are going to just say we're not going to take refugees and we're going to arbitrarily ban muslim travelers to this country, that hurts us in that part of the region. >> so, do you think that this ban is strictly based on a campaign promise and not actionable intelligence? >> i think this ban makes us less safe. i haven't seen any intelligence that it makes us any safer, and i think it's a religious ban against muslims and muslim-majority countries, and that is ultimately going to inspire attacks against us. >> sir, i know you've been very outspoken on concerns about team trump and ties with russia, and now we have president trump making this comparison between the actions of russia and the u.s. it's going to air this evening, the super bowl interview with bill o'reilly. take a listen. >> do you respect putin? >> i do respect him, but -- >> do you? why? >> well, i respect a lot of people, but that doesn't mean i'm going to get along with him.

he's a leader of his country. i say it's better to get along with russia than not. and if russia helps us in the fight against isis, which is a major fight, and islamic terrorism all over the world -- >> right. >> -- major fight, that's a good thing. will i get along with him? i have no idea. it's possible i won't. >> he's a killer, though. putin's a killer. >> a lot of killers. we've got a lot of killers. what, you think our country is so innocent? >> what do you think he means by that? and also, do you think that russia hacked our election? >> it's very stirring to hear, very, very stirring, thomas, to hear the president of the united states defame our great democracy, to compare us to russia and its dictator, putin. you know, he may want to side with the murderous dictator, but i and most americans will side with the troops who defend our country. i'll side with the cops who walk the beat and the brave individuals who keep us safe every day. he can have the russians. so, that's why i'm so concerned. when you know that, we know, and it's not disputed, that russia

tried to influence our election, they preferred candidate trump. it was ordered by vladimir putin. trump prefers for us to get out of nato, wants to reduce the sanctions against russia, as he started to do earlier this week, and won't show us anything about his global financial holdings. i think all of that together raises a lot of questions about whether there was communication between the president and his campaign team and russia before the election. >> do you think there will be a bipartisan investigation into that assertion? >> thomas, i'm trying. every democrat supports that. i really believe this can't be something that is relitigating the election, but looking at the intelligence finding that says that russia seeks to do this again. and i really am hoping republicans put their country ahead of party, because if we do nothing, this will tell russia and other foreign adversaries that it's open season on u.s. electio elections. and we should say we're never going to tolerate again an outside country trying to influence our elections. >> congressman swalwell, thank

you for your time. >> thank you. on a lighter note, "saturday night live" is putting the white house secretary, sean spicer, in its comedic crosshairs. did you see this? >> i'm not here to be your buddy! i'm here to swallow gum and i'm here to take names! >> all right, do you know who that actor is portraying sean? we'll tell you after this. when heartburn hits,

fight back fast with tums smoothies. it starts dissolving the instant it touches your tongue. and neutralizes stomach acid at the source. ♪ tum -tum -tum -tum smoothies! only from tums

all right, so, "snl" had a special guest last night, comedian melissa mccarthy with an epic spoof of the white house press secretary, sean spicer. take a look. >> today, when he entered the room, the crowd greeted him with a standing ovation, which lasted a full 15 minutes. and you can check the tape on that. everyone was smiling. >> yeah, i'm also concerned about steve bannon. a lot of people are saying he's the one behind this muslim ban.

>> yeah, all right, you guys -- you guys still aren't getting it. what, you need some props? my words too big? i've got to show you in pictures? okay, great, here you go. when it comes to these decisions, the constitution gives our president lots of power, and steve bannon is the key advisor. >> all right, the very best of this is a portion where melissa mccarthy/sean spicer, actually used the podium to go after somebody, so you have to actually look at this to see it. but it was very good, very funny, and i'm sure sean will get a chuckle as well. all right, we have another rally in new york city today, but this is vastly different than the others. we'll explain why after this. boost it's about moving forward not back. it's looking up not down. it's feeling up thinking up living up. it's being in motion... in body in spirit in the now. boost. it's not just nutrition.

it's intelligent nutrition. with 26 vitamins and minerals and 10 grams of protein. all in 3 delicious flavors. it's choosing to go in one direction... up. boost. be up for it.

hi, everybody. welcome back. i'm thomas roberts here at msnbc world headquarters in new york. and at the half hour, here is what we are watching for you. game day in houston as the

atlanta falcons get ready to take on the new england patriots. later today, though, anti-president trump protesters are expected to gather at a nearby park and then march toward nrg stadium. nbc's ron mott is there live for us. we'll check in with ron in a few minutes. looks a little cloudy there in houston. to get back to politics and new reaction from vice president mike pence following the administration's latest obstacle in restoring its travel ban. and here's what he told my colleague, chuck todd, moments ago on "meet the press." >> many republicans in congress believe it was done hastily. you have an opportunity now for a do-over. why not? >> it was not done hastily. there may have been some leaders on capitol hill that were not informed in the usual niceties of washington, d.c. but look, we live in a very dangerous world. the reality is there are people around the globe who have inspired violence here in the homeland. we just saw in the basement of the lourve a machete-wielding terrorist from egypt that came into that country.

the american people know that the threats that we face are real. >> so, we have more about the legal battle that's taking place for president trump's legal ban, and it is a moment in time now where preparation is going to be going back and forth to figure out where they can move forward with the administration and the executive order. rick pildes is a constitutional law professor at new york university school of law and joins me now at 30 rock. rick, what do you make of the trump administration and trying to regather itself to go after this? is this all said and done because they got denied about the appeal from the 9th circuit? >> no, no, this is still very much a live controversy. so, the first thing we can say is that federal judges throughout the country enjoined the way in which they order affected legal permanent residents, detaining people at the airports, unanimously federal courts put a stop to that. now we're moving into the stage

where we're asking, is this order itself legal, substantively? does the president have the power to issue this order? >> well, and that's part of the argument they made, that the president can decide who stays and who goes in this country. we know that also part of that argument from the trump appeal said on basic principle that an alien seeking initial admission to the u.s. requests a privilege and has no constitutional rights regarding his application. because they lost the appeal, is that not a proper argument? >> the administration has not lost this appeal. i want to be clear about that. you had a federal judge -- >> well, the denial of this appeal. >> they did not deny the appeal yet. all that has happened at this stage is that the federal court of appeals for the 9th circuit has said we want to hear arguments on this question on monday. we want the papers filed on monday. they did not act yet to issue a stay or not issue a stay. they said we need papers from both sides. we need briefs from both sides. so, no, this is extremely live

right now. you had one federal judge in boston who has now said the order is legal substantively. >> correct. >> you had one federal judge in seattle who has now said the order is not legal substantively. so, you have a conflict between the federal district judges. no court of appeals has addressed the substance of this yet. that is about to happen in the 9th circuit. the first question there will be do they stop the order that was issued by the lower court and say this process that trump has imposed, president trump has imposed, can go forward, or do they not issue any kind of emergency stay, in which case the order of the federal district judge remains in effect? >> okay, so because we're in this legal limbo, all right? so, we're going to break this apart because my legal mind is not working as best it could this sunday morning. because my impression is, because of the fact that the court is requesting more and the fact that they filed this motion, that it wasn't adequate enough for them to make any type of determination or ruling, that

that motion in and of itself wasn't enough to clear the benchmark for them? so it is a denial, in a way, but you're saying that this is really just a pause for them to gather more information, go back in, make proper arguments tomorrow. in the meantime, the travel ban remains halted because of the judge robart decision -- >> that's correct. >> -- which allows for free access from those seven previously restricted countries. >> that's correct. it's understandable, all of this is very confusing legally and it's confusing to people on the ground who have to implement these policies as well as people traveling or seeking to travel. there is so much going on so quickly. but the state of play right now is that the order is not in effect, it has been halted, but the president is now appealing to the 9th circuit, and the 9th circuit has not done anything meaningful yet. they will probably do something in the next day or two with respect to whether they let this

order from the judge in seattle stay in effect or whether they stop his order from going into effect. >> just from your legal opinion, do you think it is a mistake for the white house to challenge the 9th circuit in this way? >> oh, no, it's entirely expected the administration would pursue this legal challenge. they certainly -- they won in boston already. they believe their policy is legally justified. of course they're going to continue to pursue it through the federal courts. the right way to challenge policy is in the courts, and ultimately, the courts will decide whether this order is legal or not. the president does have a tremendous amount of discretion with respect to entry at the borders, and that is essentially the core of the argument that the trump administration will be making and has begun to make in the 9th circuit. >> we will continue to follow this, rick. great to have you on. thank you for helping us break this down, helping us all understand it a little bit better, and we will continue to follow it. for the third week in a row, thousands have taken to the

streets nationwide voicing their opposition to president trump on a number of issues about why they're out there, one of which includes the ban. that opposition also spread overseas across several continents. nbc's morgan radford is outside trump tower with news of a very different type of rally. morgan, good morning. tell us about this one. >> reporter: thomas, good morning. we're standing outside on fifth avenue in front of trump tower, and beginning at noon today and lasting until 2:00 p.m., already more than 150 people have responded to be part of a pro president trump rally. those people are coming here today. they support the ban, the travel ban that we just saw in the last 48 hours, that was not only suspended, then appealed. they're saying, basically, president trump is our current president and it's time to support him and at least give the man a chance to do his job. now, of course, thomas, as you mentioned, this is in sharp contrast to those rallies we saw pop up all across the country yesterday. there were thousands of people that packed the lower part of manhattan yesterday, and that was part of an lgbtq rally that

was against that travel ban, people who were saying it is time to come together and say that we do not support president trump's policies. but again, at noon today we expect to see a very different type of rally, thomas. >> all right, morgan. again, that's happening at noon, coming up here in new york city. we will talk to you later today. thank you. in houston, that is the site of today's super bowl, everybody's getting ready for that. well, we've got nearly 300 people marching to the heart of the game festivities in the downtown area. nbc's ron mott is there for us this morning. ron, explain what their purpose is, and do we expect more protests that may get close to the game? >> reporter: hey, thomas. good morning to you. yes, we do expect more protests today, probably early afternoon is the time frame a lot of these groups have given their people to gather in certain places. now, there is a pretty wide perimeter around nrg stadium, so we don't anticipate demonstrators will get very close to the stadium. i spoke with a special agent in charge about the wrinkle in their security plans. he says this is nothing new for

them, just standard operating procedure, really. they began preparing for the super bowl a few years back and say they're always prepared for any civil unrest that might break out around a game like this. here's more of what he had to say about credible threats and noncredible threats. take a listen. >> we're obviously at a level of heightened awareness, but it's 24/7 for us, and press come in all the time and our job is to mitigate those threats. but we've practiced, we've rehearsed. we've been doing this for three years, so we're ready. >> reporter: there is a lot of security in place here. the gates will open at 1:00 local time for the game. 6:30 is kickoff eastern time. security will be very tight. folks should get here early, pack their patience, but not much else, thomas. >> ron, thank you so much. ron mott in houston for us. we've got the battle over the travel ban inside the trump administration raising new questions about steve bannon's increasing power. in fact, "time" magazine even asks if bannon is the second most powerful man in the world. coming up next hour on "am joy,"

wall street wins a big prize from donald trump, but what do nervous investors get? joy breaks it down. and now, i help people find discounts, like paperless, multi-car, and safe driver, that help them save on their car insurance. any questions? -yeah. -how do you go to the bathroom? great. any insurance-related questions? -mm-hmm. -do you have a girlfriend? uh, i'm actually focusing on my career right now, saving people nearly $600 when they switch, so...

where's your belly button? [ sighs ] i've got to start booking better gigs. you may know what it's like to deal with high... and low blood sugar. januvia (sitagliptin) is a once-daily pill that, along with diet and exercise, helps lower blood sugar. januvia works when your blood sugar is high and works less when your blood sugar is low, because it works by enhancing your body's own ability to lower blood sugar. plus januvia, by itself, is not likely to cause weight gain

or low blood sugar (hypoglycemia). januvia should not be used in patients with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. tell your doctor if you have a history of pancreatitis. serious side effects can happen, including pancreatitis which may be severe and lead to death. stop taking januvia and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area which may be pancreatitis. tell your doctor right away and stop taking januvia if you have an allergic reaction that causes swelling of the face, lips, tongue, or throat, or affects your breathing or causes rash or hives. kidney problems sometimes requiring dialysis have been reported. some people may develop severe joint pain. call your doctor if this happens. using januvia with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. to reduce the risk, your doctor may prescribe a lower dose of the sulfonylurea or insulin. your doctor may do blood tests before and during treatment to check your kidneys. if you have kidney problems a lower dose may be prescribed. side effects may include upper respiratory tract infection, stuffy or runny nose, sore throat, and headache.

for help lowering your blood sugar talk to your doctor about januvia. new reporting today on the white house over steps that it took to mitigate some of the confusion and chaos that's been caused by the travel ban. it's part of this "washington post" report, "inside the white house cabinet battle over trump's immigration order p." david, great to see you. let's dive into this, because what josh is seeing and this effort to resolve confusion after the order went into effect shows a dichotomy of what's taking place for that inner circle of the trump administration. >> yeah, and thomas, we knew that when president trump selected his inner circle and, to some degree, his cabinet, that he had stocked some of them as sort of establishment figures who understood sort of the process of washington, and

sometimes you take more deliberative steps, and then also with some outsiders who have a very different point of view. and steve bannon, one of his senior advisers, representing that. they want to disrupt the establishment in the way that the president did during his campaign. and so, i think you're seeing this battle play out in realtime, and the travel ban is a perfect example of these sort of outside views saying we need to do extreme things early on to set a tone to try to move washington forward, not do business as usual. but the way this was rolled out caused plenty of confusion, mass protests, and donald trump was said not to be extremely pleased with the way this was rolled out. maybe the policy itself he's certainly supportive of, but the way this has played out he's certainly not happy with. >> david, the major part of the battle between chief strategist steve bannon, homeland security secretary john kelly and all of this, because kelly's plan was to issue a waiver for green card holders from these seven majority muslim countries. so, what's your understanding of the dispute, where there was the disconnect between those two?

>> i think if you have green cards it gives these folks legal permanent residence, and they expect to be able to come back into the country, to be able to leave the country, visit family or do things overseas. so, i think this is something where the agencies did not have a great deal of input into this order before it was rolled out, and that's contrary to the way these things are normally done, especially when they affect so many people. the administration talks about, oh, this is affecting 100 people or maybe a few hundred, but in fact, the state department and dhs have said this is in the tef thousands around the world who are affec by this order. now of course, a judge has put a temporary ban on the order, but this is certainly something i think we're going to see play out as they go forward, and it will be interesting to see as they roll out other executive actions, including some i'm hearing about immigration, how they roll it out, whether they give more lead time, whether they explain more. the white house could have done a much better job in explaining to the public, to the agencies themselves, and to reporters how this was being handled. >> all right, so, with the chaotic rollout, the surprise of it all to many people that should have been included, is

this creating a problem for steve bannon and steve miller in terms of their influence and their roles against different cabinet officials? >> yes. i think what we're hearing is that donald trump has not been that pleased with, again, the way this was rolled out, saying we need to have a more orderly process on this. and you know, i think that doesn't say that the influence, generally speaking and philosophically, that steve bannon and stephen miller, the chief policy director, represent. i think donald trump wants to do something -- take big steps. he sort of agrees with some of their views on immigration, on trade, on doing things differently. i think they're going to keep doing that. the question is how much they roll this out and maybe in a better way try to communicate it to the public, people who are affected by it. >> and when it comes to steve bannon, i mean, we've had figures in the past, karl rove or a david axelrod or valerie jarrett, you know, these president whisperers. >> yep. >> do we have a real insider look at who this man is, or are people just making wild

assumptions about the true influence he really has? >> well, in his case, much like some of the others you mentioned, he has a long history, having been at breitbart news as the head of breitbart news, and having producing hollywood films about sort of his world view. so there's a public record people are looking at. and it's pretty interesting. unlike the figures you talked about from previous administrations, steve bannon looks at both parties as corrupt and the establishment as something in need of overturning. >> shaking up. >> exactly. so, i think that's been clear. donald trump had some of those inklings, but ever since he brought steve bannon on to the campaign as chief strategist, he's been much more confrontational and i think that's what you're seeing in the white house, he's being encouraged by steve bannon and others to keep that tone but also take dramatic steps to upset the establishment, do things differently. you know, they're saying look, washington's been gridlocked so long, you haven't seen a lot get done. both sides agree with that. let's try something radically

different. >> it's the new normal. some are embracing it, others resisting hard. coming up next, the end game over the travel ban and whether president trump will give up the fight over it. . .

i'm so frustrated. i just want to find a used car without getting ripped off. you could start your search at the all-new carfax.com that might help. show me the carfax. now the car you want and the history you need are easy to find. show me used trucks with one owner. pretty cool. [laughs] ah... ahem... show me the carfax. start your used car search and get free carfax reports at the all-new carfax.com.

all right. it's a new day and a new fight with the white house renew its interest to fight the latest court order refusing to reinstate president trump's travel ban. robe robert, crystal, great to see you and spend some sunday morning with you both. let's get right into this because robert, yet the president let loose on the judge who suspended that order via twitter calling him the so-called judge, also saying it was a ridiculous decision that will be overturned. is this a good approach an nag ne -- antagonizing the judge?

he's done it before. smart judge? >> not at all. he is a judge's judge appointed by george w. bush. he's a very thoughtful judge and republican second. he interprets the law literally, someone who has the a great respect for the constitution and the power of the judiciary in terms of playing it fair. he's a coach. he calls balls aened strikes, an umpire, rather. i don't think it's wise for the president to do this. and sean spicer, the white house press secretary, first said it was an outrageous decision and then they dialed it back and said it was an unfortunate decision. the white house is trying to calibrate and recalibrate to make sure you're not offending the judiciary. after after all, that is co-equal braunch of government. >> we did the two statements with outrageous and one with -- then we go to twitter and figure out how the president feels. in the new issue of political

magazine, we have jon harris and daryl lipman arguing trump's most dangerous enemies are inside the white house and risks being taken down by high-ranking leaders like nixon, somebody he has studied to get to this point. is there a real possibility there? >> i think there's a lot of truth to that and it was frankly something i hadn't thought of until we saw the first few weeks of the trump administration. it makes sense when you consider a number of his nominees to be cabinet-level secretaries have active contempt for the agencies that they've been appointed to lead. you think about pruett at epa, betsy devos at other education and it makes sense that the bureaucrats who are there who believe in the cause and mission of their agencies would be concerned about the direction the trump administration will take them in. that's been encouraging and also encouraging to see the judicial branch step up and issue these

rebukes and that the trump administration, as much as they're undermining that with their language, has so far more or less gone along with that. so we haven't quite had a constitutional crisis yet in week number two. we'll see what week three brings. >> robert, trump's remarks on vladimir putin, we'll see more of that in these pre-super bowl interview with bill o'reilly, the equivalent of us being killers like vladimir putin in russia? >> i'm not trying to respond to that. ber free-loving, peace-loving country and obviously will protect ourselves when american lives are in danger. but going out and killing people, going out and maliciously thwarting democracy, that's not what we're about or pa of our dna. >> crystal, are you surprised or is this more of the same about how donald trump feels about putin and russia? >> it's shocking. i want's similar to things he's already said and it's bridge too far for a lot of republicans. senator mcconnell was just on essentially expressing his

distance from the president on this particular thing. we are not russia. we do not aspire to be russia, and i hope that donald trump does not aspire to be vladimir putin although that part is a little more unclear. >> we have constructed bridges in lots of different ways that no one anticipated over the last 18 months. crystal, great to see you, robert, as well, and happy super bowl sunday. that wraps up this hour of "msnbc life." ahead on "a.m. joy," gifts donald trump has the given to rich friends on wall street. who pays for it? or fill a big order or expand your office and take on whatever comes next. find out how american express cards and services can help prepare you for growth at open.com.

find out how american express cards and services this is one gorgeous truck. special edition. oh, did i say there's only one special edition? because, actually there's 5. aaaahh!! ooohh!! uh! holy mackerel. wow. nice. strength and style. which one's your favorite? come home with me! it's truck month! find your tag for an average total value over $11,000 on chevy silverado all star editions when you finance through gm financial. find new roads at your local chevy dealer.

that's why a cutting edgeworld. university counts on centurylink to keep their global campus connected. and why a pro football team chose us to deliver fiber-enabled broadband to more than 65,000 fans. and why a leading car brand counts on us to keep their dealer network streamlined and nimble. businesses count on communication, and communication counts on centurylink. [ inaudible ]. good morning, and welcome to "a.m. joy." barely two weeks since donald trump became president the world has erupted in opposition and resistance that shows n