this sunday, the turmoil presidency. president trump back on the campaign trail thrilling supporters. >> people want to take back control of their countries and they want to take back control of their lives. >> while at town halls, his critics worry. >> ever since the election, i have felt like a passenger in a car that's being driven by a drunk driver. >> this in a week in which the president went after the intel community for leaking. >> the leaks are absolutely real. the news is fake. >> fired his national security adviser. >> fired him for what he said to mike pence, very simple. >> lost his secretary nominee and called the media the enemy of the american people. this morning, i talk to president trump's chief of staff reince priebus.

also senator john mccain says president trump needs to learn from history about attacking a free press. >> that's how dictators get started. >> my interview with senator mccain. plus spy games, how serious is the rift between president trump and the intelligence community? >> the last thing they need is to have a president who questions their patriotism to this country and to him. >> i'll talk to the former his of the cia, leon panetta. and stress test. how politics is getting all of us stressed out. but some a lot more than others. joining me for insight and analysis are david brooks, columnist for the "new york times." amy walter, national ed tore of "the cook political report." hugh hewitt, host on the salem radio network. and donna edwards of maryland. welcome to sunday. it's "meet the press." >> from nbc news in washington, the longest-running show in television history, celebrating

its 70th year. this is "meet the press" with chuck todd. >> good sunday morning. it's only been four weeks but already we're running out of adjectives to describe the trump presidency and this last week did nothing to clear things up. late yesterday president trump returned to familiar territory, comfort food for politics, essentially. addressing adoring supporters in florida, far away from protesters or reporter questions. mr. trump is hardly the first president to seek validation from campaign-style events so early in his presidency. the last three presidents chose to escape washington early in the first months of office. but none were dealing with the kind of self-induced crises that mr. trump is facing right now. the past week, the president fired his national security adviser mike flynn, saw the secretary nominee have to drop out, forced to react to a report that staff had repeated contacts with russian officials during the campaign, and realized that congressional republicans were becoming more emboldened to both

distance themselves from the president and investigate the president's ties to russia. he watched his poll numbers in gallup plummet. it's no surprise that president sought to go back what does he best, communicate with the american people. first through a televised news conference and then yesterday at yesterday's boisterous rally. president trump was back on the stump last night for what his team called a campaign rally. more than 1350 days before the next presidential election. >> despite all their lies, misrepresentations and false stories, they could not defeat us in the primaries and they could not defeat us in the general election. we will continue to win, win, win. >> mr. trump is hoping to shore up his base after a bruising week. and to put pressure on republican lawmakers who are returning home and are being greeted by an angry opposition. >> ever since the election, i have felt like a passenger in a car that's being driven by a drunk driver.

your hand's on the emergency brake. >> this week mr. trump returned to a well-worn playbook. he held a 77-minute flood the zone-style news conference and spent much of it defending his own performance. >> this administration is running like a fine-tuned machine. >> and the president selected and targeted enemies, including the intelligence community. >> the leaks are absolutely real. the news is fake because so much of the news is fake. >> and then there's the media. in a tweet on friday, the president called the media "the enemy of the american people." >> they have their own agenda and their agenda is not your agenda. >> but he can't escape the governing problems that pushed his job approval rating below 40% in several polls after just 30 days in office. white house infighting and chaos, a rejection of the key foreign policy initiative by the courts, and the forced firing of his national security adviser after 24 days on the job.

then there are the multiplying questions on russia. at least seven congressional committees led by republicans say they are investigating issues related to either russia, former national security adviser michael flynn, or the handling of classified information. at his news conference, mr. trump repeatedly was pressed on whether anyone from his campaign had contact with russian officials. and he would not directly answer the question. >> well, i have nothing to do with it. i have nothing to do with russia. i told you. i have no deals there. i have no anything. >> so you're not aware of any contacts during the course of the election? >> how many times do i have to answer this question? >> can you just say yes or no on it? >> russia is a ruse. i have nothing to do with russia. to the best of my knowledge, no peern that i deal with does. >> congressional republicans are not exactly rushing to defend the president. >> the president said in the press conference that nobody he knew of from his campaign was in contact with russian officials. do you believe him? >> i have no idea. >> and joining me now is president trump's chief of staff reince priebus.

welcome back to "meet the press," sir. >> good morning, chuck. >> let me start with the issue of mike flynn and the conversations, what was said or not said with the russian ambassador. you were on this program just before the inauguration. and here's what you told viewers at the time. >> i have talked to general flynn. none of that came up. the subject matter of sanctions or the actions taken by the obama administration did not come up in the conversation. >> so there was no challenge of american policy currently by mr. flynn? with the russian ambassador? >> none. >> obviously, now we know that was not true. you clearly were misled. walk me through this. when did you know you had been misled? >> some time after january 27th. it was -- our legal counsel got a heads-up from sally yates that something wasn't adding up with his story. and so then our legal department

went into a review of the situation and some time after that when sally yates refused to do her job as attorney general, like two days later, we had to get rid of her. and then some time after that the legal department came back and said that they didn't see anything wrong with what was actually said but then we started thinking about whether or not michael flynn was being straight with us. and that's when we started asking a lot of questions and sort of deposing michael flynn and figuring out what he knew or what he didn't know. he maintained the fact that he never talked to the russian ambassador about sanctions. but still something wasn't adding up. and eventually we determined that he did, in fact, talk about the sanctions even though we didn't believe that it was illegal. the fact was that it turned more or less into a conversation about whether or not he was being honest with us and the vice president, and the

president asked for his resignation and we got it. >> have you read -- did you read the transcripts yourself? >> i can't answer that question. but i can assure you that i am fully aware of the situation and we determined that he wasn't being straight with the vice president and others, and that's why we asked for his resignation. >> why was there more than a week, why did more than a week go by before the vice president was informed of this issue? >> well, i think he was always aware of the issue as to whether or not he talked about sanctions. i mean, that was an ongoing conversation. he was aware of the fact that the fbi interviewed michael flynn. the legal department started review the matter to get a report on whether or not anything was actually done wrong and whether or not he in fact talked to the russian ambassador about sanctions. and some point after we were first tipped off and got to the point of reviewing whether he

was being honest or not, after we got the report back from the white house counsel, that's when we looped in -- that's when the vice president was brought into the conversation more fully in regard to whether or not michael flynn was honest. >> waiting that long, do you -- do you regret that it looks like -- that the vice president is essentially not in the loop? >> no. the vice president is in the loop on everything, chuck. i mean, it happened so fast. i mean what happened was the legal department was tipped off, they looked into the legality of it. the actual investigation was ended almost immediately. so there was no investigation it was a matter of whether it was legal. then when we found out that he may have talked to the russian ambassador, that's when we started having the conversations with the vice president as to whether or not it was -- whether he was being honest or not. so, i mean, it felt like it happened very quickly. and we made a determination very quickly. >> do you still believe this was an honest mistake by mr. flynn, or do you think something -- are you concerned it's something

more nefarious? >> no, i don't think he did -- my view is, and i'm not an expert on, you know, the logan act. i can just tell you our legal department looked at. my view is what he did wasn't illegal, like many people said. it's the fact that he wasn't straight or honest. i think it's hard to believe that you would have a conversation with the russian ambassador and not remember it. so either way, either you don't remember or you weren't honest. either way, it was an unsustainable place to be and the president made a decisive decision to ask for his resignation and he got it. but look. the fact of the matter is in between that time the president got a lot of things done. keystone, dakota, tpp, nominated neil gorsuch. we had the keystone and dakota pipeline begin. we had a hiring freeze. we had a deregulation executive order. there are so many things also happening to the good, chuck that it would be nice to talk about some of the accomplishments, which in 30 days have been remarkable. >> i'll give you some time to get to that. i want to get back to mr. flynn.

is one of the reasons why you ended up having to let him go, when he was interviewed by the fbi on the 24th before the sally yates warning, are you -- did he mislead the fbi or lie to the fbi? is that one of the issues that came up during the deposing? >> that's a different issue for the fbi to answer, chuck. i'm just not in a position to answer. i certainly talked about that issue with leadership at the fbi. but i'm not in a position to talk about that with you. but -- listen, we've talked about this. i think we've laid it out very clearly. now it's up to the doj and fbi to take it any further if that's what they do. >> by the way, has anybody else inside the white house been interviewed by the fbi over the last couple of months? >> not that i know of, chuck. i think the answer is no to that. i would know. >> i want to go to the press conference on the issue of russia.

the president never seemed to answer the question which was asked three or four times there. which is, did anybody -- does he know for sure that anybody on his campaign, can he say definitively that nobody in his campaign, nobody that he's been associated with, had any contacts with any russian agents? >> no. first of all, the answer is no. and we don't know of any, any contacts with russian agents. and that gets to that "new york times" story, chuck. i mean, we spent days talking about a story that says that our campaign had constant contacts with russian spies. i can tell you, i've talked to the top levels of the intelligence community. and they've assured me that that "new york times" story was grossly overstated and inaccurate and totally wrong. i know what the intelligence committees and the house and senate were told by the fbi. and i know what i was told and what i will tell you is that story was total bony.

baloney. and devin nunez, the chairman of the house intelligence committee went on the record after he was informed by the fbi as to that story and what did he say? he said it was total garbage. this is what we're talking about, chuck. it's not all media. it's not everyone involved in the media. it is this sort of fake news stuff that is enormously important. that when you get a front page story of "the new york times" without a single source on the record saying that your campaign had constant contacts -- they didn't say one contact. they didn't say two contacts. it doesn't matter. we have not been informed of even that. but to say constant contacts? then the next day, "the wall street journal" comes out and says that the president of the united states is being cut out of information by the intelligence community. then later in the day, all of the main departments of the intelligence community says that's not true. this is what we're dealing with.

while we're putting in a lobbying ban, while we're freezing federal government employees, while we're getting the economy back on track, we're sitting here talking about these stories or whether steve bannon and i get along or not, which we did. i can assure you people in kin 94 sha, wisconsin, are not worried about that. they want to see jobs and money back in their pocket. that's what we're trying to do. >> the ap has a story that senate intelligence committee sent a letter to the white house counsel asking for a preservation of any communication, anything that could have any ties either during right now since you've taken office, during the transition of the campaign to make sure there are no -- all records are preserved regarding russia. are you aware of this letter? have you already acted upon it? >> yeah, i'm aware of it. i think they're going to do their job. they have to do that. those are things that richard burr and that team have to do. and that doesn't mean that there is anything there. it just means they need to do some things that satisfy their committee, that they've looked

into something and then they can have -- they can have meetings behind closed doors that they always do in the intel committee. then they'll issue a report. as long as they do their job and we cooperate with them, they'll issue a report and report will say there's nothing there. i know what they were told by the fbi. because i've talked to the fbi. i know what they're saying. i wouldn't be on your show right now telling you that we've been assured that there's nothing to the "new york times" story if i actually wasn't assured. and by the way, if i didn't actually have clearance to make this comment. i'm not a sloppy guy. i dot my is and cross my ts. i was a 15-year litigator before i became rnc chairman. >> fair enough. let me ask you the final question on the president's tweet. i'll put it up here. the fake news media, failing new york city, abc, cbs, cnn is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the american people. i understand. there is press criticism all the

time. it happens with many presidents. but let me ask this question this way. aren't you concerned that now that the president of the united states does not have the moral authority to travel around the world and express the openness for a free press in other countries? a free press is being challenged in a turkey in a russia. with the president of the united states trying to delegitimatize the american press, does that not sort of undercut his ability to spread freedom and advocate for press freedoms around the world? >> well, first of all, it's nothing new. thomas jefferson, abraham lincoln, john adams have all had their issues with the press. i can assure you this, chuck, and everyone in your business. the president believes in the first amendment. he believes in the free press. i believe in those things. we don't believe everyone is lousy in the media. we don't believe everything is bad. but there are some things that are really bad. and we tried to -- he categorizes that as fake news. what we've been through the last

ten days has been unbelievable. the leaks, the fake stories, the anonymous accusations. that stuff is bad. that's what he's referring to. i know where he's coming from on this. cane assure you he believes in a free press, first amendment. he loves our constitution. we just want to get this stuff back on the rails and more honest in regard to these really big accusations that are coming at us. >> i know you believe all of this is press generated. do you not have a problem in that west wing with leaks yourself? >> look, if there's a problem there, those people will have big issues. the truth is we don't have problems in the west wing. i mean you read about all the stories, i don't get along with bannon and this one said -- actually, we really gelled as a team. we get along great. and we're working well together. and the amount of drama and spin you read about in the washington daily gossip rags is unbelievable stuff. it just isn't true. you read it every day. you wonder what alternative

universe they're reporting on. it just isn't true. i think every west wing has different personalities. you had rahm emanuel, valerie jarrett, karl rove -- you always have different kinds of people. it doesn't mean that you don't ultimately get along, serve the president and want to make the american people proud. that's what we're doing every day. that's what we are trying to do every day. >> reince priebus, i'm going to leave it. i guess thanks for coming behind enemy lines and we'll see you next time. >> no, i'm happy to be here. thank you, chuck. >> thank you, mr. priebus. many republicans have been largely reluctant to criticize president trump but not my next guest. senator john mccain who appears on the cover of this week's "new york" magazine has taken plenty of incoming from mr. trump and is willing to give it as well. here's what he had to say on friday at the munich security conference in germany. an event essentially founded to confront the threat posed by the old soviet union during the cold war. >> they would be alarmed by an increasing turn away by

universal values and toward old ties of blood and race and sectarianism. they would be alarmed by the hardening resentment we see towards immigrants and refugees and minority groups, especially muslims. they would be alarmed by the growing inability and even unwillingness to separate truth from lies. >> i talked to senator mccain yesterday from munich and i began by asking him whether in that speech he was referring directly to president trump. >> i was certainly referring to the threats that we're now facing with this stated goals of this administration which would upset the last 70 years of a new world order which was established after world war ii. 70 years based on human rights, respect for the law, free trade, all of the things that -- aspects of this world order that

took place after one of the most horrific, terrible wars in history. and i'm for maintaining it. and i'm afraid that it's under assault from a variety of forces including by the way so are the russians. >> you say a variety of forces. you're being careful here. do you think the president agrees with you about the world order or not? >> i think many of his statements have been contradictory. some of them have indicated that. i'm very pleased with the national security team that he has around him. we're here in munich, by the way. and general mattis and general kelly and the vice president gave a very good speech today. but i worry about statements which upset our friends at a time when the strings on the european union and europeans are greater than they have been since any time since the end of the cold war. >> let me ask the question this way.

how much confidence do you have in the current commander in chief? >> well, i worry. i worry about the president's understanding of some of these issues. and his contradictory articulations. and i think the rollout of the "immigration reform" was an example of a need for an orderly decisionmaking process in the white house. and that, i think, is probably what's plaguing them more than anything else right now. >> you've been -- you've taken extra care to say how much you like the president's national security team. does that include what you've seen out of the national security council? >> i worry about the membership. there has never been a political adviser as a permanent member of the national security council. and in mr. bannon's role as both political adviser and member of the national security council, i am very worried about former

secretary of defense gates has said he's deeply concerned, so has leon panetta and many others who view the national security council as apolitical and should not be influenced by any political influences. >> it's interesting you bring up mr. bannon. he calls himself an economic nationalist. when you hear that or how about this, when europeans hear that, what do they hear? >> they feel uncertain about our trade relationships. they saw that we abandoned the tpp. they're facing the brexit problem right now. all this business with vladimir putin is very disturbing to all of us. to equate vladimir putin and the united states of america as he was asked, you know, i guess it was bill o'reilly said putin is a killer and he basically said so are we. that moral equivalency is a contradiction of everything the united states has ever stood for in the 20th and 21st century.

>> there's a lot of members of congress it seems this week that do want to get more involved into an investigation into what russia did, what role did russia play in the 2016 election. >> there are so many questions out there that we first of all need to understand the parameters of what's happened here. and so i would -- i would hold off and wait and see what happens. one thing that you and i know from being around this town and being around washington, there's probably going to be some more shoes to drop. >> that's -- that's true. let me ask you this. can americans be confident that a republican-controlled congress can investigate this president thoroughly if necessary? >> i hope so and i have to believe so. >> and then before i let you go -- >> more hope than belief. >> more hope than belief? before i let you go -- >> both. >> i'm curious of your reaction to a tweet that the president sent friday night. the fake news media failing "new york times," nbc news, abc, cnn is not my enemy.

it is the enemy of the american people. do you believe the press is the enemy? do you believe any group of americans are the enemy of another group of americans? >> i was talking about the period as you know of the new world order. a fundamental part of that new world order was a free press. i hate the press. i hate you especially, but the fact is i -- we need you. we need a free press. we must have it. it's vital. if you want to preserve -- i'm very serious now -- if you want to preserve democracy as we know it, you have to have a free and many times adversarial press. and without it, i'm afraid that we would lose so much of our individual liberties over time. that's how dictators get started. >> that's how dictators get started, with tweets like that? >> no, they get started by suppressing a free press.

in other words, a consolidation of power when you look at history, the first thing dictators do is shut down the press. i'm not saying that president trump is trying to be a dictator. i'm just saying we need to learn the lessons of history. >> senator mccain, i'm going to leave it there. you are a student of history, that's for sure. i always appreciate you sharing your views no matter how much you hate me. coming up, how concerned should we be about president trump's testy relationship with the intelligence community? my interview with a man who among other things is a former head of the cia, leon panetta.

welcome welcome back. hugh hewitt, former democratic congresswoman donna edwards, amy walter, editor of the cook political report and david brooks, columnist for the "new york times." david, i'm going to start with you. two columns this week that you had were headlined "how should one resist the trump administration," that was on valentine's day.

"what a failed trump administration looks like." you have -- that's pretty declarative in 30 days. >> enemy of the people. i'm an enemy of the people. you know what? my fear of the administration as it's shaken out so far is not that it's fascism, it's that it's anarchy. there are 696 appointed jobs that require senate confirmation and the trump administration has named 692 of them. so there is nobody home in the government. the civil service opted out because they've been offended by trump. the court system has given themselves permission to block every trump initiative, the intelligence community is disarray or disaffection. to lead, you actually need to lead a government and the government has gone awol. in one of the columns i liken him to captain kirk on the star ship enterprise of the command deck pushing the pretty buttons. but they're not attached to anything. i've been in touch with a lot of foreign officials this week. they're noticing. and they're afraid of the weak united states. >> we talked earlier this week about you were very upset about

the withdrawal. you were angry about it. and the weak kneed republican senators and i reminded you, they may not fear this white house right now. and that is a problem that washington seems to -- this white house hasn't gotten control of washington. >> i think they're going to remember given the rally yesterday that he has got deep and lasting support in red america. i disagree with david pretty fundamentally on where we are right now. i think to quote dan rather, news is where you look. investing $7 billion, bringing 3,000 jobs to arizona. the gorsuch nomination. if he names john bolton as his national security adviser today, he will find another ally who can do the sunday shows as well as reince did with you. it is slow. june 7th, 1993, five months into his presidency, bill clinton is on the cover of "time" magazine, "the incredible shrinking presidency." he's here 25 years later. it's too early.

>> look, presidents get a lot of opportunities to reset. voters are definitely very patient on that point. but what are we seeing in 30 days? >> i think that i'm much more where hugh is right now which is we're 30 days into this. while we in washington are pretty clear about what we're seeing, because it's not like anything we've ever seen before. the disarray, the internal discombobulation and there is a good swath of americans who want to wait and see what happens. a whole bunch of people voted for this president not because they liked him, not because they condoned his behavior, but because they thought that he was going to be able to make a difference. you're not going to know that in 30 days. here comes the bottom line. a year from now we'll be back and all these things that he said he's going to be able to do alone, right? i'm going to fix border security. i'm going to fix health care. i'm going to fix jobs. they're either going to happen or they're not. and whether he can get folks on his team along with him, we've been -- all the people at this table at one point or another, including you, you, i know me, said the republicans party is

falling apart. they're never going to coalesce behind the president. they're never going to stick with him. right now they are. and they are not abandoning him. even john mccain. >> well, look, i think all presidencies start with a little bit of chaos. but this kind of chaos is different because of where it is and at what levels. i think, you know, the actions on flynn, on the implementation of the immigration ban, what some said was a muslim ban, this is the kind of chaos that not just this administration but no administration needs. and it's got to wrap itself up quickly. i think republicans are going to like head for the hills. >> guys, we're 30 days in. he doesn't have a national security adviser, he had to fire him. there are seven committees that want to investigate his campaign on russia. that's a huge problem. this is not a small problem. >> you should never call a federal judge so-called. that is an enormous mistake. enemies is an enormous mistake. i point out with amy, you make

enormous mistakes early, you can course correct. you bring in a bolton and you have somebody that can come on the sunday show like reince did. there are opportunities to course correct. >> there's two levels here. there's the talk media thing which he's great at. he's good at your job. but there is the actual substance running of government. rex tillerson could be a great secretary of state. but he can't even pick his deputy because somebody in the white house blocks him. >> there's a loyalty test. >> emasculation right away. and then ben carson loses somebody. people all around the agencies are trying to actually run a government are prevented because of the loyalty test. then the israeli prime minister comes in, there's no state and no defense representation. this is just not how government works. you can't run it as one or three people in the white house. you need to lead an organization. >> people have no one to call. i mean, that is the problem. you got people who are heads of agencies, no undersecretaries, no assistant secretaries, no deputy secretaries. you cannot run a government like this. >> all right. we're going to pause here and pick up this conversation later in the show. up next, what happens when there is a lack of trust between

the white house and the intel community? my interview with the former head of the cia and the defense department, leon panetta. this is 100% useful for a 100% fresh mouth. just ask listerine® users. the very people we studied in the study of bold. people who are statistically more likely to stand up to a bully. do a yoga handstand. and be in a magician's act. listerine® kills 99% of bad breath germs so you can feel 100% in life. bring out the bold™. also try listerine® pocketpaks for fresh breath on the go.

welcome back. senator john mccain is not the only familiar face troubled by donald trump's current turmoil presidency. just this week leon panetta who has been the secretary of defense and head of the cia, among other things, told the "new york times" this.

i've never been so nervous in my lifetime about what may or may not happen in washington. i don't know whether this white house is capable of responding in a thoughtful or careful way should a crisis erupt. i spoke with mr. panetta last night and began by asking him whether he finds believable that report this week in the "wall street journal" which you heard referred to earlier in the show that people in the intelligence community are withholding critical information from president trump because they don't trust him. >> no, it's not. in my experience, i have never had intelligence officers who have a responsibility to provide full information to the president and to other leaders in the country ever withhold a piece of intelligence. so it's something that certainly hasn't occurred when i was there and i doubt whether it's happened this time. >> if you were running the cia and you had an intelligence officer say, i have a sensitive piece of information but it may be connected with this investigation that's going on

with the current president, in particular russia, this is the implication that was in "the wall street journal" story that somehow is anything at least in that sphere there is a concern about giving it to the president, you would have a hesitation of giving that information to the president? >> absolutely not. because your first responsibility is to provide the truth to the president. and if you start thinking about how the president's going to use it, what he's going to do with that information, then, frankly, you'll never provide the truth to the president. and that's what intelligence officers are supposed to do. >> so if you were head of the cia and you knew intelligence officers were doing this, would that be a fireable offense? >> absolutely. i think any time an intelligence agency withholds vital information to the president or withholds any key information to the president, that's a violation of their oath. >> so let's talk about though this issue with the relationship between this president and the intel community.

it's rocky to say the least. what do you hear on the morale front? >> obviously, it's not a good situation. because there is a lack of trust between the president and the intelligence community and between the intelligence community and the president. and, you know, every time he demeans the intelligence community or accuses it of leaks or accuses it of doing things that it's not doing, that obviously impacts on the morale of that institution. look, these are good people. they're not republicans or democrats. they're good patriots who are trying to do their job. it's a tough job. they have to put their lives on the line in order to provide information to the president. the last thing they need is to have a president who questions their patriotism to this country and to him. >> what is the -- if this continues, if this sort of cold war between the intel community and the president continues

where he believes that any bad story about him and a foreign leader or him and a situation having to do with national security is due to an intelligence leak and that's what he tells the public, what is the long-term impact on the cia? >> the bigger question is what is the long-term impact on the president of the united states and the decisions that the president has to make with regards to foreign policy and protecting the security of the country. that's his first responsibility is to protect the country. he can't do that without getting intelligence, without getting good intelligence as to what's going on in the world. and so ultimately, you do have to have a relationship of trust re-established. i hope mike pompeo, the new director of the cia, can do that. i hope that dan coates, the new director of national

intelligence, that he can help do that. i think jim mattis is trying to do that. so my hope is that ultimately that relationship can be re-established. why? because it has to be re-established for the sake of the country. >> but do you believe the president has a point on these leaks at all? do you think these leaks are coming from the intel community and that it is undermining his presidency? >> i -- chuck, you know, i -- i've been involved in politics for a long time. and i served two presidents and worked under nine presidents. leaks are a problem that every president has complained about. >> right. >> the presidents that i worked for complained about leaks. but the reality is that leaks come from all kinds of directions. the most important thing you can do to stop leaks is to establish loyalty between the people that are working for you and the president of the united states. if you establish that sense of loyalty, then he won't have to worry about leaks.

>> leann panetta. again, if i go through all your titles, i'll run out of time. it is always good to see you, sir. thank you for sharing your views. >> chuck, good to be with you. thank you. >> thank you. before we go, reminder of our podcast this week. the story of a high-flying lobbyist and a dark tale of power and influence in washington. the 1947 "meet the press" podcast, check it out on itunes or wherever you get your podcasts. it is a gripping, gripping story. when we come back, the latest thing that has a lot of americans worried, really worried. and it's something we talk about on this broadcast every single sunday.

welcome back. "data download" time. so how stressed out are you about politics? the american psychological association released the annual survey on stress in america. and 2016 was the first year the group asked about the impact of politics. i wonder why. 49% of americans say the outcome of the 2016 election is a significant source of stress. hillary clinton got 48% of the vote. familiar number there. 57%, by the way, say the same about the current political climate and 66% are stressed out about the future of the country. now it's not surprising is that this stress caused by the election results breaks down along party lines. 72% of democrats feel that stress versus just 26% of republicans feeling high levels of stress. and the levels of stress over

the election depend on where you live. 33% of rural americans are stressed about the results. 45% of folks in the suburbs and a whopping 62% of people in urban areas. all that not entirely shocking. urban and suburban voters were mostly for hillary clinton. now there was a stressor that did cross party lines, majority of both democrats and republicans say they are stressed out about the future of america. 76% of democrats and 59% of republicans. look, it's been over three months since president trump's election and the anxiety felt by many in the aftermath and relief felt by others continue to play a role in how americans are experiencing this new political reality. but the bipartisan concern about the future is something that may take presidential leadership and only presidential leadership to heal. when we come back, we have something else that should be stressing this new trump white house, falling poll numbers.

5 years ago, last week. just 1 pill each morning, 24 hours and zero heartburn. it's been the number 1 doctor recommended brand for 10... ...straight years, and it's still recommended today. use as directed.

back now with the panel. congress is away but the opposition is not. take a look at town halls from the weekend in a couple of republican districts over the last few days. here's some -- here's some clips. >> more access to health savings accounts scram. health savings accounts. i'm trying to give you some details. it's okay. scream.

>> are you proud to have him representing our country? >> given the two choices i have, i am thankful that mr. trump is our president. >> so that first rally donna edwards was tom reid, republican from new york. the second one you saw was senator tim scott. he was doing a joint town hall with congressman mark sanford. does that look familiar to you at all from back in the 2009 town halls? that democrats were experiencing? >> it looks familiar. i have to tell you. you can't avoid them. you can't do -- some members are choosing to do electronic town halls. to avoid the crowds. they better take them head on. republicans are going to face exactly what democrats faced then. it wasn't pretty. >> head-on the right call? >> and, remember, the republicans who are in office right now, more than half of them, i think it's over 60%, were not in office in 2009 and 2010. they don't know what the town halls look like and they don't know what it's like to put legislation together as difficult as this repeal and replace is going to be.

so they're kind of going this is brand new for so many of them. but i do think that you're right. taking it head on rather than looking like they're avoiding it. >> does congress have a -- do congressional republicans have a legislating problem to you, hugh? >> look at where -- barack obama had already signed a giant stimulus bill. george w. bush's tax cut was well on its way to getting completed. what major piece of legislation is off the starting blocks? >> only the budget reconciliation. the president's two biggest allies are mitch mcconnell and paul ryan. the southern gentleman and the boy scout and big brain are very important to make this work. i think at the town halls they cannot run away. they have to come with facts. this week aetna's head told "the wall street journal" that obama is in a death spiral. humana pulled out of obamacare this week. they have to sell the message there isn't anything left of what the president passed in 2009. they have to sell a replacement though. >> it's hard to adjust to the new world. everybody defers to the white house.

we assume all around the world, initiation starts there and then we react. but initiation is not starting there. so it's interesting to see who understands the new world and the asian leaders seem to get it. in japan, in china. they're like, okay, we have to be the actors. it's not going to be the white house. the europeans sort of get it. v. pute -- vladimir putin began to get it this week. he turned on trump, the russian media. they're going to start being more aggressive. congress, they have not quite gotten it. i think republicans say, no, we have to lead this thing. >> but 8 1/2 years, they should have the replace bill and ready to put it in front of the president. and the reason they don't is because they can't deliver pre-existing conditions, children under 26, making sure that you're really covered for wellness. these are the things that people want. and the people showing up at the town halls are not just democrats. they're republicans, too. they have health care. >> i want to show you, speaking of the issues with the president's popularity, two big polls this week, gallup, pew. putting up the pew numbers here.

39/56 approve/disapprove. a job approval rating below the number he got. the partisan split is obvious. i put up the independent numbers because as independents go, so goes this trump presidency if you believe the numbers. >> this is true. although, we know that the democrats still have a geography problem. and where they are the most difficult senate seats for them to hold are in places they need to win. democrats need to win republicans, not just independents. where some of these key house races are, they need republican lts, not just independents. the pew poll thing, what depressed me the most is remember when president obama came in 2013 and said the fever is going to break on this partisanship? i looked at that poll. the patient is in critical condition. the fever is spiked. it's not just a divide between d and r and i, it is the divide between gender and race and education is deeper and more significant than i've ever seen. it can't continue like this that we have two countries that are divided on those things for this long of time. it's super depressing. >> pause it here, especially when you don't have presidential

leadership right now that is trying to unify the country. he is focused on his base and his base alone right now. back in less than a minute with "end game." and the college that president trump loves to talk about most of all. system? try align probiotic. for a non-stop, sweet treat goodness, hold on to your tiara kind of day. get 24/7 digestive support, with align. the #1 doctor recommended probiotic brand. now in kids chewables.

back now with "end game." all presidents have their favorite answers that they fall back on and apparently president trump is no exception.

this week no matter the question or the setting, mr. trump wound up talking about -- well, see for yourself. >> we won by a very, very large electoral college vote. we are very honored by the victory that we had, 306 electoral college votes. we were not supposed to crack 220. you know that, right? we got 306. because people came out and voted like they've never seen before. so that's the way it goes. i guess it was the biggest electoral college win since ronald reagan. >> well, it wasn't quite the biggest electoral college win since ronald reagan, since his 49-state win, donald trump's electoral votes were surpassed by barack obama twice, bill clinton twice, and george w. bush once. so it is the biggest electoral college victory since the last election. david brooks, the question was about syrian refugees. the second was about anti-semitism. it's like if he doesn't want to answer the question, he falls

back on, "but i won." >> yeah. i don't know if there some conditional -- i mean a lot of people need to prove they're validated. he is a marketing guy. he got good numbers in the election. he won the election. he wants to go back to that. amy's written well about this. his supporters are a little transactional. he has to deliver for them. and so the numbers he should be focusing on are not what happened in the past. it is the fact that from 1950 to 2000 we had 2.3% growth in this country. right now we have 1.1% growth. so there are 11 million men out of the labor force. ex-cons wondering what to do with their lives. these are the actual numbers that he has to focus on not the political victory. >> he's got to turn this page. >> he keeps wanting to say -- what he wants to say, i speak trump, is i won the greatest electoral upset in modern history. >> so just say that. >> that's what he needs to say. don't call the media enemies, mark the self-regard. that's the way to go. he'll learn how to do. that when he does, the orchestra is going to get into tune pretty quick. >> but he's going to -- i don't think that's ever going to change.

>> it's a level of insecurity either about how he won or the fact that he did. we're not arguing that. he needs to start talking about governing. >> it's this i alone can do this, right? that's that goes back to what david is talking about. i don't need anybody else. everybody around this table said i couldn't win. all the smart people said i couldn't win. and we need government. no, we don't, i can do it by myself. >> he alone may be judged by the public on that front. before we go, a quick programming note. it will be a fun special for you to watch tonight. don't miss the paley center salute to nbc's 90th adversaries. 90 years. and we thought we were cool at 70. anyway, don't miss it. that's tonight at 8:00, 7:00 central. that's all we have for today. we'll be back next week because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." >> you can see more "end game" and post game" on the mtp facebook page.

>> announcer: due to mature subject matter, viewer discretion is advised. the gang member throws hot coffee in the face of a rival, leaving the man burned and possibly blind in one eye. losing both legs hasn't stopped another inmate from being part of a gang either. and one of wichita's most notorious gang leaders is back in jail, and this time he's got something to say.