secretary sean spice ear cording to politico has been checking staffers phones to stop those embarrassing leaks plaguing the trump administration. spicer's likely to get questions about that in about half an hour, when he takes the podium for the daily briefing by we will bring to you live. let's start with president trump's budget blueprint released a short time ago, basically the sales pitch he's going to make to the american people tomorrow night, during a speech before a joint session of congress. his priorities, his vision for america, his attempt to get republicans on one page when it comes to spending, taxes, health care and more, it's also his attempt to shake off some bad approval ratings, 44% according to a new poll from nbc news and the "wall street journal," that is a record low for a newly inaugurated president. >> this budget will be a public safety and national security budget that will include an historic increase in defense spending to rebuild the depleted

military of the united states of america at a time we most need it. [ applause ] this defense spending increase will be offis the and paid for by finding greater savings and efficiencies across the federal government. we're going to do more with less. >> all that, as the chair of the house intelligence committee, you're looking at him now, late this morning responded to darrell issa's call for a special prosecutor to investigate russia's role in the campaign. kasie hunt on the hill, hallie jackson at the white house. hallie let me start with you. let's talk about thi budget guidance basically that president trump has put up. what does it basically show about his priorities? >> reporter: what you need to know coming out of this, the president wants to spend a lot more money on defense, military and homeland security spending. take a look here, $54 billion is

what he'd like to boost the budget, increases to agencies not just the defense budget but homeland security, the cia. you can see him there, military programs and u.s. intelligence as well. cuts then because the promise has been to balance this dollar-for-dollar $54 billion added, $54 billion cut from agencies like the epa, like the state department, and interestingly and potentially problematically for some republicans on capitol hill, ali, no change to entitlement programs, no changes to for example medicaid, medicare. that is something that goes against a lot of republican orthodoxy so far amongst some of the budget folks on the hill. the president did talk, too, about health care reform during his meeting earlier this morning at the white house with the nation's governors. listen to what he had to say. >> we have a plan that's going to be i think fantastic. it will be released fairly soon. we'll be talking about it tomorrow night during the speech. i ask secretary price to work with you to stabilize the insurance markets and to ensure

a smooth transition to the new plan and the new plan will be a great plan for the patients, for the people, and hopefully for the companies. >> so the president talking today obviously about health care, about the potential eventuality of tax reform proposals that he'd like to push through. we're looking at some of the budget proposals more fully coming out in mid march. ali? >> also we are also talking revised immigration and travel ban, the executive order obviously the one that's been winding its way through the courts. what do we know about the new order? >> reporter: we've heard estimates from the president himself and from members of the white house administration talking about maybe two weeks, maybe it would be last week. it's looking like per from a senior administration official the new revised travel ban will be signed or put into place on wednesday, that is the day after the joint address to congress. we expect the president to be taking his message to the american people at some point so we're looking ahead to that, in

the middle of the week. lot going on, on the presidt's agenda and schedule. you saw him tweet about some of it, like health care. no tweets on the oscars fiasco from last night. >> no kidding, everybody's waiting for that. hallie, thanks a million for that. stand by, cassie is on capitol hill. sorry, kasie. hallie and kasie. i'm ali, that's hallie, that's kasie. kasie, let me ask you about investigations over the white house and the campaign and russia. clearly there are going to be some, but there are really different sides as to whether it should be handled by the senate or the house or an independent committee. where are we on this? >> a lot of back and forth over the weekend about these investigations into russian meddling in the u.s. election. centering around reports that the white house actually reached out to members of congress to ask them to republican members of duong ask them help rebut

this story first in the "new york times" about russian officials being in contact with trump campaign officials, we should emphasize nbc's reporting slightly different than what we saw in the "new york times" report, nbc reporting there were potential contacts between trump officials and russians, although those associations with any intelligence agencies are not clear, but we heard in a pretty unusual move the vice chairman or excuse me, the chairman of the house intelligence committee came before the cameras. he was quoted widely on the record in the press, he had talked to a number of reporters on capitol hill the week before last when congress was still in session and the white house asked him to call an additional reporter and h seemed to want clari ts idea that he wanted to be transparent. he said look, thiss something that i do all the time. this was not an inappropriate request but also acknowledged in the course what have turned out to be a 40-minute press conference he had not seen

evidence around the questions about the trump campaign's contacts with russians or russian officials. he is simply taking the intelligence community at their word at this point. take a look at some of what chairman nunez had to say just a few hours ago >> as of right now i don't have any evidence that would, of any phone calls, it doesn't mean they don't exist but i don't have that, and what i've been told is by many folks is that there's nothing there. >> reporter: so i pushed him, he said i've been told by many folks, i tried to get him to say okay, who are these many folks who are telling you these things, he wouldn't go there and he said just the intelligence community broadly but also acknowledged that the investigation on the house side, it's still in the very early stages. they are not yet at the point where they have received evidence back from the intelligence community. essentially they have to first write to them to say hey, these are the documents that we're looking for, this is what fits

into the scope of our investigation. then the intelligence community has to produce the documents so members of congress can review them. the question of course and the one that democrats in particular are raising is about whether it's possible to do a thorough bipartisan investigation in the house intelligence committee. democrats have a little more faith in what's going on, on the senate side but even then, there were some questions raised over the weekend, because chairman richard burr, the senator from north carolina, was also asked to speak with reporters around this "new york times" story to kind of push back against it. you had mark warner, the senator from virginia as the democratic vice chairman, he planned to raise those concerns with chairman burr, so as of right now, it's proceeding as usual but you have the one republican darrell issa asking for a special prosecutor. >> kasie it's a sign of the times you think this is proceeding as usual. this is where we are, all the

arguments and disruptions who investigates what, we're talking about speci prosecutor and that's what we think is usual. very telling. kasie hunt on capitol hill, hallie jackson at the white house, i'm ali velshi. i'll get everybody's name straight within the next couple of minutes. i'll bring a new name into the discussion, terry mcauliffe, democratic governor of virginia and a former chairman of the dnc. good to see you, sir. let's talk about the budget. president trump is promising a big jump in defense spending, probably about $54 billion, might actually benefit your state. >> yes. >> virginia gets more military dollars than any other state in part because of its proximity to washington but $53 billion is more than 11% of virginia's gdp, more than, about 250,000 people. how does someone like you fight that? how do you push back on the president saying that he's going

to bring in something that's going to benefit your constituents? >> well first of all, i support defense spending. i just left the president and the vice president at the white house. we've had all governors here for three days. i chair the national governors association. when i got up to ask the question a president i said if you're going to spend money let's get more aircraft carriers in the hampton roads region. i can use the jobs. i'm all for defense spending. exactly right, 27 military installations, the largest naval base in the world but a good question is how are we possibly going to pay for it. so i need to see the other side of the ledger. i'm all for it. how are we going to pay for it, are we increasing the debt, are we taking something away from individuals in this country? you want to put money in virginia i'm all for it, let's go. >> governor, you've had a lot of experience on the national stage. >> yep. >> you know $54 billion is not monopoly money, that's real

money. >> real money. >> the stuff you'd have to take off the table to get $54 billion without increasing taxes is very difficult. and there are a lot of republicans who don't want to see the deficit increase. from a mathematical perspective i don't understand how this is supposed to bourque. >> i don't either. he told me last night and vice president pence mentioned to me last night that actually said terry you'll be happy in virginia that we have increased defense spending. i didn't get any details on the other side of it. it is a tremendous amount of money. we don't want it to come on taking people's health care away from them or anything like that. so the big question is going to be how do you possibly with the go gigantic deficit the united states of america is running today, how are you possibly going to pay for it? i support it but i want to know how you're going to pay for it. the devil is in the details. we've had discussions on health care, what are they going to do. they talk about repeal. we can't have millions lose their health insurance, can't

build your economy that way. >> that is mathematics to me, right? >> sure. >> it's actuarial, it is economic. everybody would like everybody to have health care and not have a mandate and all sorts of terrible things but the bottom line is president obama tried to do it without a mandate. the math on this is really hard to make sense without a whole lot of people losing their insurance. >> no question about it, and i think the political rhetoric of a campaign, oh, first day in officebamacare will be gone has hit the reality of actually governing and when you have to governor, in virginia i have to balance my budget. we have to work closely in a bipartisan way and they have now come up with a very difficult -- they don't know what to do. they have 16 republican governors who expanded medicaid in their states, in fact vice president pence did it when he was governor and they are now saying we don't want to lose these expansion dollars. what do you do about a state like virginia which didn't do t unfortunately, i lost $8 billion

and this is going to be the real rub they have and the problem trying to figure out how do we do it? campaign rhetoric is easy. governing is much more difficult. you spend $54 billion on defense spending in addition? you're going to fix the aca at the same time you're going to get rid of how you pay for it? i think it's highly unlikely. >> all right, you were talking about meeting with the president, you got a shout out today from president trump during his speech before the national governors association. it was a discussion that you both had about immigration policies. let me just play this for my viewers. >> sure, sure, sure. >> i was talking last night to terry mcauliffe and he said you have to mention this and he said you have to get the point out that they're removing the bad ones, and that's where our focus is. it's the bad ones. >> tell me a little more about the genesis of that conversation. >> well yesterday, i met with general kelly. i have been very concerned in virginia. we had individuals coming out of a church who were in a

hypothermia center who were stopped by i.c.e. officials. the first person was a legal resident. i think this is chilling for the virginia economy. it's driving people underground, putting people not going to hospitals, it's putting individuals are not going to work with law enforcement. i was the first elected official i believe, i went out to an airport during the travel ban when that came out, you can't have discriminatory tactics. i met with general kelly yesterday, the head of dhs and i want to know the procedures of the united states ofamerica. when we finished theeeting i said can i convey to the american public that any illegal immigrant who is here today will not be deported, only be deported if you came here illegally and have been involved in a criminal enterprise. he said yes you could say that. so my message to nerve virginia is, if you are here illegally, you are not requestigoing to be deported. you'll only be deported if you're involved in a criminal enterprise. secondly i asked the general, he

said i could do that, no i.c.e. official also randomly stop anybody in our country. he said yes, you can say that. secretary general kelly, four-star marine general i take him at his word. i told the president last night at dinner, i said i met with the general. no one in america understands your policy, mr. president. they think everybody is being deported. i have legal residents in virginia scared to death. general kelly said this, he said you need to say it because that is not how people feel in this country. everybody feels they'll be deported. >> that doesn't jive with what people think. they think if you're here illegally you are subject to being deported. there's a distimpgs go ahead. >> i only can repeat what i'm told, the secretary of the dhs, general kelly, the president of the united states last night confirmed it for me, if you are here illegally, you will not be deported, unless you're involved

in criminal enterprises, so i'm going to hold them to their word. if they change it obviously i'll be aggressive but i'll take them at their word. >> if you are here illegally unless you have been involved in a criminal enterprise you will not be deported is the word you got from secretary kelly and the white house. >> correct, that's right. as you say most people don't know that and i told the president, you folks got to do a better job in why you are communication. you're hurting my economy because folks feel they'll be deported and that's not the case. you get up there and say it so that people understand it. shouldn't be just me. >> governor mcauliffe, thanks for being with us. >> thank you. >> governor terry mcauliffe of virginia. health care headaches, the president meeting there you go with health care executives at the white house this morning, promising to repeal and replace obamacare but what will his solution mean for millions of americans who rely on it for their health care? and live pictures from the white house where sean spicer is scheduled to hold a daily press briefing in about 15 minutes. we'll bring that to you as soon as it begins.

when that pain makes simple errands simply unbearable... ...i hear you. i hear you because my dad struggled with this pain. make sure your doctor hears you too. so folks, don't wait. step on up. and talk to your doctor. because you have places to go... ...and people who can't wait for you to get there. if you have diabetes and burning, shooting pain in your feet or hands... step on up and talk to your doctor today. [kids cheering] [kids screaming] call the clown! parents aren't perfect but then they make us kraft mac cheese and everything's good again. parts a and b and want more coverage, guess what? you could apply for a medicare supplement insurance plan whenever you want. no enrollment window. no waiting to apply. that means now may be a great time to shop for an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company.

medicare doesn't cover everything. and like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, these help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. these types of plans have no networks, so you get to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. rates are competitive, and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. remember - these plans let you apply all year round. so call today. because now's the perfect time to learn more. go long. 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.

i love to see businesses that just started from ground up grow into further success. it just feels good to know that i'm helping someone else. my first goal is to learn about their business, what they're currently doing in their advertising. pull some research, create a great story. trying to figure out some way of building some kind of trust in a very quick moment. you have to love to work with people. our goal, without a doubt, is that all customers are satisfied before they leave. ♪

we have come up with a solution that's richard lui i think ry good. i have to tell you, it's an unbelievably complex subject. nobody knew that health care could be so complicated. >> actually a lot of people knew it was that complicated. that was president trump talking about owe replacing obamacare this morning. he held a listening session with the ceos of the nation's largest health insurers, as republicans

continue to introduce legislation to repeal and reduce the health care bill. provides expanded tax credits and health savings accounts, reduce tax subsidies and medicaid, creates state-based high risk pools for the uninsured, provide no guarantee for people with preexisting conditions, which is something they said they were going to maintain, and zeros out penalty for violating individual and employer mandates. it would also cut planned parenthood funding. we expect to hear more about this and a lot of other news in a few moments at the white house press briefing. first joined by michael sperre, you and i have spent some years talking about this, but to say it's not, it's complicated. we've known that for a long time. >> sure. >> the basic point of complexity is paying for it. right, that was the one that everybody likes this idea and then they realize that in order to have health care for everybody particularly the sick.

>> costs money. >> costs money and you got to have the healthy buy in. >> right, that's correct. >> so knowing what you know about where we are right now, explain the road we go down. >> as you said it's complicated. the trump administration comes in and says we're going to reveal, get rid of obamacare and replace it with something terrific. then comes the devil in the details. when it comes to covering the uninsured, 22 million covered by obamacare, about half of them are covered via medicaid expansions and the other half by private health insurance through the exchanges. so there's two separate paths that the conversation is going on right now, as we speak. >> right. >> the other day, president trump met with the governors. he was talking about the medicaid expansion right now. let me step back for one second. medicaid is a complicated program. medicaid covers about 75 million americans, about $600 billion a year so it's a big program. the way the program is funded, the states and the feds split the cost of the program. this is a program that affects

just about every american, one in five americans. >> generally somebody's parent are on it. >> somebody's parents are on it so now the question what do we do about the medicaid expansion. the aca says expand medicaid and the supreme court says you don't have to, it's an option. 31 states expanded the medicaid program aund the aca. of those 31 states, 16 had republican governors. what are you going to do with the expansion? 11 million people of the 75 have coverage through this expansion. the question is, what are you going to do? one problem that they have is there are some republicans who say you know what? the way we could save money for the federal government and secure medicaid going forward is convert the program into what they call bloc grant, basically instead of the feds and the states splitting the cost the feds say to the states here is an amount of money, you deal with it and the trouble is with inflation during a recession, et

cetera, it might not be enough money to cover everybody. people are going to lose out. people will lose their health insurance. >> those people on medicaid who got it through the aca, the medicaid expansion, they are at risk. >> they are definitely at risk at this point. the one thing they have that's really going for them, though, is about half of them, if not more, live in states with republican governors and there's billions of dollars coming to the states now to the republican governors are in a situation we got to have protection for our people. we can't throw the people on the street. we can't have all the people lose insurance and can't have the state lose this money, we can't have our hospitals lose the money so there's a big debate what's going to happen with medicaid. >> in reducing medicaid and the tax subsidies, people will now receive we think a tax credit to purchase health insurance based on their age. we're giving you this example, a person underhe age of0 is elible for a $2,000 credit person over the age of 60 is eligible for $4,000 tax credit.

bottom line, are we going to be paying more or less for health care or don't we know? >> it's really interesting. if you have tax credit, right now the credits, the subside tax credits for the insurance and exchanges are based on income, not age. if you're low income, if you get a bigger subsidy, if you are higher income, smaller subsidy or no subsidy at all. >> right. >> the administration is saying let's get away with income based subsidies and tax credits based on age. in theory you could have a wealthy senior who is going to get potentially $4,000 tax credit while a very low income young adult is going to get a $2,000 credit. so if you're young and you're healthy, maybe that tax credit will be enough for you to buy a catastrophic hsa that will cover you if you're hit by a car but if you're older and sicker, that $4,000 tax credit is not going to be enough to pie health insurance for you. one interesting i think this one interesting fact.

the insurance industry has been complaining under the aca they're only allowed to charge three times as much for the older folks as the younger. they're saying thwe should be ae to charge five times. under the trump proposal the older folks only get a tax credit of two times as much as the younger folks so it's going in the opposite direction. >> it's complicated as we like to say. you'll be with me many times to continue to have this discussion. michael sparler from the columbia university school of public health. do you believe you'll get better health care coverage if obamacare is replaced by a new. plan? cast your vote at pulse.msnbc.com. we'll check your results later in the show. president trump this week expected to unveil a revised executive order on immigration, this morning, former president george w.ush weighing in on whether he thoht president trump's travel ban would be effective. >> i am for an immigration policy that's welcoming and that

upholds the law. >> is the ban the answer? sean spicer scheduled for the white house press briefing. we'll bring that to you as soon as it begins. 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.

come close, come close. i like that. [ all sounds come to a crashing halt ]

ah. when your pain reliever stops working, your whole day stops. awww. try this. for minor arthritis pain, only aleve is fda approved to work for up to 12 straight hours with just one pill. thank you. come on everybody. aleve. live whole. not part.

in what's being billed as a major blow to al qaeda a u.s. drone strike in syria has taken out al qaeda's number 2, the son-in-law of osama bin laden. if confirmed, this would be president trump's first successful strike against such a terror figure. i want to bring in ali suffan, a

security research firm, former senior agent with the fbi, and spent a lot of time investigating al qaeda. you said to me sometimes that in all of this isis noise, we have forgot than al qaeda is still an operationally strong and dangerous place. what's the significance of this? >> al qaeda is actually strategically way more dangerous than isis. al qaeda controls amazing swathe of land in yemen. they are very effective in idlib, in syria. al nusra has thousands of members fighting in syria. aqap went before -- >> al qaeda affiliates. >> in yemen went from 1,000 before the war in yemen to more than 4,000 to 5,000 today. >> wow. >> al qaeda is growing and just remember ali, on the eve of 9/11 bin laden had 409 members who pledgeed aleenlg yans to him and

al qaeda. today the affiliates have thousands and thousands of people. keep in mind isis was an affiliate of al qaeda. >> and they broke away. >> and this hit is just a reminder about the importance of syria for the mutation of al qaeda, the current mutation of al qaeda and also important that this individual is one of the original members, one of the leaders of al qaeda who joined al qaeda especially with the merge between the egyptian lamicihad and al qaeda. he was on the shura council, he was the head of the political committee under osama bin laden. he was one of the council that actually voted for the operation of 9/11. almost everyone on the shura council voted against it but him and zawahiri voted for the

operation. >> and zawahiri is now the boss. >> now the boss. now the other person on the day of 9/11, bin laden asked his security chief and his secretary to put the satellite on so he can watch the operation. he was with him and then him and bin laden were watching or were hearing about the operation unfolding on bbc arabic and voice of america. this is, this person is not only the, you know, son-in-law of osama bin laden, he is one of the original owe jipgs egyptian members of al qaeda. if you look at al qaeda central zawahiri is chief but you have abu has mad al masscy,

masterminded the east africa embassy attack, still there. you have leaders who were with osama bin laden from the beginning still involved with the group. >> you mentioned the growth of al qaeda in yemen. yesterday the father of the navy s.e.a.l. who was killed in the first counterterrorism operation that was approved by president trump spoke out to the "miami herald" calling for an investigation into his son's death and what he called a stupid mission. you and i were together right after this happened talking about this mission. the president's anti-terrorism reputation took a hit on this one. john mccain even came out and said it was hard to call this a success, america lost a major aircraft, civilians were killed and this navy s.e.a.l. was killed. this father is saying don't hide behind this mission to cover up that it wasn't a success. >> there are a lot of questions about this, and these questions, we raised it earlier, you and i, but also senator mccain raised it and the press raised it and

many involved in the national security field raised these questions. just before the operation, it was obvious for the s.e.a.l.s team and for the people who were involved in the planning that the operation has been compromised, and al qaeda know that they are coming, but the order came in to keep pushing and go in to basically a place where it was a disaster. we lost one navy s.e.a.l., three other were injured. we lost an aircraft. 30 other people were killed, including women and children, and yes, you know, our guys killed 14 al qaeda members, too, but this operation was supposed to be an intelligence collection operation. an intelligence collection you don't have this disaster. you don't have this carnage. so i think it's very legitimate to ask what happened, and we already have different versions between the obama administration and between the trump

administration. >> the obama administration had been planning it. >> regarding the planning phase and the approval of this. was it approved by the obama administration? was it not, obama administration claim, no. we didn't prove it. >> just planned it. >> if we want to do something in yemen this is up to the next president to decide if you want to go to yemen or not. is a complicated situation. the trump administration you know, stated that, no, obama approved it and they just carried out the operation as has been approved by the former administration. >> if the al masri thing is true that is a success for donald trump. >> this is a big, big deal. i mean, this is the number two individual in al qaeda, one of the people who were involved in the planning of 9/11, khalid sheikh mohammed gave a brief to the senior leadership of al qaeda at his house in kabul immediately after 9/11. this individual is really big, really huge and it's a great hit. >> good to see you my friend.

thank you for joining us >> thank you. >> ali soufan, head of the soufan group. president trump is refusing to answer questions whether he supports a special prosecutor to investigate ties with russia. is it going to happen? we're still waysing for press secretary sean spicer to take the post for the daily press briefing. i was energetic. then the chronic, widespread pain drained my energy. my doctor said moving more helps ease fibromyalgia pain. he also prescribed lyrica. fibromyalgia is thought to be the result of overactive nerves. lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. for some, lyrica can significantly relieve fibromyalgia pain and improve function, so i feel better. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions or suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worsening depression, or unusual changes in mood or behavior. or swelling, trouble breathing,

rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects are dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain and swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who have had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. with less pain, i can be more active. ask your doctor about lyrica. i did... n't. hat? hey, come look what lisa made. wow. you grilled that chicken? yup! i did... n't. smartmade frozen meals. real ingredients, grilled and roasted. it's like you made it. and you did... n't.

e*trade's powerful trading tools, give you access to in-depth analysis, and a team of experienced traders ready to help if you need it. it's like having the power of a trading floor, wherever you are. it's your trade. e*trade

press secretary sean spicer is expected at the podium for his daily briefing now. the reporters are assembled. he'll be facing questions on this very busy news day about the administration's budget outline today and questions about whether a special prosecutor should investigate trump's associate's contacts with russia. joining me now is eli stokels from politico and white house correspondent for politico. good to see you. short time ago the chairman of the house intelligence committee devin nunez said there was no need for a special prosecutor to investigate the trump campaign ties to russia and the only serious crime was the leaks. that's contrary to what congressman darrell issa said over the weekend. let's listen to that. >> you cannot have somebody, a friend of mine, jeff sessions, who was on the campaign and who was an appointee.

you're going to need to use the special prosecutor's statute and office to take not just to recuse, you can't just give it to your deputy, that's another political appoint gee. you do have to do that. >> okay, so eli, is that just posturing or is it significant? issa is calling for a special prosecutor for special investigation. nunez is not? >> politics plays into this big time. issa was reelected narrowly and as for nunez, he's the chairman of the house intelligence committee and yet you have to question the independence of that body with him in charge, given that this is the person who the white house who sean spicer the press secretary has enlisted to speech reporters to defend the administration for them. and i talked to nunez because spicer facilitated that conversation on friday, and the interesting thing to me is that nunez and spicer respect' on the same page and nunez says when he

asks the fbi if there are communications between the trump campaign and russians they've told him no, which is something that sean spicer and the white house have said there were conversations the fbi is investigating. it's a matter of whether they were frequent and constant as some news outlets have reported. the white house disputing that but not the calls took place. interesting there. >> we've got the picture of the white house on the screen. i want to bring in robert costa, "washington post" msnbc political analyst. this falls into my category the budget. the president is talking for maybe about a 10% spike in defense spending. this is tens of billions of dollars. he says there's not going to be a tax hike. he says there's not going to be a deficit increase, but it's really hard to cut $50 billion plus from the rest of the budget. thinking back to the sequester

we tried this already it's hard. >> it's very difficult and part of the challenge for the trump administration is figuring out how to pay for some of the changes to thebudget. they want to increase military spending, trump, the president will be giving a speech later this week. we're told on military spending to back up what he says on tuesday night to congress, but he's also facing some challenges. does he have a border adjustment tax to try to get some revenue for the federal government as he makes some of these changes with his tax plan, and of course with his budget. it's part of what steve bannon talked about last week, the so-called deconstruction of the administrative state. you see it in the sweeping proposals to many of these agencies. >> robert i'll ask you to hold. sean spicer is at the podium for the briefing. >> -- mick mulvaney to talk to you about the president's budget when director mulvaney is finished we will allow him to take a few questions, and then resume the briefing and all the fun that foes with it. so without any further adieu, director mulvaney.

>> thanks very much. i want to talk about the budget blueprint most of you know president started speaking about this morning with the governors, talk a little bit about what it is and what it isn't, and then talk about where we are in the budget process and what it looks like from here. first of all, what this isn't. this is not a full blown budget. that will not come until may so you're not going to see anything in here that has to do with mandatory spending, entitlement reforms, tax policies, revenue projections or the infrastructure plan. this blueprint was never going to be that as i made clear during my senate confirmation. it say top line number only. as for what it is, these are the president's policies as reflected in top line discretionary spending. to that end it is a true america first budget. it will show the president's keeping his promises and doing exactly what he said he was going to do when he ran for office. prioritize rebuilding the military including restoring our nuclear capabilities, protecting the nation and securing the border, enforcing the laws currently on the books, taking

care of vets and increasing school choice. all of that without adding to the currently projected fy 2018 deficit. the top line defense discretionary number is $603 billion, that's a $54 billion increase, it's also the number that allows the president to keep his promise to undue the military sequester. the top line nondefense number will be $462 billion, that's a $54 billion savings. it's the largest proposed reduction since the early years of the reagan administration. the reductions in nondefense spending follow the same model, the president keeping his promises and doing exactly what he said he was going to do. it reduces money we give to other nations t reduces duplicative programs and eliminates programs that don't work. the bottom line the president will protect the country and do so in exactly the same way that every american family has done over the last couple of years, prioritize spending. these numbers will go out to the

agencies today in a process we described as pass back. review from agencies are due back to omb over the course of the next couple of days and we'll spend the next week working on a final budget blueprint. we expect to have that have that number to congress by march 16th. that puts us on schedule for a full budget including all the things i mentioned this one does not include with all the larger policy issues in the first part of may. so with that i'll take a couple questions. >> in order to get to your top line on the rest of the discretionary budget f you're not going to touch veterans benefits, you need to slice about 12% off of the rest of government. can't do you that without affecting the services that government provides for the people? >> that's part what have this process is this week. the numbers go out, and the numbers each agency will get its top line number along with representations from omb as to how we think they can hit that number. they may say yeah that's a good

way to reach that number or come back with us with other projections. it's unusual for us to come to you this early in the process but we wanted to let everybody know where we were. >> we're talking about double-digit reductions that,'s athat's a lot. >> expect to see exactly what the president said he would do. foreign aid the president said we'd spend less money overseas and more of it here, that will be reflected in the number we send to the state department. >> thank you very much. one quick follow-on that, accounts for less than 1% of overall spending and i just spoke with an analyst even if you zero that out it wouldn't pay for one year for the budget increases being proposed right now. how do you square that and why not tackle entitlements the biggest drivers when a lot of republicans said over the years they need to be tackled. >> foreign aid the same answer i just gave, it's a fairly small part of the discretionary budget but consistent with what the president said. when you see the reductions you'll be able to tie it back to

a speech the president gave or something the president said previously. we are taking his words and turning them into policies and dollars. so we will be spending less overseas and spending more back home. i forgot your second question. >> on entitlements. the biggest driver of spending. >> very unusual to -- this is a budget blueprint what some folks used to call a skinny budget and it would not be unusual for larger policy decisions including tax reform revenue projects not to be included. >> building the military doct-- >> hold it on could we see -- >> it will contain the entire spectrum of the program's policy changes. >> on rebuilding the military, can you talk more about the breakdown of that? >> no i can't because again where we are in the process is that the number is going to the dod today and over the us for of ten days to two weeks we'll be coming one those details. i got time for one more. yes, sir? >> you're going to increase the

military budget but are you going to ask the people in the defense department to take a look at their budget and say where can we cut or look and make sure we're spending the right amount of money? >> absoluly. >> part of that is part of the process? >> secretary mattis is interested in driving more efficiencies into the defense department, omb is also going to be involved with him on a procurement process, all of that will be incorporated in our larger budget in may. >> not just like a blanket. >> no, sir. last one. >> is this a count for spending the president's wall the $34 billion you'll ask for this year or the $54 billion, is that included money how to pay for the wall? >> it will be more than likely a lull bit of both. we expect to include some money in a future supplemental for 2017 for the wall and a 2018 budget will also contain longer term dollars. >> split up between the two? >> i believe that will be the case. thank you all very much. >> thank you, director. so let me get back to -- be with

you in a second, april. this morning, the president dropped by the national governors association meeting where 49 governors from both states governors from states and territories joined cabinet members and senior white house staff. while at meeting, the president delivered a statement on his forthcoming budget proposal which he'll submit to march 16th, as you heard the director mention. the president's budget will first and foremost keep americans safe. that means investing in our nation's physical and financial security. we'll rebuild the nation's military and increase defense spending, including increase in spending for our veterans and borders will be matched by equal deductions in nonspending programs. it will come from looking at outdated and duplicative programs. it will be sensible and rational but they will also be tough. with our nation's debt spiraling out of control, we simply must take a look at the way we're spending taxpayers' dollars. families across the country are

being forced to make difficult choice because for too long the federal government has not treated their money with the respect they deserve. the national debt exploded in the last administration from $10.6 billion on january 20, 2009 to $19.9 trillion the day before -- those are both trillions, the day before the president's -- president trump's inaugural. every child born in america this year will inherit an average over $60,000 in debt and that, frankly, is too much. funding all of the necessary programs to keep our country safe and prospering. this meeting with the governors was a continuation of a weekend of engagement and discussion between the governors and administration. the president and first lady welcomed the governors last night to the white house for the annual governors' ball and last night the vice president had a productive meeting with several governors. we are proud to work with governors are rebuilding the nation's infrastructure,

restructuring the health care and obamacare was put in place without a lot of input from governors. we're committed to consulting them on this and so many other subjects as we solve the nation's issues together. this morning the president had a listening session with some of our country's leading health care insurance companies. interestingly on yesterday's abc this week minority pelosi laid out a way with obamacare. it had three goals. one, to lower the cost, the other to expand benefits and the third to improve and increase access. so, let's go through her criteria. lowering costs. this year all four tiers of obamacare insurance plans are facing double-digit increases in average premiums. to take a look at one set of premiums for standard silver plans in the states, 63% increase in tennessee, 69% increase in oklahoma and a staggering 116% increase in arizona. on expanding benefits n reality

the new laws' mandates have led to mass cancellations of coverage, soaring out-of-pocket costs and declining enllment figures. millions are choosing to pay tax over buying the government-mandated insurance. increased access. with insurance fleeing the marketplace, americans are facing a dwindling number of insurance choices with 17% of americans left with only one insurer option available in their exchange. insurers will be indispensable partners out of obamacare into the patient's first plan the president will be working with congress to put in its place. the president's plan will encourage innovation, modernize our health care system and provide immediate relief and ensure access to quality, truly affordable care. this afternoon the president had lunch with vice president pence and ambassador haley. afterwards he's having a meeting with speaker ryan and majority leader mcconnell. following that he'll be meeting with secretary of state tillerson. the secretary is coming off a successful trip to mexico where he was joined by secretary of

homeland security kelly. i'm sure the president is looking forward to discuss that trip with the secretary. this afternoon the vice president will be speaking to an extraordinary group of 60 presidents of historically black colleges and universities. there will be a pool spray at the top of the event and the vice president's office will release his remarks and photos following the event. we can expect a meeting with the president with them as well. this evening the president will have dinner with regional press affiliates in town for the joint session of congress. while it's tradition for representatives from the networks to meet with the president before his joint address, this is the first time, to my knowledge at least, that the opportunity has been expanded to include representation from 18 regional outlets from around the country. tomorrow the president will also have the traditional lunch with the network anchors beyond the so-called big five networks we also opened it up and invited telemundo, univision, ewtn, oan, c-span. the president will meet wilbur ross.

secretary designate ross has been a champion for struggling industries in private sectors. pending his confirmation, he'll do in the same pos for american people as he has donin pvate sector. we expect to have his swearing in tomorrow here at the white house. also tomorrow the president will deliver his first address to both houses of congress. in his speech the president will lay out an optimistic vision for the country, crossing traditional lines of party, race, socioeconomic status. as i said before, the theme will be the renewal of the american spirit. he will invite americans of all backgrounds to come together in the service of a stronger and brighter future for our nation. in addition to laying out the concrete steps the president has already taken to make the american dream possible for all of our people, he will talk about the bold agenda he wants to work with congress. this includes tax and regulatory reform, to provide relief to hard working americans and their businesses, making the workplace better for working parents, ensuring the families who have

suffered under obamacare's skyrocketing rates see it replaced with a patient-centered alternative, making sure every child in america has access to good education, rebuilding our military and reaffirming our dedication to veterans. can you see a speech grounded in solving real problems for every american. how can we make sure every american who needs a better job get one. how can we get kids trapped in failing schools into better ones. how can we keep drugs and gangs out of our neighborhoods. the president will address those people who have been waiting for their leaders for too long and let them know help is on the way. we'll have a background briefing here in the briefing room. we'll provide additional details later in the afternoon. as you might already know, the department of defense presented its preliminary plan to the white house today to defeat isis. this plan has been delivered by secretary mattis who is currently briefing the principals on the option presented today and seeking their input and feedback. finally, i wanted to note the

president continues to be deeply disappointed and concerned by the reports of further vandalism at jewish community cemeteries. the cowardly destrucon in philadelphia comes on top of similar accounts from missouri and threats made to jewish community centers around the country. the president continues to condemn these and any other anti-semitic hateful acts in the strongest terms. from our country's founding we've been dedicated to protect our citizens' rights to freedom of worship. the president is dedicated to preserving this originating principle of our nation. while we're at it, i don't want to get ahead of law enforcement, but i was asked the other day about the story in kansas, the shooting in kansas. while the story is evolving, early reports out of kansas are equally disturbing. so, with that, i'd be glad to take your questions. john? >> reporter: sean, there's a report this morning that you reached out directly to the cia director pompeo. did you directly contact

director pompeo and ask him to knock down "the new york times" story on the russian connection? >> thanks. if i may, let me walk through the entire timeline. as i mentioned, i think a week ago, "the new york times" published a story about what they called contacts between members of the trump campaign and russian officials. the fbi deputy director is at a meeting here at the white house that morning. after the meeting concluded, he asked chief of staff to stand back a second. he wanted to tell him that the report in "the new york times" was, quote, bs. for viewers at home, i think pretty much figure what that means. but ail legal it at that. at that time the chief of staff said, thank you for sharing that with me. can we let other people know that the story is not accurate? throughout the day they went back and forth to see what they thought was appropriate. finally came to the conclusion that they did not want to get in the process of knocking down every story that they had issues with. we then were informed that other people had come to the same

conclusions, including at that time chairman nunez told us, i've been knocking this down, telling reporters we shared a number of a reporter that contacted us. and, again, when the reporters contacted us and we said, no, to the best of our knowledge, that's not true, they were asking us, can you point to anybody else that can substantiate this. and i think we did a good job of saying, sure, we will share with reporters other people who have come to the same conclusion. so i won't go into the specifics. i will say i think we did our job very effectively by making sure that reporters who had questions about the acuk accura and claims in the "new york times" we were pointing them to experts who understood whether or not that story was accurate or not. just to continue to be very, very clear on this. it was about the accuracy of the reporting and claims made in there. plain and simple. about whether or not a story that appeared in "the new york times" was accurate. individual after individual

continued to say as far as they knew, they weren't. i think most of you probably saw chairman nunez's comments this morning. he was very clear this morning, number one, he reached out to us to y, i've been telling people, reports, that these allegations and descriptions in "the new york times" are not accurate. and then we shared that information with him. but he came to us to share that he equally had that issue brought up to him. he was briefed and saw, quote, no evidence that the story was accurate. so, the answer is, you know, we have continued to give reporters information and sources that went to the accuracy or lack thereaft thereof of a report in a newspaper. and i think chairman nunez equally said it's interesting how we literally were engaging with the press saying, if you have a question about the sourcing on this, obviously when brought to our attention, we said, it's not accurate, as far as we know. but then most of you and your colleagues who inquired would say, we t