♪ good afternoon, i'm stephanie gosk at msnbc world headquarters in new york. we start with breaking news. president trump has fired u.s. attorney preet bharara of new york's famed southern district. known as one of the nation's toughest prosecutors, bharara refused to step down after the president ordered 46 of the remaining u.s. attorneys appointed under barack obama to step down on friday. but the context here is very important. back in november, the president personally invited bharara to trump tower and asked him to stay on. bharara accepted. this is bharara after that november meeting -- >> president-elect asked presumably because he's a new yorker and is aware of the great work that our office has done over the past seven years asked me to discuss whether or not i would be prepared to stay on as

the united states attorney to do the work as we have done it, independently without fear of favor for the last seven years. we had a good meeting. i said i would absolutely consider staying on. i agreed to stay on. i have already spoken to senator sessions who is, as you know, the nominee to be the attorney general. he also asked that i stay on and so i expect that i'll be continuing the work with the southern district. that's all i have. thank you. >> investigationings swirling around the white house, it is a stunning reversal. mon, ka what are officials telling you? >> reporter: steph, all officials are referring us to the department of justice, so no official reaction yet. but of course this news is coming as a bit of a surprise given the fact that he met with president trump, as you mentioned, after the election and sources telling my colleague tom winter that mr. ba ra ra actually planned to go to work

on monday. so this is totally coming as a surprise. this is something where he essentially said he was fired for refusing to resign and he spelled that out as much in a tweet saying earlier today i did not resign. moments ago i was fired. being the u.s. attorney general in the southern district of new york, will forever be the greatest honor of my professional life. so this is important context. it's important to note that he was overseeing some very high profile cases, both on terrorism and public officials in new york. so this will have a lot of repercussions and ripple effect given the department of justice has asked these u.s. attorneys to step down. this was one who was expecting to stick around through this at least beginning of the administration, steph. >> have we heard anything from the other 46? >> reporter: no. we're awaiting reaction. but as i said, there are a few others who may be thought this was going to be more of an outcome, though.

it's unclear that this early on in the administration this was not something that was expected. it came as a surprise, but this is one who definitely has some history with the president. so that is what is notable about his exact reaction. >> absolutely. to talk about that history, joining me now is dan clamman the deputy editor at yahoo news. dan, nice to see you. >> good to be with you, thanks. >> let's start with the reversal. do we have any idea why it happened? >> it's really bewildering. you know, preet bharara clearly was shocked himself that after having been told that he was welcomed to stay and that the president wanted him to stay, the attorney general wanted him to stay that he gets this call asking him to submit his resignations along with all of the others. just the day before, attorney general sessions was on the phone with all the u.s. attorneys. he never said anything about this. he said apparently at the end of

the call happy hunting. and then this happens. you know, there's no -- no one called him. no one told him about it. and the white house, the justice department did not explain to the press -- didn't do any ground work to explain why this happened. and so, you know, i guess the first -- my gut reaction is it may just be a bad rollout. may be incompetence, but it does raise a whole lot of questions about why it happened the way it happened. >> and that really is the question here. is this just anger over the process or are we talking about something else? i want you to listen to sean hannity on fox news demanding that trump purge all obama appointees. take a listen. >> for weeks we've been warning you about the deep state obama holdover government bureau cats who are hell bent on destroying this president, president trump. tonight it's time for the trump administration to begin to purge

these saber tos before it's too late. >> is there -- listening to sean hannity there, do you think that the anger with obama leftovers has grown to such a pitch that the trump administration has said, you know what, we want them all out? >> look, that may be. and it's worth reminding the viewers that u.s. attorneys are essentially patronage appointees and serve at the pleasure of the president. it is not remarkable, in fact, it is expected that the u.s. attorneys will leave so that the new president can appoint his u.s. attorneys. the thing that's weird about this is the way it happened. you have to wonder whether it was intentional. i said earlier that perhaps it was just incompetence, but it seems so incompetent that you have to wonder whether there was maybe some method to the madness, that this was actually -- the trump white house wanting to show some muscle and wanted to make a

statement along the lines that you're suggesting that, you know, we want them all out. in fact, i saw an unanimous quote in one of the stories i read of someone, white house official i think saying we want them all out. so perhaps that's what's going on here. but, you know, it is raising all these questions. it is another distraction that the trump administration does not need right now. one of the questions that people will be asking, you know, important to say there's no evidence of this, but is there some investigation going on? is there a case that preet bharara has that's confidential that hasn't come out yet that they're concerned about? those questions will be asked because of the way this was handled. >> it's interesting that you bring that up because one of the things that people are speculating about is this -- just a few days ago the ethics watchdog group asked bharara to investigate trump organization ties to foreign governments.

is the timing suspicious here? >> look, i mean, trump's businesses are based here in new york. and so, if there were a criminal investigation into his real estate businesses, his conflicts of interest, any other kind of investigation, it is not at all -- would not at all be surprising for the u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york to do that investigation. there's no evidence that that is the case, but that certainly is a possibility. and, you know, we're not at the point where there is enough smoke here at all to suggest that there's a fire, but it is just kind of head scratchingly unusual that it would be handled this way. although i have to say, there is -- there has been a pattern of these kinds of clumsy rollouts and not the white house, the justice department not having the wherewithal to

figure out how to explain this to the press, how to provide the context so that people wouldn't misinterpret what happened and perhaps that's what happened here again. >> dan, you spent some time covering the now former u.s. attorney. do you expect him to come out and explain this to the american public? >> i do. he's already -- look, he's a pretty brash guy, was very aggressive u.s. attorney, and he is not shy at all. he's already tweeted that he was fired as opposed to submitting his resignation. that's the first indication that preet bharara is not going to go quietly, but it's just his personality to be out there. he knows a lot of reporters, to be in front of the cameras, and i suspect that soon in the next 24, 48 hours we're going to hear from him again. that will i think probably help us understand whether it was just that he was angry at the

way this was handled or that there was more there or something in between and we have to wait and find out, i guess. we will hear from preet. >> some clarity would be nice. that's for sure. thank you very much for joining me. >> absolutely, thanks. turning now to nbc news investigation reporting tom winter joins me on the phone with more on how this played out today. tom, what are you hearing? >> reporter: well, stephanie, i think it kind of started yesterday afternoon when we got the announcement from the justice department saying that 46 u.s. attorneys appointed by president obama would leave. and then we found out through folks that we talked with that they all had to be out by midnight last night. so, it came as a total surprise not just to preet bharara, not just to his office but to the other 45 u.s. attorneys. not a surprise that those 45 u.s. attorneys were going to go, but a surprise in that some of them were told that they have

until may on a conference call this week, the weekly conference call with attorney general jeff sessions. he encouraged them at the end of his call saying happy hunting, not indicating at all that these u.s. attorneys were going to have to leave and leave with fairly short notice. again, most of them knew that they would be heading out, but the one that thought he was definitely going to stay was preet bharara, who handles the district -- one of the largest if not the largest district for the justice department has a tremendous amount of cases just because of the nexus to wall street. it's the district where wall street is. it's a district that handles a tremendous amount of terrorism cases. he is absolutely taken on a lot of public corruption cases in new york state. so this is somebody who had met with donald trump. i know at the top of the hour you played a clip of him coming out of that meeting. he's a very, very precise guy. if you meet with him, if you

speak with him, watching him at a press conference or at an event, you know that he knows exactly where he's going and what he's going to say. and for him to come out of the meeting with donald trump and say that i've been asked to stay on and i'm going to stay on, there was no ambiguity about that. so what is surprising here is that he was one of the 46 people asked to leave yesterday. as i mentioned before, he was absolutely taken by surprise by all this. and had come to the conclusion earlier today that he wasn't going to resign. he had no intention on doing it. and we're told through multiple sources and multiple officials that he planned on being in the office on monday morning. >> tom, let me ask you this. in looking -- a lot of people -- this name is going to be new to them. can you describe just a few of the cases that he has pursued to kind of get a sense of the bipartisan nature of a lot of his investigations.

>> reporter: that's a great question. so, just in new york state alone he's investigated democrats, investigated republicans as a state legislature level. he's been able to get convictions in those cases on public corruption charges. he's looked into -- he's looked into democrats. he's looking -- as a matter of fact, the case is in the latter stages close to being wrapped up, bill de blasio is a democrat. he's looked into governor cuomo's office. he's looked into -- he's got an active case involving anthony wiener, the disgraced congressman for messages he may have sent to an underage teen. he's also gone after wall street insiders as far as insider trading cases. he's looked at people across a vast spectrum. and i'm not including in that terrorism and counterintelligence case which is are cases that his office is continually looking at. so he's been a fairly equal opportunity prosecutor when it

comes to democrat versus republican if people are looking at this from a political standpoint. as far as cases that his office is looking at now, his office looks at cases just like all the justice department districts look at cases. some of which we never hear about because they never come out of the grand jury or investigative stage. some of those cases later become cases that were brought to court and people are charged. so, as far as him maybe looking at something now and did that lead to a change as far as him being in office, we've heard nothing to indicate that that's true at this point, so obviously, you know, so much of this has happened in literally 24 hours because it was about this time yesterday that all this started to happen. so, it's a little early for us to kind of get a sense on that. >> all right. well, a lot of people scratching their heads. tom winter, thank you very much. we'll have much more on this story throughout the hour. but next, vice president mike pence in kentucky today to convince voters that trump care

is the best option for medical coverage. plus, an attorney from the aclu gives us his take on whether trump's revised immigration order will stand up in court.

the trump white house hitting the road today to sell the obamacare replacement. vice president mike pence was in lieu wiville, kentucky promoting a plan that's taking heat from all sides. >> despite some of the fear mongering from those on the liberal left, i want to assure the people from kentucky who might be looking on this morning, we're going to work with the congress and work with our agency in health and human services and we're going to have an orderly transition to a better health care system that makes affordable, high-quality health insurance available for

every american. >> pence acknowledged their replacement plan isn't popular with everyone in kentucky. a red state that cut its uninsured by half because of obamacare. >> i know that not every politician in kentucky supports our plan to repeal and replace obamacare. i know your former governor has been defending obamacare all over america and might have something to say about my visit here today. and i welcome the debate. >> but that debate is coming from the right as well. noticeably pence didn't mention that replacement plans fiercest ran paul who vowed to vote against the bill in its current form. msnbc joins us me live from louisville. marianna, pence spoke to kentuckians today. was pence's real audience fellow republicans in congress?

>> reporter: so stephanie, as you mentioned, the big elephant in the room was kentucky senator ran paul. it is very likely that vice president mike pence came to paul's backyard here in kentucky to pressure him and fellow republicans in congress to back the gop's health care plan. you know, but he also referenced the crowd before him. it was a select group of business leaders, louisville business leaders from this business bliehind me to whom he make the economic argument to repeal and replace obamacare. let's listen. >> today, one third of the state is on medicaid. as your governor has said over and over again, it's unsustainable. and medicaid here in kentucky is threatening to bankrupt this state. folks, this just can't continue. i promise you, it won't. >> reporter: but also remember

stephanie, because so many people were covered here thanks to obamacare because of medicare expansion mostly, the state's uninsured population dropped from 20% to around 7% after obamacare was implemented. that's why you also saw hundreds of protesters outside this event here today with a simple message for vice president mike pence -- we want to keep obamacare. we're happy with it. and we want affordable health care for all. stephanie? >> mariana the vice president taking it from all sides today. thank you very much. house republicans say they expect their obamacare replacement to pass by the end of the month. the plan drops the employer and individual mandates. adds tax credits in place of certain subsidies and freezes obamacare's medicaid expansion. the bill does keep some popular parts of obamacare in place, people can stay on their parent's plans until they're 26

and insurers would continue to cover people with pre-existing conditions. joining me now is aarp david sertner. they have come out against the republican replacement bill. thank you very much for joining me. >> thanks for having me. >> you have a number of concerns about this bill. how does it hurt seniors? >> well, i think it hurts seniors in a number of ways. first of all, it reduces funding for medicare. it hurts the stability of the medicare program. secondly, it's going to spike premiums those not yet eligible for medicare by as much as 8,000 dollars. and it also is going to put a threat for the care for the 17 million children and dumts with disabilities and poor seniors who rely on medicaid for their long-term care and home and community-based services. there's a lot of people at risk under this bill. >> are there parts of the bill that you think you can work with, that you support? >> well, we're certainly happy that we kept some changes to the

bill, like the prescription drug coverage. that was done in the aca and pre-existing conditions. the age 26 rule for children on a plan. those are good pieces, but one of the big things we're concerned about is affordability. if a 50 to 64-year-old is going to pay as much as $8,000 more for insurance, that's simply unaffordable and there will be many millions of people potentially losing their insurance. >> what are your plans at this point, david, to fight this bill? >> well, one of the first things we're doing is trying to educate not just the general public but also people on capitol hill. we're not sure if everybody appreciates that the changes in this bill will dramatically spike premiums for older americans. there are luckily a number of studies coming out this week. we're all waiting for the official scorekeeper, the cbo to give their numbers next week. but in the meantime, we're trying to let people know that these are dramatic increases in premiums that are really going to hurt older americans. >> david, thank you very much

for joining us. >> thank you. the latest now in the legal fight over president trump's travel ban, maryland becoming the latest state to join in a lawsuit that seeks to stop the temporary travel ban. the trump administration has been hard at work on the ban since releasing its original version on january 27th. the new travel ban is designed to with stand tougher court challenges. the executive order set to take effect next week bars entry from six majority muslim nations, including iran. a judge will hold a hearing on the case wednesday. but how will it play out in the courts? joining us now is legal art of the american civil liberties union. there's a growing list of states challenging this travel ban. do you expect even more states to join in the fight? >> it's hard to know, but i suspect there may be more states and more individuals challenging. and i think no one really is fooled by the fact that they tweaked the bill in response.

we're pleased they were treated on some issues. it's discriminatory on the basis of religion. >> how much harder is it to win those court battles now that these what you call tweaks have gone into effect? doesn't that make your job a lot harder? >> well, you know, it's always impossible to predict how cases will come out. we think judges will see behind what's going on. i think one of the things that the supreme court has said over and over and that courts in this battle have said is we have to take into account context. i think the context is fairly clear. the president said he wanted a muslim ban. he has continued to say things that suggest that that's what he's doing. his advisers have said it. it's language in the first order and the second order that are thinly veiled references to islam. so i think courts will see through what's going on. >> but one of the critiques of that ninth circuit decision was the fact that, yes, candidate

trump at the time called it a muslim ban, but he also changed his position a bunch of times in that you can't go back to a campaign and use what the candidate said as context for this executive order. and that they've come back and it's just six countries and they're saying this is not a muslim ban but really about the security of the country. >> right. that's an important point you raise. first of all, i don't know that he has sort of changed his policy position or their advisers. they said they were going to try to get around the court cases. that's very different than saying we don't still want to ban muslims. his policy advisers said, look, we're going to do the same policy, we're going to try to get around the court cases with technical changes. the other thing is within the orders themselves there's discriminatory challenges. reference to honor killings which is a nod to islam. >> they do cut down the number of people that fall under the

umbrella that will be affected by it. isn't that a step in the right direction? >> they take out iraq, so that's good. but there's still six countries. the other thing people forget, it's these six countries but also a worldwide ban on refugees. so that is going to harm an enormous number of people. and also keep in mind that the first order said we're going to look at these things for 90 and 120 days. it's already been a significant amount of time. you think they would be revising the policy. the this new order restarts the clock at 90 and 120 days again. the other thing i would stress is they -- the administration said this is urgent. urge gent that we do this. look how long it took to revise the order. they still didn't release it for political reasons they felt they were getting good press off the president's speech. that sort of i think belies the notion that they even feel this is urgent for national security reasons. >> well, they were also criticized for the way they

rolled it out with running it by other agencies and for not taking the time that they needed. >> right. but i think they even said they delayed it for reasons unrelated to that. and just from a national security standpoint, it's not just us saying this is not the way to do it. i mean, their own -- the dhs national security officials, there was a leaked memo suggesting this is not the way to do it. it will actually not work. then there's national security experts from both sides who submitted affidavits in these cases saying this is going to make us less safe rather than more safe. all those things will be taken into account by the courts. >> thank you for joining me. >> thank you for having me. u.s. attorney preet bharara tweeted just a short time ago that he's been fired after he refused to step down. now he's released a statement that says in part, one hallmark of justice is absolute independence. that was my touch stone every day i served. i want to thank the amazing

people of the southern district of new york, the greatest public servants in the world for everything they do each day in pursuit of justice. more of that statement and our political panel will weigh in on the story next.

so with our ally cashback credit card, you get rewarded for buying stuff. like what? like a second bee helmet with protective netting. or like a balm? you know? or a cooling ointment for the skin. how about a motorcycle? or some bee repellant. i'm just spit-balling here. nothing stops us from doing right by our customers. ally. do it right. told you not to swat 'em.

( ♪ ) i moved upstate because i was interested in building a career. i came to ibm to manage global clients and big data. but i found so much more. ( ♪ ) it's really a melting pot of activities and people. (applause, cheering)

new york state is filled with bright minds like victoria's. to find the companies and talent of tomorrow, search for our page, jobsinnewyorkstate on linkedin. good afternoon, i'm stephanie gosk at msnbc world headquarters in new york. here is what we're following. an intruder identified as 26-year-old jonathan trand breached the south grounds of the white house late last night. the president was inside when it happened. the intruder claimed he was there for a meeting with t president which was false. here is what the president had to say about it. >> secret service did a fantastic job last night. i appreciate it. secret service did a fantastic job. it was a troubled person. very sad. secret service was fantastic.

>> an appreciative flth. the secret service issued a statement saying that the suspect was arrested without incident and was not armed. vice president mike pence made a stop louisville to make the case for the republican health care plan in a sharply divided kentucky. breaking news this afternoon, the justice department has just fired the so-called sheriff of wall street. that's preet bharara, the u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york, including manhattan. he's known for going after corruption, sending democratic and republican lawmakers to prison, 46 u.s. attorneys were ordered late yesterday to resign immediately. all of them are holdovers from the obama era. so most expected to leave, though not so suddenly. bharara who you see with the headline whacked above his head was not ready to obey attorney general jeff sessions. he met with mr. trump back in new york at trump tower. here is what bharara said back

then about the president and the man who let him go today. >> we had a good meeting. i said i would absolutely consider staying on. i agreed to stay on. i have already spoken to senator sessions who is as you know the nominee to be the attorney general. rob joining us and democratic consultant evan. evan, we just got a statement from bharara that says in part, quote, today i was fired from my position as u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. one hallmark of justice is absolute independence and that was my touch stone every day that i served. what's your reaction to that statement? >> well, it's a sad day for justice. bharara was non-partisan fighter for good government. he put a lot of corrupt people in jail and new york state thanks him for that. and to do it this way,

unceremoniously is just unfair to the legacy of a great man. >> rob, turning to you. this is quite a reversal. what do you think is behind it? >> well, i think there's a bit of drama here being created out of what is a pro forma exercise by this white house, which is to name their own u.s. attorneys. mr. bharara is high profile. he has an exemplary record. he should be congratulated and thanked for that. it's the prerogative of every president to put u.s. attorneys in each of these offices. apparently there was some agreement, according to mr. bharara, that he would stay on. i don't believe that's been an official statement from the white house or during the trump administration. >> rob, unique to bring him to the trump tower in a public way that he certainly didn't need to do, right? >> look, the presidential transition and trump tower had a lot of oddities involved in it.

yes, i don't want to defend if he was poorly treated and not as if there's been a ton of consistency through the transition in the first 50 days of this administration, but the bottom line is, these u.s. attorneys serve at the will -- the pleasure of the president. he certainly has the right to ask them to move on. frankly, mr. bharara should resigned when asked and may be doing a bit of grand standing today. >> evan, let me ask you about that. surely bharara knows he serves at the pleasure of the president and would have to honor a request to resign. so what is behind this? he had to have known that not resigning was going to create some sort of issue. >> look, this is just another example of the unpredictability of the white house and it's damaging to the reputation of the government. what do we do with all these cases that are now left unattended? it wasn't like in past years where -- or in past years where president first came in and essentially notified all of the attorney generals they were going to be leaving their jobs.

he selected half or so to leave. why is that? we don't know. we do know that preet bharara was presiding over very serious corruption cases in new york and he also has a district that encompasses trump tower and the home address of donald trump. so it's a little odd that this would happen the way that it did, especially for a person that as you noted went after republicans as much as he did democrats. >> rob, let me ask you this, a source tells nbc news that one office for u.s. attorney actually found out about this on twitter. is this an example of the trump administration just mishandling this? >> well, i think there's been many things that probably could have been handled better in the past 50 days and this very well could fall into that category. i don't want to defend process. this is obviously a white house that has factions within it that are pushing and pulling for the president's attention and decision making.

this may not have been done in the best way and without the most respect to these individuals that served their country well in those positions. i agree with evan, i think it's interesting that they basically released half of the u.s. attorneys or not the other half or those other half going to be replaced as well? most things with this white house, it would be nice if we had more information and more things were explained, but they're perfectly within their rights to do this. this is a very pro forma action to take for a new president. >> they're within their rights, evan, but you might ask why the trump administration is getting rid of a u.s. attorney who has this reputation of being this nationally known corruption player. >> right. being within our rights and doing the right thing are two completely different things, right? and this administration has just fired a person that was exemplary at his job. again, did it in a non-partisan way. it is also tradition for the president to keep some

republican appointees if their democrats. some democrat appointees if they're republican. we don't know what this president's plan is? does he have a philosophy about the department of justice? he launched this incredibly controversial travel ban in some ways will have to be defended by the department of justice and implemented by the department of justice. and how is that going to work now? who is in charge? what are we doing next? this is all about the unpredictability of the white house and continuing narrative that puts the government in a very bad position. >> stephanie, i think it's important to note. it's not as if the cases cease to go forward in these offices. the deputy is now in charge. investigations continue. mr. de blasio is probably not off of the hook. so until we see who the president appoints to this position, who could be someone equally as exemplary as this u.s. attorney has been, i don't think we should prejudge that

somehow there's some motive here in order to diminish the abilities of this office. >> but rob, certainly the attorney general has a lot of hiring to do now. >> he does. yes, he does. >> all right. rob stutzman and evan thies, thank you both. >> thank you. republican lawmakers facing hostility from voters in their home districts concerned about their future medical coverage. we'll have a live report from inside congressman darrell isis town hall meeting in california. k or is it your allergy pills? break through your allergies. introducing flonase sensimist. more complete allergy relief in a gentle mist you may not even notice. using unique mistpro technology, new flonase sensimist delivers a gentle mist to help block six key inflammatory substances that cause your symptoms. most allergy pills only block one. and six is greater than one. break through your allergies. new flonase sensimist. ♪

so we know how to cover almost alanything.ything, even a "truck-cicle." [second man] how you doing? [ice cracking] [second man] ah,ah, ah. oh no! [first man] saves us some drilling. [burke] and we covered it, february fourteenth, twenty-fifteen. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ announcer: get on your feet for the nastiest bull in the state of texas. ♪ ♪ la quinta presents,

how to win at business. step one: ask the presenter to "go back a slide." well played. you just tossed a mind grenade into into your colleagues' dulled senses. look at them, "what did i miss?" he one-upped me once again. step two: choose la quinta. and your la quinta reward points can be redeemed for everyday purchases on the go so you can win at business. learn more at lq.com today.

back-to-back town halls today for republican congressman darrell issa of california. the focus was health care. like many republican town halls before it, demonstrators gathered outside to protest the repeal and replace obamacare. cal, what were these demonstrators -- what was their main message today?

>> reporter: you know, the main subjects were the affordable care act, immigration and president trump's relationship with the russian government. that's what people came out. that's what they wanted to hear about. now, congressman issa is in a very interesting position. he's the richest man in congress. but this is a changing district. the 49th congressional district in california is changing, shifting and it's shifting because of all the issues that we've been talking about. we've been seeing this across the country, but it's certainly true here. the congressman's been dealing with these protests not just today but outside his home saufs close by here in vista for weeks. people have been pushing him to do these town halls. one of the more contentious moments is when he talked about medicare and medicaid. take a listen. >> one of the challenges i have -- because when i go back to washington, this isn't a new problem. governor schwarzenegger tried to deal with it during his time. california needs to step up the

plate for a 50/50 on medicaid. if we do, it should work. >> reporter: they were a number of those con ten jotentious mom. the last election here was very ugly, a lot of money went into tv campaigning. and both parties are hoping that they'll be able to take it during the midterms. now, as far as the congressman goes, we asked him on his way out, does he plan on holding more of these? he says he will hold more town halls in the coming weeks to hear more from his constituents, stephanie. >> cal, tell me about what people expect about that fight in a couple years? >> reporter: yeah. what's really interesting act it -- sorry, there's somebody on the beach here. what's really interesting about that fight in the last election it was almost 50/50. there was a difference in 1,600 votes in this district. 1,600 votes, which is really a small margin of error. so you have democrats who really want to make a play for this district, but they have

competing primary process here and that's something the democratic party is working on, planned parenthood was out here today. they were a big part of the protests and organizing group. when you talk to members of planned parenthood, especially those who organize the process, they'll tell you they're really trying to push to take back some of the districts where the margin of error was so close. >> look out for the beach goers bind you. they look dangerous. >> our camera man jumped in the middle. thank you, stephanie. >> all right. coming up on monday, chris hayes and senator bernie sanders head to mcdowel county, west virginia to speak with local residents about the issues impacting their lives. we'll hear firsthand how residents view the new health care proposal and the overall thoughts on president trump's performance. don't miss in all in american bernie sanders in trump country on monday at 8:00 p.m. eastern only on ms nbc. be right back.

afoot and light-hearted i take to the open road. healthy, free, the world before me, the long brown path before me leading wherever i choose. the east and the west are mine. the north and the south are mine. all seems beautiful to me. to take advantage of this offer on a volvo s90, visit your local dealer. 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. whether it's connecting one of or bringing wifi to 65,000 fans. campuses. businesses count on communication, and communication counts on centurylink.

i had a wonderful time tonight. me too! call me tomorrow? i'm gonna send a vague text in a couple of days, that leaves you confused about my level of interest. i'll wait a full two days before responding. perfect! we're never gonna see each other again, will we? no-no. wouldn't it be great if everyone said what they meant? the citi double cash card does. it lets you earn double cash back. 1% when you buy and 1% as you pay. the citi double cash card. double means double.

damage control at the c.i.a. aphthouses of documents were leaked on the internet. was it an inside job? cyber security expert thinks so. he'll join me after the break. we'll have more on the breaking news we've been following. u.s. attorney preet bharara fired after refusing to resign, this after he says he was given a personal assurance by then president-elect that he would be able to remain in his job. stay tuned for more on that. way to say this. it's over. i've found a permanent escape from monotony. together, we are perfectly balanced. our senses awake. our hearts racing as one. i know this is sudden, but they say...if you love something set it free. see you around, giulia here's to the wildcats this i gotta try .. bendy... spendy weekenders.

whatever kind of weekender you are, there's a hilton for you. book your weekend break direct at hilton.com and join the weekenders.

c.i.a. is still reeling from a stunning security breech this week. thousands of stolen documents, including the agency's alleged spying techniques were published on the internet. officials are still assessing the damage, but a former c.i.a. official suggesting investigators need look no further than inside this agency to find the suspected thief. >> this data is not shared outside c.i.a. it's only inside c.i.a. it's on c.i.a.'s top secret

network, which is not connected to any other network. so, this has to be an inside job. >> the white house has expressed concern over the leak. this latest setback highlighting an already strained relationship between the president and the intelligence community. for more on this, i'm joined by michael baker, former c.i.a. operative and founder of diligence llc. michael, thank you very much for joining me. >> sure. thank you. >> i want to start first, do you agree this had to be a c.i.a. insider? >> frankly, anybody who is former c.i.a., whether myself or the individual who just made that comment doesn't know for certain. we shouldn't know, right? so whether all this information was, as was put, held only inside the agency or whether we had arrangements with contractors, outside providers, companies that are assisting that's been using their techniques and expertise for advancing the ball, i don't know. that's just speculation. is it likely that this was a

result of a reliance on contracting and contractors? it's quite possible. again, we have the issues with edward snowden and with hall martin at nsa. so, but again, the method by which you identify who the perpetrator is, who did this is fairly straight forward. it's a step by step, very labor intensive process, but the first step typically is that you gather up all the individuals who had access to this information. and sometimes that's a very small list and it makes your job a little easier. sometimes as may well be in this case because of the size of the effort, it could be a very long list of individuals. both staffers and contractors. >> well, let me ask you this, michael, what would be more alarming that it was an insider or that our system, which protects some of the most important secrets the country has was somehow breached and hacked? >> well, yeah. neither one is good. that's a brilliant statement,

isn't it? i suppose in a sense these things typically come as a result of an individual. what i mean by that, i think what we'll find is that it wasn't the system that was breached from the outside. it was that somebody for whatever reason they were disgruntled, didn't get enough hugs, they disagree with the point of spying and using technology to protect national security interests, whatever their reason, it's likely that this falls down on an individual. but again, obviously the caveat there is speculation at this stage in the investigation. >> let's turn to the information itself, michael. the cyber weapons have become so important to the security of the country. how much damage has potentially been done here? >> well, really sort of the holy grail here of questions. a lot of the material so far it looks like was classified at a low level, at a secret level which by itself indicates a lot of the information may have been

archival, may have been historical nature, may not have been deemed to be particularly sensitive, but still important. overall, the 30,000 foot level, any time you release information that provides insight to our enemies about our focus, about our efforts in research and development, our technology, whatever it may be, any time that happens there's a potential for some serious damage. at this stage of the game when you're talking about 9,000 plus documents and possibly what could be the first of a few dumps if you believe what wikileaks is saying, yes, you have to assume the worst. so this causes a wide variety of ripple effects. one of those is you have to play out what's the worst thing that could happen? you have to play that game constantly. so it's -- this is a serious matter. people aren't underestimating this. when they talk about how potentially damaging, they're serious. they're not doing it for dramatic reasons. >> michael baker, thank you very

joining us. >> thank you. >> appreciate it. that does it for us here on msnbc. stay with us, we have much more news in the next hour. just like the marines did. the process through usaa is so effortless, that you feel like you're a part of the family. i love that i can pass the membership to my children. we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life.

youthat's why you drink ensure. sidelined.

with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you. very good afternoon to you. we have breaking news we're recovering this hour for you. president trump has fired u.s. attorney preet bharara. bharara is what "time" magazine once calmed the man that busted wall street. and it's top cop. he leads one of the most independent and prolific prosecutorial districts in the country. that's new york southern district. this comes after the president ordered the remaining 46 u.s. attorneys across the country that were hired earlier either by the previous administration and earlier presidents to step down friday. bharara refused. he was then fired. bharara has taken down big corruption cases involving both political parti.