that's the most important number of the day. that does it for this hour. i'm kasie hunt in for steve c n kornac kornacki. if it's friday, there's one thing president is not immune. from controversy. tonight, a presidency on the brink. and an ousted white house adviser says he has a story to tell. >> is the white house concerned that general flynn has damaging information about the president? >> no. >> plus targeted trolg. life ill tamitates art. >> it can't get enough. >> how the russia real life cyberer attack strategy. >> sometimes you can't get what you want. this is "mtp daily" and it starts right now.

good evening. i'm chuck todd in washington. welcome to friday's "mtp daily." we begin with a presidency on the brink of irrepair. yes, it's early. after 70 days the white house faces a very real possibility of cascading crisis. tremendous damage has been done tots authority and its ability to govern and things seem the just get worse. because the president arguably keeps making them worse. his agenda is stalled so he has declaredar by threatening consvave republicansnd democrats. more and more in his own party are bucking him and in some cases, mocking his attempts at vengeance. the president refuses to acknowledge and he is doubling down on homes and misinformation. arguably a disastrous place to be for a presidency just 70 days

old. now we've learn that had the president's former security adviser michael flynn wants immunity to testify on russia. and remember, folks asking for immunity doesn't mean you're guilty of a crime. that's not an argument that mike flynn or president trump can creditably make. >> the very last thing john podesta said, nobody is too big for jail. that should include hillary clinton. five peel around her have been be given immunity to include her former chief of staff. when you are given immunity, that means you've probably committed a crime. >> and ring leaders were given immunity. if you're not guilty of a crime, what do you need immunity for, right? >> the white house said today that mr. trump wants flynn to testify. but president trump defend flynn's request for immunity by calling the investigation a witch hunt after he called it a hoax. the president's comments today were rejected if i top

republican on the house oversight committee. >> is this a witch hunt? >> no, i don't think it is a witch hunt. it is very mysterious to me why all of a sudden general flynn is saying he wants immunity. a, i don't think congress should give him immunity. if there is an open investigation by the fbi, that should not happen. >> questions that the white house' interference of a house probe of russia are also piling up. remember, this is like a side bar story compared to these other two issues. after "the new york times" and "washington post" reported that the white house itself fed the information to the top ally, in this case, be devin nunes, in an attempt to use the investigation to prop up the president's baseless claims that president obama wiretapped trump tower. for the past eight days, sean spicer has gone out of his way to mislead the press on this particular story. >> would you rule out that the

white house or anyone in the trump administration gave chairman nunes that information? >> i don't know what he actually briefed the president on. i don't know why he would brief the president on something we gave him. that doesn't make a ton of sense. i'm not aware of it but it doesn't really fast smell test. >> why would nunes need brief the president? >> that's a big assumption you're making of the to jump to that conclusion is frankly irresponsible of. >> do you have any commitment to what you said on monday, to how that happened in a process -- >> i don't have anything for you at this time. >> you told us that you're willing to look into it. >> and i am of. >> and provide us answers of. >> no, no. please don't put words in my mouth. i never said i would provide you answers. he said we would look into it. >> there you go. that's just spicer's spin on this one topic. then there is escalating war with conservatives in his own party after threatening to

campaign against them that 2018, he has begun to single some of thoilt on twitter. it should be obvious but president trump has a temperament problem. he cannot compartmentalize or let things done. if you're always fighting the last fight, you're going to be blind sided in the next one. ask yourself, is this president pr prepared to lead if there's a crisis? and how might our enemies answer that? i'm joined now by washington super lawyer, he was chief counsel had. mr. lowell, gals to see you. let's give me some legal clarity here. mike flynn asked, his lawyer asked for some form of immunity, number one, saying he has an inresting story. we now know the senate said o soon, no thank you, notet. different ways have interpreted that. but explain why asking for

immunity is not an admission of guilt. >> it is a little iron pick both president trump and mike flynn himself during the campaign made those ridiculous statements, that if somebody gets immunity, they must be guilty of something. that's clearly not the case although i think they'll to have figure out how to explain what they went. what it is is a device by the senate, or an agency, steeks ability to get somebody's testimony, and their testimony can't be used against they if the justice department then comes after them in a criminal case. people don't quite get right. it is called use immunity. it doesn't mean you can't be prosecuted. i means your words can't be used against you. it makes it three times harder to get a prosecution. >> let's look at the way this story is. nobody has 100% confirmed, it appears that mike flynn is among the folks the fbi is investigating. that if he is not at the center of the investigation, he is certainly within a few yards of

the center. if the justice department is in an active investigation of him when he is testifying before the senate, how would the immunity apply? or at that point what would happen? >> so if immunity occurs, at any point in the process. s what happens is a mad frenzy by prosecutors thoeflt box up all the information they have at that moment and show somewhere, someplace, some time that they had it without regard to anything he said. people remember that that became an issue when the senate and the house gave immunity to oliver north. it was found the government could prove the evidence they had against him was untainted by what he had given in immunity. so if you get immunity, the prosecutors who bring your case have a burden of showing that not only they're not using the words, but nothing derive from your words to be making the case against you. >> i'm glad you brought up

oliver north. he had immunity but he still was prosecuted. >> but ultimately the prosecution failed and was reversed because the immunity tainted the case. >> so this is why, if you look at oliver north, this is why you want immunity. >> and i thought his lawyer did a very good thing for him by trying to be as provocative to say, saying he has story to tell, trying entice congress to give him immunity. saying my guy, i don't care what the ramifications of immunity is. >> what is you're in the white house staff right now? or the nsc staff right now? is it time to lawyer up? >> well, speaking as one the of lawyers in the washington community, yes, it should have happened yesterday. and my number -- no, no. what i really think is, it is too early to lawyer up. not everybody needs a lawyer, period.

the people who are the targets or the focus basically are already consulting. when you say you're at the nsc or whatever, not everybody who has spoken to mike flynn needs a lawyer. and i want to say something that people get lost. there's a lot of rhetoric like anybody who gets immunity may have done something wrong. there may not be anything under this. and i believe as we believe that presumption of innocence means something. having said that, if you had to draw a line where you have to lawyer up, where you have mike flynn, that's a good place. >> why would the senate feel as if they needed to get him immunity if the fbi is in the middle of an investigation? what would be the motivation to essentially, to disrupt it. that's what they would be doing. >> only two reasons why either the congress or a prosecutor would give anybody immunity. reason one is because they can't tell the whole story without

that person, period. >> that they are the lynchpin. >> i would say, person x to person y. that's the first or the second. but you're on to it. they are that link in a chain and without that nk, it does not work. okay? the second reason is related. they need that person to rat out somebody higher or more important and they think the person that they will get evidence about is either more culpable or more important to go after than the person who gets immunity. >> if you were mike flynn's lawyer today and you saw the president's tweet this morning, which indicated no, i want him to get immunity. he should ask for it. would that make you happy or nervous? >> if you were his lawyer urgs would be very happy because you would think that would influence the congress. does mike flynn know something about the president? we don't know. that's the psychology we won't know. if you're protecting mike

flynn's interests, you'll do everything fobl get him congressional immunity which will put a big monkey wrench in any prosecution they would want to bring. if you're anybody else on the planet, you don't want him to have immunity. >> so he may be investigated with some things have nothing to do with the russia issue. he has this entire turkey episode, too. at what point do they get link asked the immunity gets linked? >> so understand the contours of immune. we pews phrase -- >> that's what i'll worried about. >> if i got immunity and i went before congress and i was asked, russia, russia, russia, and never asked a question about turkey, turkey, turkey. then your immunity on russia won't stop the government from finding evidence about turkey. and they could still prosecute you about both. the lynchpin is that if you're given immunity for what you say, a prosecutor has to prove not only did they not use what you

said, but didn't get any evidence derive from what you said. it is theoretically possible that he could be asked questions about what he did in white house. >> there is a reason healls you the smartest man in washington. appreciate you being here. >> let me bring in the panel. business kristol is the editor at large. the national political reporter for politico. welcome all. okay. eliana, this is a white house that feels fates totally off the rails now. do they grasp how off the rails it is? >> i think they do. i think the vast majority of people in the white house and the president himself grasp that things are going awry.

the question is who is there to put it back on the rails? and i'm not sure there is anybody. >> i think a white house in which a mid level staffer is looking for the most sensitive documents and then sharing them with a congressman, a chairman of a committee, outside of channels, not notifying his boss, a superior, or to whom he doesn't report, that is a white house that is asking for huge trouble. if you look at the history of white house scandals, this is often how they begin. >> and we haven't even gotten to the underlying problem. they are compounding all of their problems because they're panicking. they're inexperienced, turning on each other and the president is consumed by it. there is to compartmentization of this. >> and you worked for a president under investigation in bill clinton. he figured it out. there is a point no matter how much you're in denial.

no matter how much you're angry and seething. he found a way to compartmentalize and say i still want to govern. >> you put a team together. you isolate. you don't gossip about it internally. now you have like staff are turning on each other. and you saw in the "washington post" story today about the nunes meeting, that the staff trying on save each othe >> iis clear he that se white house staff are dropping on others. >> the clinton white house, i don't think sandy berger allowed mid level staffers to free lance, to take orders from some other -- >> that is such a recipe for disaster. you're breaking various protocols in how you're handling classified materials and you're creating the situation.

why will they not say who cleared him? i've cleared thousands of people in. you did. if it is no problem, who was it? the reason they don't want to say is that that who it was gets asked immediately, who did you talk on while you were doing all this research in. >> and we're learning more, there is a 30-year-old in charge. it's crazy. >> general mcmaster tried to fire this person. >> tried to move him over or fire him. >> tried to remove him. the national security council staffer by the name ezra cohen-watnick had developed a relationship with jared kushner, appeared to him and steve bannon who took case to the president and he the president overruled his national security adviser. so really, i think this russia issue is not that complicated.

either investigators will find trump campaign that's the will had inappropriate contact with the kremlin or they did not. what i think is amazing, this white house has managed to stir up so much controversy in the course of this investigation and undermine its own case. that i think it really does make the case that there is a lot of dysfunction going on. >> it is not this white house. it is one individual. the president cannot compartmentalize. he cannot let the story go. he ss it is a ohio vallhome. what's wrong saying, they went after marco rubio and ted cruz. how do you not say that? >> should you say that. may be he doesn't, you think just have an investigation. if he wants to appoint joe le

lieberman. >> 60 days. maybe he doesn't want the truth to come out. can we just be honest? >> when people keep blowing smoke and doing these complicated things, if inuse a clinton example. one reason they didn't come clean. we had the sail conversation in february, march, april, in 1998. why didn't he just let people know what happened? because there was a problem. i don't want to make this painful for you. >> none of it bothers me anymore. >> there's a coast armor. >> yes. it is, no one is more concerned than me. no one wants to get to the bottom of this more than do i about what really happened with russia. at least give lip service to it and say you want to understand what happened. they can't even see clearly enough to know that's a smart thing to do. >> when you talk about the one individual, i would add if the

president was interested in burying the scandal, he has taken step that's have hurt him. it is not like he wasn't warned that mike flynn was cozy with russia and he might not be the best person for security angle. and it blew up in his face. the president has made some bad decisions that have added fuel to the fire of this scandal that seems to be ultimately the biggest issue here. all right. we haven't even gotten to the party infighting yet. unbelievable. we'll pause here. you're-stick around for the hour. the truth money stranger than fiction when it comes to the strategy. when i saw on it homeland sunday, i saw testified on thursday. stay tuned.

so much lobster, so little time. at red lobster's lobsterfest any of these 9 lobster dishes could be yours. so don't resist delicious new lobster mix and match or lobsterfest surf and turf because you won't have this chance for long. they also know you need to getg your annual check-up. now with one touch using the mycigna app you can find a doctor in your plan's network to save money. need to be thorough.

i'm ricardo, a sales and service consultant here at the xfinity store in bellevue, washington. here at the store, we offer internet, tv, phone, customer service, home security. every situation is a little different. it could be about billing, simple questions like changing the phone number. sometimes, they want to upgrade, downgrade, but at the end of the day, you want to take care of the customer. one of the great things about comcast, there's always room to move up. of course, it depends on you, how hard you work. ♪

welcome back. as mitch mcconnell weighs the so-called nuclear option to confirm gorsuch to the supreme court, he now says he regrets using that to get president obama's judges through senate in 2013. in fact the democratic leader told the associated press, we made one mistake. we shouldn't have changed the rules for lower court judges bust we never did it for the supreme court. has the much bigger mistake on their behalf. well, schumer is referring tot to the so-called reid rule enacted by harry reid that let some lower court nominees be confirm with a simple majority and not allow they will to be filibustered. 36 democrats say they will oppose gorsuch chuincluding six for re-election. they will have the votes to zpibl potentially trigger mcconnell using the nuclear option. guess what, this sunday schumer

and mcconnell will be my semi exclusive guests on "meet the press." what's the best way to get two servings of veggies? v8 or a fancy juice store? ready, go! hi, juice universe? one large rutabaga, with eggplant... done!

that's not fair. glad i had a v8. the original way to fuel your y. welcome back. the first public hearing on their russian investigation revealed some things about the kremlin's cyber tactic that's seemed straight out of a spy novel. expert witnesses explain the complex they used during election that are still being used now and how they spread fake news. basically a twitter user, you see in your feed might look and sound like an american sitting behind his computer in the united states. but they're actually fake profiles by the russians to spread conspiracy theories. complete with hash tags and photos and they specifically targeted president when they knew he would be online. >> part of reasons active

measures have used in this election is because the commander in chief has used it at times against his opponents. great outlets. that are soviet pushing accounts tweet at president trump during high volumes when they know he is online and they push conspiracy theories. if he is to click on one of those or cite one of those, it just proves putin correct. >> and yes, if you are watching every single current else of homeland and you're up to date, then yes, that was part of last week's else. to help us understand these tactics, let me bring in the ceo of fire eye. he was among the folks had a testified yesterday. thank you for coming on the show. >> thank you for having me. >> okay. i'll be honest. some of this will seem surreal to folks. it seems, come on! are you telling as you bunch of russians who may not speak the language as well as us are

suddenly fooling all these americans? why shouldn't we be skeptical of the testimony we heard? >> i can tell you i first responded to russian intrusions in 1996 when i was in the united states air force. we've seen gradual incrementalism ever since. so i know it very al. i would say for maybe the first 20 years, fair game for espionage was just defined differently and had different tools. they used to just break this and surreptitiously take information. but over the years, we see russia doing it. not just russia. we'll see iran start doing this and other modern nations starting to use the same tools at their disposal to influence public opinion. to invade our privacy. to hack organizations. >> has the united states ever done this? >> i can't speak to that i haven't handled firsthand an intrusion that i would have adistribute you'd to the united

states. >> and we don't know of other countries doing this. >> there have been reports being claimed. would it stretch credulity to think we don't have modern weaponry that's available in the cyber domain to meet diplomatic means. and i think everybody has been trying influence with whatever tools they have at their disposal but now we have different toos. facebook, twitter, other anonymous ways to push different agendas. and as these tools emerge, i would expect every modern nation would use them to propagate their ideas. >> when mark warner, the ranking democrat on the intelligence committee, during his opening statement, he was outlining that this operation was so sophisticated that it was even essentially targeting the swing states. and making sure voters in the wisconsin, the michigans, and the pennsylvania, they were seeing some of this fake news. or they were making sure it was

high on those social media he feeds. is the russian operation that sophisticated? have they been downloading voter files to essentially micro target their fake news? >> you know, i don't have firsthand knowledge as to how sophisticated they are wit what senator warner brought up. i can tell you, with the anonymity of the internet, you can certainly proves your agenda and push it into different geographies. we didn't see the evidence but it would not have been in plain view during the investigation as we did during the cyber intrusions during the election time frail. over the last 12 to 15 years of. >> the most starting part was when clint watts said the person who helped spread this misinformation the most was the candidate himself. they would time it so he would

see it. >> i'm certain, whenever you see what's called the leaking of information, it is probably done strategically. it could be done under some guise of threat. there could be communications bift happens. what you're referring to, wasn't communication before hand but i'm sure whoever is behind it has to be thinking of how to get maximum impact based on timing. >> you brought up 1996 was the first time you knew that russians were trying to do this. i've had intelligence sources tell me for years, look. there are other countries. while the chinese throw a lot at this, the russians have been much more sophisticated than anyone else and there's a nuance to what they do versus anyone else. is this a putin program? who run this is program? >> with, it is hard for me to tell. what we get to see firsthand is the results of doing nearly 20

years of responding to computer intrusions. we have over 150 threat an lists in 19 different countries that speak 32 languages. we're responding to the victim networks. we're analyzing the evidence left behind. throughout history what i've witnessed is russia seems to have the tools and capabilities to be successful and how i've described them in a hockey analogy, iis like plang goalie againstario lemieux on a brea the russians put the puck in the net when they try hack you. china has been more polite about it. they've always carried the, i say they wear the chinese jersey when they hack you. but we seem to have come up with some kind of treaty and rule of engagement that we've agreed upon with china. so we've seen that threat largely abate. we're seeing he ran and north korea, and there's asymmetry that's sort of dangerous for a

nation. right now in cyberspace, in the cyber domain, the united states is in the glass house here. a lot of nations can't beat us kinetically but they can get a lot of impact in the agenda of the cyber domain. >> how much more resources would a company like yours need from the federal government? is there a point where you can only do so much for private firms? do we need a better national strategy here? >> we definitely need a better national strategy. and i'll speak for every single victim company ceo west noted a deterrent and we need attribution. you have to know who is behind these attacks so you can determine what is the proportional attack. that's a diplomatic thing. you have to have the current administration work other nations to figure out, what will we do with espionage. otherwise we can do our best

playing goalie but the asymmetry, it won't bode well if all we do is think about defense. we have to think about diplomatic ways to get deternlts in place. >> that's the challenge that i've heard over and over again. and no one knows what that answer is yet. thank you for giving voice to this. thank you for coming on. still ahead the new president wants to know what the last president knew and who he told about the russian investigation. i'm going to talk with someone who was in the white house on the last day president was in the white house. josh earnest.

we're both stuck in this cube farm and you're about to hit 'send all' on some embarrassing gas. hey, you bought gas-x®! unlike antacids, gas-x ® relieves pressure and bloating fast. huh, crisis averted.

why pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis.

i don't settle cases. i don't do it because that's why i don't get sued very often. >> fast forward. three lawsuits have now ended in a settlement. the judge approved the $25 million settlement today. i ends two class action lawsuits and a civil suit. president trump opted to settle shortly after his election in november saying as president i have to focus on the country. under the settlement, it admits no wrongdoing. the students will get atst 90% of their money back. we should note that while some former trump university students say they were defrauded, others said they were happy with the school. neither the trump white house nor the school have commented.

coming up, josh earnest on what the obama administration knew about russia's election interference. >> as we close out this quarter, the dow falling by 65 points. the s&p 500 down 5. the nasdaq down 2 points. its best quarter since 2013. the number of retailers filing for bankruptcy is marching toward a post recession high. nine retailers have filed for chapter 11 in just the past three months. consumer spending barely up last month amid delays and tax refunds. inflation continues to rise, pointing to a likely interest rate like. that's it from cnbc, first in business worldwide. to severe chronic plaque psoriasis. so i made a decision to talk to my dermatologist about humira. humira works inside my body to target and help block a specific source of inflammation that contributes to my symptoms.

in clinical trials, most adults taking humira were clear or almost clear, and many saw 75% and even 90% clearance in just 4 months. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. ask about humira, the #1 prescribed biologic by dermatologists. clearer skin is possible. i'm not a customer, but i'm calling about that credit scorecard. give it. sure! it's free for everyone. oh! well that's nice! and checking your score won't hurt your credit. oh! i'm so proud of you. well thank you. free at at discover.com/creditscorecard, even if you're not a customer.

it'that can make a worldces, of difference. expedia, everything in one place, so you can travel the world better.

new developments today on the obama administration's efforts to preserve intelligence regarding russian hacking.

saying that obama officials were so concerned about what would happeno key documents related to the probe once donald trump took office that they created a list of document serial members to give to senior members of the intelligence committee. the obama administration said the purpose of this document list was to make it harder to bury the information. this comes one day after the white house counsel sent a letter to the leaders of the house intelligence committee saying the white house homes they will investigate whether the white house improperly disseminated the information. in short, they want to know about how much they knew and who they shared the information with. joining me now, a former obama white house full, josh earnest, a brand new msnbc contributor. nice to see you. >> happy friday. >> in this case, i want to you

put on your obama administration hat. >> so we have this news on the serial numbers. how did that work? explain what was happening during this transition. how concerned, how much of a concern was it in the west wing? >> president obama in defendant ordered the intelligence community to dig into what exactly happened with regard to russia and their involvement in the presidential election. he asked them to put together a report before the end of the administration and the president's dwrekss quite clear. he suggested they brief it to the white house in both parties in the house and senate and the trump transition team. >> you had intelligence that there was some of that intelligence gathering that there was concern it might disappear. so there was another order given for preservation. >> i think the goal was to make sure everyone knew.

the president wanted to make sure the intelligence community was taking a deep dive look into this to see what happened, to try to assess the aims of the russians burg also to make sure the republicans and t democrats could take aim at it to make sure it didn't happen again. >> i want to talk about this story, one that the assistant secretary of defense evelyn farkas. she sort of gave voice to it. essentially it was on that "new york times" story that said not only did you try to preserve documents but you aggressively disseminated them. perhaps even lower classification levels to make sure a ben cardin, who happens to be the ranking republican, could have the intelligence. >> i wasn't involve in the

decisions. >> pinlds but you might be aware. >> what i can tell you is the motivation of those decisions. it was to make sure that as many intelligence officials, we're talking about intelligence proefs at the fbi and other places, but at the relevant committees in congress were read in on what happened. has the serious attack on our political system. this is not a small matter that we have russia intervening in a rather brazen fashion stoffel obama administration did make a concerted effort to make sure that they had all the access to theers the. what motives could contribute to russia's decision on get involved. but also to think about what sort of response would be most effective in trying to be, to deter russia if this activity in the future. >> do you understand why the trump white house believes, or perhaps the president believes this was a concerted effort to

undermine his legitimacy as president? >> if they don't have anything to hide, it raises questions, why are there so many trump officials hiding, or at least not being forthcoming, with so many meetings they had with so many russian officials? for example, there is now this investigation into what kinds of conversations jared shner, the president's sun in law was having. there were all kinds of people being paraded through trump tower. for some reason the russians were taken in through back door. and this was typical of what you would expect with meeting with ambassadors. why hide it? this is not the only exam. mr. we have jeff sessions, mike flynn, who are accused of not being forthcoming. >> one other story that popped this week. james comey, it was reported,

wanted to do an op ed, late june, early july, about russian interference and the reporting says, it was nixed by the white house. >> i don't know that those conversations. that's news to me. >> the idea that comey wanted to go public of. >> we know that he did that extraordinary news conference where he announced -- >> he wanted to go public on well with an op ed. it was nixed. >> i wasn't involved in that. there was some heartburn the manner he chose to communicate publicly. not just in yourself but also the letter in october. >> do you miss the podium? >> not today, no. >> fair enough. >> welcome aboard. thank you. coming up, why i'm obsessed with the reaction to north carolina's repeal and the dying art of the political repeal. zuccolis. through ancestry, through dna i found out that i was only 16% italian.

he was 34% eastern european. so i went onto ancestry, so learned that one of our ancestors we thought was italian was eastern european. this is my ancestor who i didn't know about. he looks a little bit like me, yes. ancestry has many paths to discovering your story. get started for free at ancestry.com when a fire destroyed everything in our living room. we replaced it all without touching our savings. yeah, our insurance won't do that. no. you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance

when liberty stands with you™. 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 tonight i'm obsessed with reminding pea that politics is the art of the possible. the law mandating that transgender people use the bathroom coordinating with their gender on their birth certificate. it preven not surprisingly, the advocates

are outraged at the compromise. cooper turns back on lgbt community. the hb 2 repeal bill is an unmitigated disaster for lgbtq rights and north carolina. maybe in a less polarized era, it would have been possible. but you have to remember what's going on in north carolina. republicans have a vote over proof majority in the legislature. it was this or the status quo. if we're going to start punishing policians by demanding all or nothing at all, then nothing at all is what you're always going to get. this is what compromise will look like in this polarized era. it will stink. but if you refuse to compromise, you won't get anything.

we're not professional athletes. but that doesn't mean we're giving up. i'm in this for me. for me. along with diet and exercise, farxiga helps lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes. lowering a1c by up to 1.2 points. do not take if allergic to farxiga. if you experience symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking and seek medical help right away.

do not take farxiga if you have severe kidney problems, are on dialysis, or have bladder cancer. tell your doctor right away if you have blood or red color in your urine or pain while you urinate. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast infections in women and men, serious urinary tract infections, low blood sugar, and kidney problems. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have signs of ketoacidosis, which is serious and may lead to death. i'm in this for my family. i'm in this for me. ask your doctor about farxiga and learn how you can get it for free. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. 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. we've got some breaking news. we're now learning more about

why the government issued that ban on laptop computers and other electronic devices on some ov oversea nights. the decision was made on a suggestion that they have the means to conceal explosives in laptop computers in a way that could elude security screening, particularly in some of those countries that were identified. we'll have a lot more details from pete williams on the n"nbc nightly news" in a little bit. let me bring the panel back in. jennifer, bill kristol, not surprisingly, there had to be something connected with that. there's plenty of times that temporary decisions were made when you were there. we had toner cartridges we were worried about at one time, the shoe issue before that. >> right. >> this is almost sort of a regular thing that happens inside the int natiernational

screening system. >> it was something that worked through the bureaucracy unlike other things that came out of the trump white house. you work with the airlines to figure out how you're going to tell everybody what they can bring on and not bring on. >> i've had my cross with the intelligence community and also you want nens citizens to trust the intelligence community tells the white house awhnd when they announce something like this, you want a level of trust. >> it's interesting that you're bringing this up in connection with the trust irssue. i had somebody say to be their biggest concern with the trump white house is if you were kim jong-un, putin, if you were an adversary of the united states, this is a time to strike. this is the time to do something

because, you know, maybe you moved troops to the border of estonia. i hate to be -- but that is a concern. is this white house ready for this? >> for a while i had thought that there would be some sort of international crisis that will reveal the character of the white house and how everything really works. whether the president listens to his cabinet secretaries and takes their counsel or whether this falls apart and the administration comes to an untimely end. i think truth and trust are two really posh things and donald trump was a product of a lack of faith and institutions and now that he's president, he's further undermining people's faith in institutions, the intelligence community, political parties, congress, you know, health care bill not getting passed, wasn't good for people's faith and the ability for congress to function. he's undermined people's trust in the intelligence community.

he's compounded the problem that he's been elected to fix. >> a crisis reveals that initial character. >> it does. >> you weren't there in the obama white house in '09. i remember the underwear incident. there's a lot of things that the white house learned. >> and how you lock down the chain of information about who knows what, what they need to know and who -- >> and they were 11 months into the presidency then and still making -- >> and having the wherewithal to not answer questions or not put information out until you're sure that it's right because i get -- i mean, every time there's a major incident or terrorist act or something, the first reports were always wrong, without exception, always wrong. and you have to be careful. >> last word. >> you need allies to trust you in an emergency, right? if trump calls angela mkel and he says we have problem and

something is happening in estonia, you need it to be a reliable statement. >> that was the word of the economist in that deadly cover that they had today. thanks for being flexible with me. after the break, has the internet taken the fun out of april fools? has the internet taken the fun out of all snark? stay tuned.

i realize that ah, that $100k is not exactly a fortune. well, a 103 how long did it take you two to save that? a long time. then it's a fortune. i told you we had a fortune. get closer to your investment goals with a conversation.

well, in case you missed it the internet, of course, maybe social media ruined april fools' day. as a public service, let us remind you that tomorrow is

april 1st. what you really need to know is it's crab season. it used to be the time to trick your family or friends, some surprise redecorating a co-worker's office and sometimes the tv networks got in on it, on the fun. the 1957 special report on the swiss spaghetti harvest. but in the age of the internet, this spoof shared between friends became overshadowed by large-scale hoaxists. and companies push outrageous phony products that i will admit we all still get a kick out of and jim bean's can of jim beans or even google's miss pac man. if you must celebrate, do it in person. put toothpaste between two oreo cookies. old-fashion fun.

keep your april fools' day off of social media. how do you even know what is real anymore on that feed. that's all we have for tonight. we're back on monday. don't forget to watch "meet the press." "for the record with greta" starts right now. go ahead, greta. >> chuck, i'm not going to miss "meet the press" this sunday, that's for sure. >> don't be late. >> i won't. thank you. i'll be there. chairman nunes speaks and it's for the first time since the stunning news was reported that a combined three trump white house officials showed him classified files. and moments ago, nunes' counterpart, the ranking member democratic adam schiff was spotted entering the white house. so why he is now at the white house? to review classified documents. here's the catch. we don't know if these are the very same documents that chairman nunes was shown when he made the surprise visit to the white