colleague chris jansing while i pop back over to the white house. hi, chris. >> see you there later. thank you, hallie. now on msnbc, a major shift in the u.s. strategy in afghanistan. the president considering new options, including sending in thousands of u.s. troops to take out the taliban. no final call has been made, but the consequential decision could come soon. plus, president trump hits back following new revelations on what brought down michael flynn. the former acting attorney general in dramatic testimony says flynn's lies made him vulnerable to blackmail by russia. and nbc news first to report it was the trump administration's second warning about flynn. also ahead, former president obama's return to the global stage this morning. warning the world about the impact of climate change. what he is saying about president trump's policies on that issue and life after the white house. we'll have a live report from milan, italy. good morning, everyone. i'm chris jansing in washington,

d.c. we begin with that incredibly important decision facing donald trump. should he okay a major u.s. troop buildup in afghanistan? the recommendation is from his senior military and foreign policy advisers to send in at least several thousand more troops into the 16 year old war to fight a resurgent taliban. the this comes after what the "washington post" calls a sweeping policy riew based on the president's preference to, quote, start winning again. peter alexander joins us from the white house. when might the president make a decision, pete centpeter? >> good question. no decision has been made. one could come soon. there was some reporting today that suggests that decision would be made before the president's visit to brussels. his nato meeting that's scheduled to take place on may 25th. just a few weeks from now. this is significant though for a variety of reasons. not the least of which is the president, who sort of ran on

this america first policy, one that advisers suggest is still his foreign policy right now. only a few years ago tweeted something that would appear to contradict this effort to go back to afghanistan. he wrote in 2013, we should leave afghanistan immediately. no more wasted lives. if we have to go back in, we go in hard and quick. not entirely clear whether the u.s. will go back in, as he described at the time. but if they do, it'll certainly get a lot of new scrutiny, given his past position on this. more broadly, the desire here is one that had been indicated by the commander in that region, john nicholson, as he testified before congress a couple months ago, trying to push ahead and trying to get more u.s. troops, thousands as he described it, into the joan region to help in effort. >> thank you, peter. joining me live now, former treasury department intelligence analyst, morgan, a member of the board of the non-profit, friends

of the american university of afghanistan, supporting higher education there. also with us, "new york times" white house correspondent, michael. and also an msnbc intelligence analyst. morgan, you visited afghanistan a few weeks ago. what's going on on the ground that would lead the president to consider this seriously? >> when i was there, i mean, it is such a stark contrast from 2012 2012, the last time i was there. the people at the embassy cannot get around. they're getting around helicopters. they're not doing the addiploma that people in embassies want to do. we're in a perilous time. isis is also a concern. i believe the commander testified about this, if afghanistan stays the way it is and we don't send more troops, i think we are looking at a more emboldened taliban and we are

going to reverse any gains we made in the past 15 years. >> defense secretary james mattis is visiting denmark today and addressed this. let me play what he had to say. >> in afghanistan, we're up against a determined enemy. as i said, isis has been thrown back there. al qaeda have been unabe -- unable to mount attacks. they're unable to work with the citizens. when the government wins the affection, the respect and the support of their people, then no enemy can stand against them. >> malcolm, as the president is laying this out, what are the pros and cons? >> well, the pros are that we really have to, in some circumstances, and this may be the one, have to stabilize the government of afghanistan and support the afghan national army. that has been the mission we've

had ever since we did our intervention there. that is nation building. that is going to take a lot of money, a lot of resources. the cons are, we are not just fighting a group that can be destroyed. there's not a victory the way that donald trump may see it. this is a culture that you are fighting. these are people who live there and will be there long after we leave that place. so until we can make some gains that is culturally acceptable, works in the tribes and a government that can support itself, we'll be there a long time. i'm not sure whether more troops is the solution. >> former president george w bush's former adviser condoleezza rice talked about this this morning. >> the president is going to have to look at a wide variety of things, not just troops but what is the strategy for increasing troop strength. doesn't make sense just to incrse t tro strength to keep doing the same thing. >> so michael, there's obviously a military calculation and a

critical one. but a political one, as well, for a president who campaigned on, let's not get involved in more messy wars. we saw the tweet representative of that that peter just read. also somebody who has vowed he is going to root out terrorism wherever it is. what is he going to do? >> i mean, that's a good question. we don't know yet what he is going to do. he didn't run on a campaign of afghanistan first, right? it was america first. a lot of his supporters share his concern about getting sort of dragged into long, messy, you know, military campaigns. on the other hand, he's also in love with his generals. what you are seeing -- >> there is an argument, some people say, that he was emboldened militarily by what he did in syrian and afghanistan. >> sure. >> that it shows him as being strong and being determined. >> that and he is also shown an interest in giving his commanders more latitude and leeway to decide the things they want to do as opposed to sort of husbanding those decisions within the white house. if you do that, the likelihood

is, as the generals have testified already, they want to increase their troop strength. they want to do more. so if he follows through on that sort of sense of giving them more control, that's likely where we're going to send up. >> it's one huge question, but we want to also talk about this other lingering question now for president trump. why did he keep michel flynn as national security adviser for 18 days after being warned that flynn could be blackmailed by the russians? we learn new details about that during three plus hours of dramatic testimony on capitol hill yesterday by former acting attorney general sally yates. she revealed how she warned president trump's white house council during not just one but two meetings and a phone call three days in a row in late january about flynn's conversations with russia's ambassador. yates alerting the white house that flynn had not only lied to the vice president and other officials, but that the russians knew it and had proof. >> first thing we did was to

explain that the underlying conduct that general flynn engaged in was problematic in and of itself. the russians also knew that general flynn had misled the vice president and others. that created a compromise situation, a situation where the national security adviser essentially could be blackmailed by the russians. to state the obvious, you don't want your national security adviser compromised with the russians. >> yates testified along with former director of national intelligence james clapper, and soon after they finished, president trump unleashed a tweet storm. let's go back to the white house. peter, what was the president tweeting? >> well, he was quick with his tweet storm late yesterday, as soon as sally yates wrapped it up. what was striking is i went up to upper press here to speak to the press officials after the yates testimony wrapped up. they said, there was nothing new there. 20 minutes later, the president tweeted to that effect. he wrote, sally yates made the fake media extremely unhappy today. she said nothing but old news.

he added, director clapper reiterated what everybody, including the fake media already knows. there is no evidence of collusion with russia and trump. and the russia-trump collusion story is a total hoax. when will this taxpayer funded charade end? suffice to say, yesterday, including his tweets, breathed new life into this russia story, this investigation more broadly. testimony from sally yates isn't complete. she's expected at some point to testify between at the senate is and house intelligence committees, as well, that are also investigating the possible ties between trump's team and russian operatives. chris? >> peter, thank you. i want to go back to the panel. malcolm, reince priebus, sean spicer initially said what sally yates did was give them a heads up. essentially, have kept with that throughout. to you, was this a little more than a heads up? >> well, it was clearly a lot more than a heads up. it appeared that sally yates went to the white house council,

which in and of itself, that meeting was absolutely earth shak shattering. that is not normal. she called them to warn them of a national security threat and what could be a breach to the national security of the united states. she not only met with th once but twice and had a follow-up phone call. this should have bn a hair on fire situation. it appears based on the tweets donald trump has, he does not want to face this at all. he wants to believe there is nothing here. should this play out, should we find that there's more to it, it's only going to look like a cover up. they should really try to clean this up as quickly as possible. >> well, you saw a lot of diverting yesterday, away from the actual questions about russia and more having to do with who leaked and then some other things. we'll get to ted cruz in a minute. morg morgan, you had dinner last night to senator lindsey graham. he said, we're going to get to the bottom of this.

what did he tell you and what's next? >> i think -- and marco rubio was there, as well. impressive room of people. i think what was really interesting is they were very focused on this provision in the leaking. i think this is important. i know democrats are going to say, well, republicans are just using the leaks as a diversion, but if you look actually at the history of the past eight years of the obama administration, they were very aggressive in going after leakers. i think as a former intelligence professional, someone who served bush and obama administrations, what's most worrisome to me in this debate is is intelligence being polite sitpoliticized by administration? there are people working every day who don't want to see political appointees politicizing the intelligence they're using. >> wait -- >> yates and clapper said they did not leak. they have never leaked. >> right. >> so was the sense at the table last night they're going to get down bottom of who did? >> i don't want to speak on behalf of anybody, but it seems

like they are -- yes, it is a concern about who leaked, but also i think the hearing yesterday was bipartisan. there is no republican senator yesterday that denied that russia tried to interfere in the elections. there is a difference between where i think the democrats take this argument too far, by saying trump, you know, may have won because of russia. russia has been interfering, as secretary rice said this morning on msnbc and nbc, the russians have been interfering since, you know, the dawn probably of our democracy, or at least over the past 20, 30 years. >> we've never had a situation when serious people are asking a question about whether or not it had major influence on a presidential election, michael. we still don't know, is the major question hanging out there still why did it take 18 days? >> well, i think there's -- the major question is the broader question about russian interference and whether there was collusion. i do think the question that was raised most starkly yesterday was this question about the 18

days. we kind of knew the broad outlines but hearing the then acting attorney general, you know, in such great detail go into what -- if we'd all seen it on "house of cards," we wouldn't have believed it as a plot line. the question of, how does the president, as sean spicer and reince priebus and others have said, he was alerted right away. the general council walked into the oval office as soon as sally yates left and informed the president. it took them 18 days. their explanation is, well, we were doing our own internal review. it is hard to listen to sally yates and the way in which she described the warnings that she gave and the question of blackmail. i mean, the word blackmail, you think of that, how that didn't provoke a more immediate response is, i think, the subject of something we need to keep pushing. >> absolutely. >> obviously, they think it was political on her part. there also were some political moments in the hearing. ted cruz wanted to focus on her

being fired. obviously, that had to do with her refusal to enforce an order she thought was unconstitutional on immigration. let me play that exchange. >> in the over 200 years of the department justice history, are you aware of any instance in which the department of justice has formally approved the legality of a policy and three days later, the attorney general directed the department not to follow that policy and to defy that policy? >> i'm not. i'm also not aware of a situation where the office of legal counsel was advised not to tell the attorney general about it until after it was over. >> thank you, ms. yates. >> for an awful lot of people, malcolm, that was a smackdown won by sally yates handily. if you listen to conservative radio and television, they saw it very differently. did we get anything out of this hearing and where do we go from here? >> well, i think we did. everybody knew that when we went into this hearing, there would be two different hearings. there would be the hearing about

russian infrutrusion and involvement in the united states elections. that is a fact. the united states was attacked in a massive cyber warfare operation last year. there may be people who have colluded or corroborated -- collaborated in that effort. the fbi is still investigating that. then there was the misdirection you got from the republican senators. they seem to want to go after leaks and go after anything except for the key question. lindsey graham aside, the investigation did move forward yesterday. sally yates did say significant things in there, and jim clapper affirmed he was not aware that the fbi's counterintelligence, which is counterespionage investigation was going on. i think this is the tip of the iceber and there's more to be revealed. >> more co coto come for sure. thanks to all of you. coming up, spirit airlines cancelling dozens of flights this morning after stranding hundreds of fliers last night. spirit blaming it all on a labor

dispute. the pilots association is responding this morning. also ahead, as vice president pence heads to the hill today to talk health care with senators, republicans across the country are facing rowdy town halls packed with voters angry about possibly losing their health care. but will the plan now in the hands of the senate look anything like what passed in the house? i'll ask a republican congressman. and comedian jimmy kimmel returning following his emotional plea on health care in a clip seen by millions. >> i saved health insurance in the united states of america. i didn't save it? they voted against it anyway? where investors can investigate and invest in vests... or not in vests. this is my retirement. retiring retired tires. and i never get tired of it. are you entirely prepared to retire?

plan your never tiring retiring retired tires retirement with e*trade. tidy cats lightweight with glade clean blossoms. our newest odor fighting scent! gives you the power of choice plus... the power of pleasant. exclusively in lightweight! every home, every cat, there's a tidy cats for that.

goal! nitedhealthcare, you can get rewarded for waldad... we wanna welcome everyone to the father daughter dance. walk, move and earn money... ...for out-of-pocket medical expenses. he's ok! unitedhealthcare

this morning, spirit airlines is trying to avert, if you can believe it, another backlash of angry travelers. they're having customers with booked flights with the airline to call ahead. it was chaos overnight between passengers, airline employees is and police at ft. lauderdale hollywood international airport. can you believe this? passengers furious after the airline cancelled nine flights yesterday, leaving hundreds of people stranded. cell phone video caught the scene as it happened. >> it was chaotic. fights broke out. lines were two to three hours. >> i cried. i'm not going to lie, i cried. >> spirit airlines is blaming a

series of delays on a laborlopi. the pilot union says that is not the case. tom costello is in our washington bureau. you've been busy. let's talk about the latest incident. explain exactly what happened and what's the situation this morning for people trying to fly somewhere on spirit? >> so a lot to unravel there. first of all, as it relates to the fights at the airport, three people have been arrested. i've read the police reports on the arrests. it appears that these three individuals started getting intimidating or intimidating airline employees. when police showed up, allegedly, the three individuals started becoming intimidating toward police. you saw the fists start flying. three individuals were arrested. what happened in general, why did this begin? because yesterday, spirit airlines had to cancel 38 flights -- pardon me -- 65 flights yesterday. 38 so far today. here's the lawsuit that's at the bottom of this here, chris.

spirit airlines is suing their pilots union, claiming they had to cancel now more than 300 flights over the last week because the pilots are engaged in a slowdown because the pilots are trying to get a better wage deal, better compensation from the airline. we talked to the union, the union says we're not engaged in a slowdown whatsoever. but we do not want to be paid at the bottom of the airline compensation list. their point being they're underpaid. they claim, again, they're not involved in a slowdown and, yet, apparently not enough crews are showing up for work. the airline had to cancel more than 300 flights over the past week. again, we expect at least 38 more today. we don't know how quickly the court may rule. essentially, the airline asking in this lawsuit that the court issue a temporary restraining order, injunction, prohibiting the union from engaging in this type of a slowdown. we don't know when the court might get involved or issue the ruling. if you're flying spirit airlines

today, you could be in for another frustrating day of travel. there's no immediate end in sight to this. >> what a mess. tom costello, thank you so much for that update. up next, i'll be talking to a republican congressman, asking if the senate's health care plan will look anything like what was passed in the house. what are you doing? getting your quarter back. fountains don't earn interest, david. you know i work at ally. i was being romantic. you know what i find romantic? a robust annual percentage yield that's what i find romantic. this is literally throwing your money away. i think it's over there. that way? yeah, a little further up. what year was that quarter? what year is that one? '98 that's the one. you got it! nothing stops us from doing right by our customers. ally. do it right. let's get out of that water.

[fbi agent] you're a brave man, your testimony will save lives. mr. stevens? this is your new name. this is your new house. and a perfectly inconspicuous suv. you must become invisible. [hero] i'll take my chances. p3 planters nuts, jerky and whaseeds.at? i like a variety in my protein. totally, that's why i have this uh trail mix. wow minty. p3 snacks. the more interesting way to get your protein.

"how to win at business." step one: point decisively with the arm of your glasses. abracadabra. the stage is yours. step two: choose la quinta. the only hel where you can redeem yalty points for a free night-instantly and win at business. some build walls to keep people out. but these are walls that welcome you in. within these walls, california's educators create safe places for every student to learn and grow. where teachers open minds to history...

unleash creativity... and show our kids the future. some build walls to divide us. but the california teachers association knows these are walls that bring us together. because quality public schools build a better california for all of us.

house speaker paul ryan is agreeing with senators who say it's going to take a while to pull together a final bill to repeal and replace obamacare. right now, 13 senators are hashing out details of a plan from scratch, which they say will not be quick or easy. >> we're going to have to satisfy 51 senators, and i can't tell you how long that's going to take. we're not in any -- don't have any arbitrary deadline. >> this morning, speaker ryan talked about his expectations for the senate. >> the legislation should not take that long. hopefully, it takes a month or two to get it through the senate. >> you think it'll happen by the fall? >> oh, yeah. >> that comes as republican congressmen face angryown halls back home while on rece. the scene last night at an event for iowa.

he'd just walked out of a tv interview, frustrated after asked why his staffers were screening people for the town halls. into a gymnasium full of rowdy people. >> i don't represent all iowans. i represent the first district of iowa. that'd be like saying, shouldn't i be able to -- even though i live over here, vote in iowa city? >> would you take donations from a republican in iowa city? >> i'm done. >> we haven't even -- we just started. >> this is ridiculous. this is ridiculous. >> we -- >> he's going to sit here and badger me. >> if you're getting your health insurance through medicaid, nothing is going to change. individual market and your insurance coverage is current, is current, nothing is going to change. >> you lie! >> calling him a liar there. joining me now, one republican congress man who has met with constituents yesterday, as a matter of fact, and has two more

events scheduled this week. congressman kevin cramer of north dakota. via skype, we have our technical problems worked out. thank you for being with us, sir. your website says since coming to congress, you've held more town halls than any over member. you have coffee with cramer events this week at shops, arguably smaller than what we just saw. i wonder what reaction you're getting, particularly as it comes to health care when you talk to constituents. >> sure. thanks for the opportunity and thanks for your patience with our technological difficulties. my town halls tend not to be so big because people have regular access. i think that's helped me have a more intimate relationship with my constituents. there was plenty of passion yesterday. based on what i saw, similar breakdown in terms of people that support the american health care act, those that like obamacare. but their concerns are what

we've always heard. they want pre-existing conditions to be covered. they want to make sure that the lifetime limits aren't put back on. there's a lot of misinfortion. the's a lot of hype. it just presents me the opportunity to straighten things out and learn something from my constituents. it is a rich experience for me. >> the $8 billion got a lot of republicans on board to deal with pre-existing conditions. i have yet, however tor, to see independent analysis that suggests it'll come close to being able to deal with pre-existing conditions. >> first of all, the $8 billion is the most recent $8 billion. there is another $130 million that's part of, you know, state grants, that are part of the risk pool, gives flexibility to the states. >> still, the analysis i've seen is that even that combination is not enough to cover pre-existing

conditions, which obviously has sparked a lot of emotional response by constituents all across the country. >> sure. well, i believe that there are more layers of protection for pre-existing conditions in our plan than obamacare. i have a 13-year-old nie31-year husband a mechanic, pay to cover his pre-existing condition of diabetes. their $10,000 deductible is impossible for him to buy insulin or go to the doctor. that's a pre-existing condition theoretically covered in terms of having health insurance but they can't afford the care. >> i'm not trying to minimize that in any way, congressman. i think everybody's individual story has worth. >> sure. >> but it is an individual story in a country with millions of them. there was a new op-ed by former north dakota state rep ben hanson. he quotes a study that says that the house bill will eliminate funding covering 300,000 north

dakotans with pre-existing conditions, including those diagnosed with cancer, diabetes, asthma, heart disease and even women who are pregnant. can you ensure your constituents he is wrong and the study is wrong about that? >> absolutely. first of all, north dakota is made up of 700,000 total people. this bill we're dealing with deals with only people on the individual market, which has been decimated by obamacar so in north dakota, there are only between 7% and 8% of the public in north dakota that actually gets their insurance through the individual market. when you take the pre-existing conditions, that's roughly 24% of that 7%. that's down to 2% of the entire population of north dakota that might actually have a pre-existing condition that would be eligible for this -- for our program, for our safety net. when you take the safety net we're providing, which is tax credits refundable, this is

something i had to point out several times yesterday, in addition to thriving market, in addition to, of course, the $138 billion of flexibility dollars for states to fashion programs, i think we have many more options for people with pre-existing conditions than obamacare, that provides one or in some cases no options people can afford to have. >> it'll be interesting to see -- >> so -- >> -- how the senate version looks compared to what we're talking about now. before you go, because it is the big story today, i'd like to have you about president trump considering sending thousands more troops to afghanistan to help fight taliban and ice ices. is that something you'd support? >> any time you send troops into battle on the ground, we want more information before we know for sure. i will tell you that the neglect in afghanistan by this country over the last eight years and other parts of the mideast, including the middle east, including, of course, the war against isis, clearly has created a void that has been

overtaken by terrorists. we need to do something. we need to lead. but before we send troops on the ground, obviously, i need to get more information. i'm sure we'll get some more. >> congressman kevin cramer of north dakota, thank you, sir. >> thanks for the opportunity. always a pleasure. coming up, how would republican changes to obamacare impact the swing state of florida? i'll talk live with current democratic congressman charlie kris. yet some cards limit where you earn bonus cash back to a few places. and then, change those places every few months. with quicksilver from capital one you've always earned enough wh that! unlimited 1.5% cash back on every purchase, everywhere. welcome to unlimited what's in your wallet?

when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night, so he got home safe. yeah, my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. what?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. a better moment of proof.®e there'a moment of truth. victoza lors my a1c and blood sugar better than the leading branded pill, which didn't get me to my goal. victoza® works with your body to lower blood sugar in three ways: in the stomach, the liver, and the pancreas. and while it isn't for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. non-insulin victoza® comes in a pen and is taken once a day. (announcer) victoza® is not recommended

as the first medication to treat diabetes and is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or if you develop any allergic symptoms including itching, rash, or difficulty breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so, stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. the most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea and vomiting. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. now's the time for a better moment of proof. ask your doctor about victoza®.

coming up at the top of the hour, the 13 members of the senate working group will be meeting. that's what they're called. they're focusing on crafting the new health care legislation on the senate side. specifically today, they'll be talking about medicaid. joining me now is democratic congressman charlie crist of florida who serves on the financial services committee. good to see you. good morning. >> good to see you, chris. thanks for having me. >> medicaid and medicare, both important in your state. it funds more nursing home care than any other provider anywhere. the census bureau shows florida's population, almost 21 million, 19.4% are 65 and older. i'm so curious, what are you hearing about health care from your constituents? >> they're outraged about it. you know, we are the third largest state in america. it is california, texas then florida. you're right, we have about 21 million residents. a lot of them came from new york recently. we got about 1,000 new residents every day in the sunshine state. so a lot of them are seniors.

the way this bill affects seep your -- seniors, as you know, 50 to 64, it allows insurance companies to charge them five times as much as they charged them before. under this new legislation that the house just passed and i was proud to vote no on that bill. the other thing it does, too, that i hear from fellow floridians about, women, it zeros out planned parenthood for the first year. that takes out mammograms and other cancer screenings. it's a horrible idea. and the most appalling part of this bill, the most merciless part of the bill, is how it affects the poor and disabled in our country and throughout, obviously, florida, too. it makes it such that $880 billion will be take away from the poor and the elderly for their health care and the disabled. the way it does that is through medicaid. medicaid is the program, as you know, that provides health care for the poor and health care for the disabled, also.

to do that, you have to have a heart of stone. i mean, how does somebody do that and look themselves in the mirror ande satisfied with what they're seeing? it is appalling to me. that's what i'm hearing from fellow floridians. >> understanding that you feel very passionately about this and, clearly, you say your constituents do, as well, it is out of your hands. you voted no. it is now in the hands of the senate. i wonder if you've had conversations with senator nelson or maybe more to the point with marco rubio, and what you think can be done in the senate that might make it more palatable. >> well, what can be done is the right thing. i mean, just to be plain and simple about it. the right thing is to provide health care for the american people. the senate clearly can do that. i have had conversations with our senators. i will continue to have conversations with them. because, you're right, the ball is in their court now. and so the opportunity to do good, to right the wrong that the house republicans did last week, is for the senate to get it right. >> what is senator rubio telling

you, congressman? >> nothing yet. i'm looking forward to getting my call returned. in the meantime, i'll be patient because it is a virtue. what is important is we focus on what some of the other republicans said publicly. in a positive sense, like lindsey graham, john mccain, like, you know, lamar alexander of tennessee. these senators -- and susan collins, i think, will come around to this, too. she supported the stimulus plan, as i did, back when we had the great recession, which wasn't great at all. i, then a republican governor of florida as you indicated, supported president obama, who was a democrat and still is, and i am now, too, and proud of it, but the fact of the matter was it wasn't about the politics. it was about the people. we are elected to represent and to work for the people of america. in my case, st. pete/clearwater area. i'm proud to do so. what is important is keep our eye on the ball. it is not about republicans, democrats or independents. it's about our fellow americans. and doing what's right for them. what's right for them is not to

strip health carraway from poe poor, sick, elderly, people with pre-existing conditions. it'll take at least 24 million people, throw them offealth care. why? so they can give a tax break to the top 1% in our country. that's appalling. that's inexcusable. >> congressman, we're out of time but it is good to see you. charlie crist, thanks so much. >> you, too, chris. thank you. have a good day. up next, a casual barack unbuttoned and without a tie in italy, warning the world about how a changing climate can harm the food supply. he said the problems caused by man can be solved by man. we're live with a report on the former president. and senators grilling the former director of national intelligence on president trump's business ties to russia. what james clapper told them next.

it's just a burst pipe, i could fix it. (laugh) no. with claim rateguard your rates won't go up just because of a claim. i totally could've - no! switching to allstate is worth it. before fibromyalgia, i was a doer. i was active. then the chronic, widespread pain drained my energy. my doctor said moving more helps ease fibromyalgia pain. she also prescribed lyrica. fibromyalgia is thought to be the result of overactive nerves. lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. woman: 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 lespain, i can be more active. ask your doctor about lyrica. i can be more active. whaaaat?!ortgage offer from the bank today. you never just get one offer. go to lendingtree.com and shop multiple loan offers for free. free? yeah, could save thousands. you should probably buy me dinner. no. go to lendingtree.com for a new home loan or refinance. receive up to five free offers and choose the loan that's right for you. our average customer could lower their monthly bills by over three hundred dollars.

rates could rise again. go to lendingtree.com right now.

during the crs of my presidency, i made climate change a top priority because i believe that for all the challenges that we face, this is the one that will define the contours of this century more dramatically perhaps than any other. >> that's president barack obama

delivering a message of hope this morning. a sneak peek, perhaps, on his post presidential priorities. this rare appearance on the international stage in milan, italy, where he delivered a keynote address on climate change and its impact on the global food supply. nbc was at the event and i'm joined now from milan. claudio, this comes as president trump is considering whether to pull out of the paris climate agreement, which was brokered by president obama. but obama didn't mention trump by name, although did he talk about their differences? >> yes. rather than being an address to the public, this was a q&a session with the former senior food policy adviser to the obamas during obama's presidency. now, the choice of menu, actually, this is a global food innovation summit. you can see behind me still going on. may not have been koins dcoinci

for president obama's first appearance outside of the united states since leaving office. he had a chance to tackle two important subjects that are, of course, the core of this particular subject on -- summit on food and they were high up on the agenda during his presidency. food sustainability and climate change, of course. climate change as you said at the beginning was the most talked about issue. he warned against the threat of climate change and, of course, he said that he wanted the paris accord and paris agreement that you mentioned at the beginning to be honored. this comes, of course, at a time when it is unclear whether trump will do that. he's threatened several times during the presidential campaign that he would pull out from them. now, he seems to have softened some. is unclear what he will do. there are mixed messages. he was asked in the q&a session about what he thinks about the mixed messages being sent out by the trump administration. this is what he had to say about

that, chris. >> the united states has been sending mixed signals on where we are in terms of leadership on climate change. what is your message for where you see the united states going in the future on these issues? >> look, obviously, the current administration has differences with my administration in terms of energy policy. and that's part of what happens in democracy. >> right. >> so there will be a useful debate that takes place in america. >> well, there was time for a few jokes from president obama. he was asked what he doesn't miss in the white house. he said he didn't like living inside a bubble. he enjoys living in his own home. he said he has constriction on his freedom of movement. this time not because of security issues but because of all the selfies people want to take with him, chris. >> claudio, thank you very much. i want to bring in my panel

now. david, msnbc analyst. and robert, former adviser to the bush/cheney campaign. i thought this another time, i think one other time i think when he was in chicago. no tie. he is leaning back. if you could go from the grey that you gain in the white house and go back to dark hair, he would be doing it. i want to play that clip that claudio talked about for things he doesn't miss? >> the hardest thing about being the president of the united states is it is unique in isolation. you live in what is called the bubble. and it is a very nice prison. so you don't have the freedom o movement to be able to just take

a walk, or to sit at a cafe. now i'm only captive to selfies. >> only captive to selfies, but rothenber robert, if a guy as young as he is having trouble adjusting, he looks very relaxed, very methodical, like the weight of the world is off of the shoulders, which it is. i remember when george w. bush was at a retreat and i said what is the hardest thing to adjust, and he said i can't go for a walk, i can't open my door, get in my truck, and just go connect with people. i think president obama will follow the motto of president

carter, be an elder statesman, be thoughtful about the world and breathe for a moment. it looks like she is doing that. >> president trump claiming yesterday that we didn't learn anything new. there was no evidence of collusion. >> he put out four tweets yesterday that were all factually inaccurate and quite wrong. one of them is that james clapper that testified with sally yates said there is no element of inclusion. we know that the president keeps conditioning in some way or another. that is not what clapper said, in fact he said the opposite. a few weeks earlier on chuck todd's show, he said have you seen evidence of collusion, and he said no, i haven't. and he said this proves there is no coordination.

yesterday clapic explper explai didn't know about the fbi could wanter intelligence investigation, so he would n have seen any evidence one way or the oer a it was standard operating procedure for the head of the office of the natural director of intelligence. so he said the opposite. donald trump said "this proves the case" and he made it the banner on his twitter feed. there was another interesting moment when he was asked about president trump's business interest in russia. >> did you ever find a situation where a trump business interest gave you concern? >> not in the course of the intelligence community assessment. >> since or any time? >> isenator graham, i can't

comment on that because that impacts an investigation. >> there are a number of those moments, robert, are it is like is he giving us a clue there? >> senator graham should have stopped at the first question, but clapper's pause, and response, says there is probably something else going on here. he can't speak to this because it sounds like the investigation is still going on. and that is breaking news, by the way. it really is in some ways. >> yeah, in some ways. the other thing we want to talk about today is afghanistan. the president will make a very consequential decision. they want to send in thousands more troops. they just sent out a statement,

there is no military solution in afghanistan. you would think that is clear to everyone. sending troops to plans does not make sense and only puts more troops in harm's way. there is a real military calculation here. >> his thought on north korea and other foreign policy leaders is now facing a vexing issue, and i don't know what his principals are for foreign policy. >> yes, but when obama did this he called for a review, he spent months reviewing it, it was his decision right or wrong, and he took what military gave him and said i want a different option. he was engaged, active, and it was all part of a bigger

operation for him. i don't know if he has the ability to do that. >> as i understand, they're saying "we need to option for the taliban to negotiate with afghanistan. i think president trump is now -- making hopefully a really smart and thoughtful decision on behalf of all americans. >> you're the optimist. >> we'll be right back. it is time for the your business entrepreneurs of the week. "breaking up was hard to do for two, but reuniting felt so good. the owners of 5 string furniture in tennessee are back together after a two-year break. jeff was running the business solo but now they're growing faster than ever. will your business be ready when growth presents itself? american express open cards can help you take on a new job,

or fill a big order or expand your office and take on whatever comes next. find out how american express cards and services can help prepare you for growth at open.com.

whether it's connecting one of or bringing wifi to 65,000 fans. express campuses. services businesses count on communication, and communication counts on centurylink.

that will do it for this hour of msnbc live. right now, andrea mitchell reports. >> right now on "andrea mitchell reports" red flag, the former acting attorney general explaining why her alert was so urgent. >> not only did we believe the russians new this, but they likely had prove, and that created a compromised situation where the national security advisor could be blackmailed by the russians. you don't want your national security advisor compromised with the russians. back to combat, they back a and will president trump now sign on? >>ir