>> above 22,000, record territory. thank you for watching this hour of "msnbc live." i'm ali velshi. >> i'm stephanie ruhle. time for "andrea mitchell reports" with our friend andrea mitchell. >> right now on "andrea mitchell reports," show of force, the u.s. testing a long range missile from an air force base in california. a not so subtle warning days after north korea's second icbm test. but in his first briefing, the secretary of state reaches out directly to kim jong-un with some caveat s. >> we are not your enemy. we're not your threat. but you're presenting an unacceptable threat to us. and we have to respond. >> punishing russia, the president signs the sanctions bill without fanfare, nor comment on vladimir putin's expulsion of u.s. diplomats but he's taking a shot at congress for what he calls clearly unconstitutional provisions despite what the vice president had to say earlier today. >> let me be clear. the united states prefers a

constructive relationship with russia based on mutual cooperation and common interests. but the president in our congress are unified in our message to russia. >> and a real dump? that's how donald trump described the white house living quarters to members of his golf club. one former first daughter is taking issue with that. we'll explain. >> good day. a i'm andrea mitchell in washington. the president is lashing out at congress. the president signed the bill into law this morning without any fanfare, no pictures released yet. but not without firing a series of political shots at a congress that approved it nearly unanimously, labelling it a significantly flawed bill and a signing statement that says it encroaches on his executive powers. nbc national correspondent peter alexander is at the white house.

peter, he issued a signing statement and then a second statement and in each case saying unconstitutional, in one case it encroached on his powers, other presidents have done this in the past. he had no real choice but to sign this, though. >> that's exactly right. the senate passed this bill by 97-2 margin. this was effectively veto proof. the president knew he had to sign it. they pushed to try to push back against the effort here and the ways -- the way that the white house view ed it to try to sort of infringe on his executive authority as the statement says the president was concerned that this would sort of disable his ability to negotiate on issues of foreign policy, saying that foreign policy fell almost exclusively into the hands of the president, saying in his words that this was seriously flawed. in effect, this is a defeat for this administration that did not want this to happen. it sort of rolls back or ends the immediate sense that there might be a reset of relations between the united states and russia as the president has over the course of the last several

months and during the campaign said was going to be a primary focus for him when he came here into office. he said he signed it for the, quote, sake of national unity, but notably none of this took place on camera, so there is no sort of public documentation of it. there is not some headline photo to show the russians that, hey, we're cracking down on you right now, which people are making note of on this day. and beyond that, we still haven't heard from the president, as you noted, about the fact that vladimir putin said he'll expel more than 750 u.s. diplomats in russia and his comments and efforts to seize two u.s. compounds there as well. so on those two topics, still nothing from the president. >> he did speak and referred to the rogue regimes in pyongyang and tehran, which are also now part of this bill. and in that light the icbm launch from california, not the first one today, but certainly a test launch, well timed, if you

will, to send a message to north korea because of its firing last week of an icbm that could reach not only the west coast, but as far as denver and chicago according to a lot of experts. that said, what about the various messages the state department trying to point out that rex tillerson is saying we'll talk with north korea, but only if they first make it clear they're giving up their nuclear program. >> the position from this administration toward north korea still remains not entirely clear, the white house, the president and others effectively have said all options remain on the table following that latest intercontinental ballistic missile test by north korea last week, the president basically the white house condemned it saying it was reckless and it was dangerous. but beyond that, right now, that is where one of the real question marks is for this administration. what are they going to do about what is one of the most immediate and urgent threats facing this country right now, given the increasing threat being posed by north korea and

on that topic we haven't been able to press the president and his aides as they have repeatedly said, saying we're not going to telegraph our strategy, our strategy in that reason, but we will be prepared to take any action necessary to protect the u.s. homeland and americans here. >> peter alexander, starting us off today from the white house. thank you, peter. delaware democratic senator chris coons will be meeting with mattis and tillerson later today. he joins me now at home base. thank you for being here. first of all, there has been some criticism there is a lack of an overall strategy, overarching strategy where there is talk about military options where many experts say there really isn't a real reliable first strike option given the retaliatory power of north korea and the proximity of our neighbors and allies of north korea's neighbors and our allies. what is your message to the administration as we face these

twin threats? >> well, later today, as you mensed, the foreign recessions committee is going to meet in a classified briefing with secretaries mattis and tillerson. topic is reviewing the authorization of use of military force. the president continues to take military action in a number of countries. >> this is something that president obama and also president bush did as well. this is an argument that you and senator kaine and others have been making forcefully but without getting -- >> on a bipartisan basis, the committee has been trying to move forward with a new authorization, but i'll be asking questions as i expect will other senators of both parties about strategy with regards to north korea and afghanistan, two places where we haven't yet heard a clear statement of strategy from the president or from his secretaries of defense or state. >> they have been doing a review of the afghanistan strategy but we still don't know whether or not there is going to be additional troop deployments.

what do you think should be happening? >> i think there is clearly division in the white house between advisers who say we should reduce our footprint and only be doing counterterrorism and those who say we should be strengthening our force on the ground and getting our nato allies to continue the long-term effort. i need to get a classified briefing on the taliban and what is most likely to push them to negotiations. i don't want to see us lose the gains we made in afghanistan but i also question whether there is a strategy to win or whether we're trying to avoid losing. >> and when we get back to north korea and to russia, there seems to be so many different messages coming out of this white house. what do you want to see? let's think first about russia, what should the president be doing in response to vladimir putin kicking out 755 u.s. staff? >> i'm glad the president signed the russia sanctions bill today, but i'm struck that he did so not making a strong statement against russia and their interference in our -- >> that means a strong statement against all of you. >> a strong statement against the congress, which was a

striking choice in terms of timing. i think the president needs to be clear that he sees putin for the threat he is, to our allies across western europe, to our democracy and to our future, because i think we should try and have better relations with putin, but that will only happen if we stand up to putin and are tougher in the face of his aggression and i think that has to begin with the president. >> let's talk about the state department and rex tillerson. he said to us that the diplomats he speaks with say help us, help us fix this situation, this mess, certainly what is implied, rather than taking responsibility for what has been widely reported as demoralized institution, hollowed out mass exodus of foreign service. >> as someone on the appropriations subcommittee that funds the state department, i'm gravely concerned by the trump administration's proposed deep cuts to the state department. that still hasn't been resolved.

i think the tension between secretary tillerson saying months ago that our strategy with regards to north korea is a diplomatic one, and we're going to try and, you know, put every force we can out there in the world and our ambassadors to try to press our allies to press china to press north korea, that's in real contrast to a budget proposal that would slash our state department by more than a third. i am hopeful that democrats and republicans will come together to sustain funding for diplomacy and development. but i think secretary tillerson also needs to show leadership within the state department and make it clear that he also isn't going to see significant layoffs and significant cuts in the state department if we want them to be a key part of our leadership in the world. >> but so far there has been a job freeze and he has yet to fill key positions. >> that's right. >> the acting -- the secretaries are all acting and mostly empty, no undersecretaries. what signal is that sending? he is advocating for these 30%

cuts and even if you and senator corker, the chair, push back, if you end up with 15% cuts that's a whole new base line for the state department. >> that's right. i think that uncertainty is really destabilizing the career foreign service, the civil servants, the folks who service all around the world, often in difficult and dangerous posts need to know they're going to have the support to be able to carry forward their functions. 30% cut, even at 15% cut for a role as important as our state department would be significant. and i do think that is distracting our career diplomats from what ought to be their principle focus, which is making us safe through working with our allies to contain north korea's dangerous nuclear program, to continue to push back on iran's nuclear efforts, and to make sure that we have got a positive future with regards to russian aggression. >> and now the president is, with tweets, blaming china for its failure to rein in north korea, which has been a universal criticism within

democratic and republican circles. but now there is talk that he's going to go unilaterally and slap china with all kinds of trade sanctions. not going through the world trade organization, but rolling out the old 301 provisions which were unilateral u.s. sanctions. >> if he does that, i would expect a strong counterresponse from china. it would have some real consequences, particularly for some of our agricultural exports, which is one of our most robust export sectors. my hope would be that he would consult with congress before taking a decisive action that would have significant consequences for our economy. but i do think it is time for us to come up with a strategy to push china to action against north korea. our timeline for containing north korea is getting short. and the threat to the united states is real. >> thank you so much, senator coons. good to see you. coming up, the white house fighting back against a lawsuit alleging that their involvement in a fake news story and this is a fake news story about a slain dnc staffer was inappropriate.

the reporter who pressed sarah huckabee sanders on that issue joining me next right here. stay with us. boost. it's about moving forward, not back.

it's looking up, not down. it's being in motion. boost® high protein it's intelligent nutrition with 15 grams of protein

and 26 vitamins and minerals. boost® the number one high protein complete nutritional drink.

and the trump white house is denying that it helped push a disputed fox news story, falsely trying to tie the murder of a young democratic national committee staffer, seth rich, to the wikileaks publication of hacked e-mails. the allegation that the trump administration was trying to

deflect suspicion that its campaign had been involved in the russian backed wikileaks operation. it all started in may when fox news published an online article alleging that the young dnc staffer who was killed for leaking -- he was killed for leaking internal dnc e-mails to wikileaks. though d.c. police say this poor young man was killed in a completely unrelated botched random robbery. fox news retracted the piece a week later saying it did not meet the network's editorial standards. at issue is whether president trump was aware of the article after sean spicer met with some of the people involved, including a long trump supporter. spicer said he met with the men but denied that the president or other white house officials were also involved. yesterday's press briefing, glen thrush pressed sarah huckabee sanders about the lawsuit. take a listen. >> did the president know about the story prepublication and did he have an influence on the way

the story was -- >> the president had no knowledge of the story and it is completely untrue that he had white house involvement in the story. >> does it disturb you there is an allegation in the lawsuit and sean spicer admitted meeting with the two individuals that this was discussed in your white house that this particular -- >> he met with member of the media. i don't find that to be a strange thing. you guys are all members of the media. >> the story later retracted because it was false, he met with that reporter and he met with a campaign donor. does it disturb you, say anything about this white house that you would entertain that kind of story? >> it doesn't bother me that the press secretary would take a meeting with somebody involved in the media about a story. none of that was disclosed. they had a conversation and that was the end of it. >> in a statement fox news said in part, quote, the accusation that fox news dotcom published the story to help detract from coverage of the russia collusion issue is erroneous. the retraction of the story is

still being investigated internally and we have no evidence that the man involved was misquoted. joining me is nina dod and george will, msnbc contributor. you know something about this, this young man was killed, his family incredibly grief stricken and then hit by the fox story claiming he was the wikileaks perpetrator rather than the white house and it was completely false. >> seth rich was a popular, extremely popular, terrific dnc employee who was killed tragically in a murder that is still unsolved. the family had to live for a year now with that. and it is horrible. what was more disgusting is when the story was reported and put online by fox news, in may, and not just put online, amplified by many of their opinion programs and by their news programs as well, covered as legitimate news for a week before the family finally got fox to retract it.

and, you know, andrea, what is really -- what is really disgusting about this is the idea you had people sitting in the white house, discussing the story a month before it was published and the white house didn't remember. >> and glen thrush, you were pushing sarah sanders hard at the briefing yesterday. the issue here is white house credibility as well. correct? >> well, look, i -- we had just been -- it is funny, before i asked that question, we had just been harangued by sarah about fake news and our obsession with russia and how it was derailing the administration from talking about important things. and how the press core had really not done its due diligence in terms of pursuing leads, having to do with hillary clinton's campaign, and i have to tell you, this disclosure that they sat and listened to this, that they entertained it, strikes me as being extraordinary. i've not heard of anything like

this. when i asked sarah sanders if she thought this was the appropriate way for a white house to behave, she said, yeah, i entertained stuff from reporters all the time. but the lawsuit alleges something more significant. that there was a discussion between the fox folks and there was a donor and campaign supporter present. i have never -- i don't know, i've been a reporter for going on 25 years now, i have never brought a campaign donor into a meeting with a flack. that is a different dynamic. and i think what is really important that happened yesterday and why i asked that question is sarah sanders is now on the public record saying the president had no foreign knowledge and no involvement in shaping that story. i want to see how that fact holds up over the next couple of months. >> and george will, this comes only 24 hours after the washington post broke the story, that in fact contrary to what his own lawyer said, his president was involved in crafting don jr.'s statement about the russia meeting on air force one coming back from the

g-20. in fact, the reporters insist they're correct, that he was directing and dictating the statement himself. that it was not just coincidental and that in fact the people on air force one and there were many people on air force one, from the white house staff, were not insulating the president from something he should not have been involved with, considering that this investigation is ongoing. >> well, you have to assume that the people on air force one share the normal norms that have governed washington for a couple of centuries. and there is no really evidence that we can take that for granted anymore. with regard to the suit involving fox and this young man, mr. rich, the lawsuit itself is -- looks to be a kitchen sink lawsuit, a lot of stuff is thrown in there about racial discrimination and all the rest. furthermore, there is a contributor involved, a kind of

blowhard, who may be saying the president is deeply involved in this and interested in this, when he has no right to say that. however, nice thing about a lawsuit and we're really good at these in this country, if it proceeds, there will be discovery and the discovery in the digital age will be full of digital fingerprints and trails, e-mails and all the rest, so we're going to learn a lot more about this. >> in fact, all of the communications to air force one are recorded. so there is a record of all of the phone conversations back and forth because they were calling lawyers on the ground, including don jr.'s lawyers, apparently. >> so what is interesting, andrea, is what we have seen in the past couple of weeks is that this is an administration and before that, the campaign, that seem to be remarkably open to just about anyone who e-mailed them to say they had negative information about one of their opponents or something that could help them, whether it is don jr. taking a meeting with the russians because they claim they have something about hillary clinton or whether it is sean spicer sitting down with a

donor for heaven sakes who says they're working on a story that potentially is a counternarrative to help the white house with the russian problems. this is a white house that apparently anybody can get into, if they say they have negative information or so far that's what the narrative appears to be. >> glenn thrush, is there some thought at the white house that things are changing? only been a couple of days now, and we have seen less tweeting from the president, but we don't know whether that is a reflection of scheduling or of his temperament or of john kelly. >> andrea, i think things are -- have changed 180 degrees in the last 24 hours. and the president is never going to tweet again, i think john kelly is going to be able to, you know, intercept any communication with the president that isn't authorized. of course that's not going to change. donald trump is not going to change. what is interesting about both these situations involving the don jr. stuff and this terrible situation involving seth rich is

let's look at the portrait of the president that we know. this is a president who takes his publish relations into his own hands. the notion that someone would come to one of the president's staffers with a piece of juicy information that was later going to appear on fox, and a staffer would not have transmitted that to the president, that does not comport with what we know in the reporting over the past months about the way he communicates with his communication staff. sean spicer at the end of every day, when he was press secretary, would sit across from the president and give hmm a download of what happened that day. so the notion that the president was, you know, tactfully moving in and out of the edits of don jr.'s statement instead of dictating it, we don't know what went down as far as the narrative, but it doesn't comport with his behavior in the past, taking full control of this stuff himself. >> and also before you all go, all of you have either covered

the white house, worked in the white house, been an adviser to white houses. i myself have covered presidents going back many years. what about the president's comment to the golf magazine of sports illustrated that the white house is, quote, a real dump, explaining why he's spent so much time at his other properties on weekends. you most recently worked inside the white house. >> i can't imagine a situation where anybody would call that a dump. it is a privilege. it is a privilege to serve the country. in the white house. period. end of story. >> and, george, you and i both were involved in different capacities in the reagan years. i was a reporter, young

reporter. every time i would walk through the gates i would feel a sense of awe that i was somehow, you know, representing the american people by covering this white house. ronald reagan used to put on his suit coat before walk ing into the oval office just to show respect. some of his predecessors and successors did not. >> ronald reagan had his personally imposed dress code to counteract what he thought was the disrespect shown by certain casual people from plains, georgia, and thereabouts. but the white house has gone through various permeatations. i think abigail adams hung up the laundry in the east room. place was almost falling down when trueman was moved over to the blair house so they could rehabilitate it. but the idea it is physically a dump is ludicrous. and the idea that as you say that you can walk through there and not just be overwhelmed by the -- the predecessors there and the ghosts of the great decisions made there is

depressing. >> yeah. >> i think we will leave it there. glenn, thanks for your reporting, thanks for all the work you do in the briefing room day in and day out. we appreciate it. coming up, new reports that the justice department is aiming to take on affirmative action and college admissions, reopening what had been a closed issue. that's ahead right here on "andrea mitchell reports." (woman) when you have type 2 diabetes, there's a moment of truth. and now with victoza®, a better moment of proof. victoza® lowers my a1c and blood sugar

better than the leading branded pill, which didn't get me to my goal. lowers my a1c better than the leading branded injectable. the one i used to take. victoza® lowers blood sugar in three ways. 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®. 40 million americans are waking up to a gillette shave. and at our factory in boston, 1,200 workers are starting their day building on over a hundred years of heritage, craftsmanship and innovation. today we're bringing you america's number one shave at lower prices every day. putting money back in the pockets of millions of americans. as one of those workers, i'm proud to bring you gillette quality for less, because nobody can beat the men and women of gillette. gillette - the best a man can get.

the trump administration is apparently planning to divert resources from the justice department away from pursuing civil rights investigations to instead study alleged bias against whites instead of minorities in college admissions. a potential to reopen long decided cases of affirmative la rights groups and academic institutions across the country. joining me now is jenai nelson, counsel of the naacp legal defense and educational fund and with me here, jonathan capehart, opinion writer for "the washington post" and msnbc contributor. we have seen cases in texas and michigan over the years, i remember covering the bakee case. this has gone through various iterations at various universities with compromises along the way. where do we stand as far as the law is confirmed?

>> just last year, in june of 2016, the supreme court, for the third time in 40 years, validated the use of race in college admissions. it basically validated the use of affirmative action programs to promote and expand democracy in our institutions of higher learning. it was a 4-3 decision it was written by justice kennedy, a justice on the fence on this issue in the past, but who spoke out quite strongly and clearly in 2016 saying this is precisely what our nation requires for equality and dignity of all residents, and that colleges and universities can craft narrowly tailored plans that support the goal of diversity and that are perfectly constitutional and do not constitute intentional discrimination. >> jonathan, the point here from the university perspective, many universities, is that diversity

is a goal, a positive goal of an overall education. and that schools that do not have diverse student populations can do things in a narrow way to try to achieve that as long as people meet all the other standards. >> right, of course. and educational institution, if it is doing is job right, is preparing young people to go out into the world as it is, not as it is envisioned on a campus that might be monochromatic. so if a college or university isn't doing its best to make sure that the -- all the students there reflect the country as much as they can, then they're not doing their job. colleges and universities have a time of it trying to not only find qualified students to come to their campus s, but then they have to convince those students to come to those campuses. and, you know, as a person of color who went to carlton college in minnesota, in the middle of the corn fields ofcar

love north field, but there were a lot of african-american students who got there and welcoming and as opening as carlton was, they weren't comfortable. that's not something that is the fault of the college, but you have an atmosphere where the justice department is saying to the coupntry there is a problem of white students being harmed by affirmative action, it sends a signal that i think there should be very vigorous pushback on. >> let's talk about this, because the counterpoint is that white students claim, perhaps i don't know if there are cases even, that seem to be -- that seems to be the justice department looking for a problem in order to put resources there, so the claim would be that white students are being disadvantaged by other students, minority students, getting entrance to the available slots. what about the fact that this takes money away from the

pursuit of more pressing civil rights cases that are out there. >> that's a great question. first, just the premise that this is harming white students is wrong on at least two key fronts. there are more white students in college now than ever before. so to suggest that white students are somehow not getting the advantage of higher education is absolutely false. and the second thing to consider is that all students, including white students, benefit from being in a diverse learning environment. they're better prepared for the workplace, they are better prepared to think on diverse teams. companies that have diverse teams earn 35% more successful in terms of revenue generation than those that do not have diverse teams. so racial diversity is critical to the success of our country. and in terms of diverting resources away from key civil rights issues, we should all be greatly alarmed by what the justice department is doing right now.

this is what a 21st century assault on civil rights looks like. an assault on voter rights, an assault on police community relations, and now this latest attack on affirmative action. it is stoking a us versus them narrative that is doing nothing but harm to our country. >> the department of justice last week unsolicited joined another case filed a lawsuit in another case, unbidden, claiming that there was no discrimination involved. >> look, i think what is happening here is -- i've written this many times, that when you have someone like steve bannon, as a senior counselor to the president of the united states, with his connections to the so-called alt-right, but white supremacists, what is not surprising about this, about the story in the new york times today is that this is in line with that type of thinking. what you just talked about,

unbidden, is in line with that type of thinking. what we're seeing here is ultimate manifestation of elections have consequences. president trump is president of the united states. he came into office with ideas -- surrounded by people with clear ideas about what they want to do, about the kinds of ideas and philosophies they want to push, and they are pushing them. we're seeing it with affirmative action today, we saw it with transgender last week, who knows what it will be next week. >> jonathan capehart, jenai nelson, thank you so much. we're following breaking news from minneapolis after an explosion at a private christian k through 12 school. the local fire department says three people are still not accounted for. at this point, we cannot confirm any fatalities. crews continue to search the scene. fire officials say the explosion appears to be the result of a severed gas line. more on this as it comes in and we'll be right back. i'm worried i can't find a safe used car. you could start your search at the all-new carfax.com

that might help. show me the carfax? now the car you want and the history you need are easy to find. show me used minivans with no reported accidents. boom. love it. [struggles] show me the carfax. start your used car search and get free carfax reports at the all-new carfax.com. there's nothing more important than your health. so if you're on medicare or will be soon,

you may want more than parts a and b here's why. medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. you might want to consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any medicare supplement insurance plan, these help pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and, these plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you could stay with the doctor or specialist you trust... or go with someone new. you're not stuck in a network... because there aren't any. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. there's a range to choose from, depending on your needs and your budget.

rates are competitive. and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. like any of these types of plans, they let you apply whenever you want. there's no enrollment window... no waiting to apply. so call now. remember, medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. you'll be able to choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. whether you're on medicare now or turning 65 soon, it's a good time to get your ducks in a row. duck: quack! call to request your free decision guide now. because the time to think about tomorrow is today.

how complicated is it for you to do your job with sometimes the president, the commander in chief, contradicting u.s. foreign policy on twitter? >> just like anything else, it is part of the environment in which we work. we'll adapt to it. we'll adapt to it. i don't view it as obstacle, a hindrance or assistance. whatever the president chooses to express, he expresses. and that's information to

everybody, us included. >> secretary of state rex tillerson in his first briefing since taking office six months ago on how he deals with president trump's tweeting foreign policy. joining me now is cory shockey, former pentagon state department and national security security council official for george w. bush, now at stanford university hoover institution. i guess under george w. bush you didn't have to worry about the president tweeting and undercutting whatever the secretary of state was saying. it is now a real issue. >> it is a real issue. and not just for the secretary of state. i do think one of the real problems the trump administration is having is consistency and continuity of message, which, of course, matters an enormous amount. vice president pence is in eastern europe, what used to be known as eastern europe, this week, he was in georgia, talk ing about consistency of policy, and it is a very hard sell. >> it is a hard sell because he is saying what you would expect the president to be saying about

vladimir putin, yet the president signed the sanctions bill today, has had no comment at all about putin's saying that we had to remove 755 people from the u.s. embassy workforce in russia. that is a very large and disproportional cut as you would know better than i, and the president said not a word about this, he hasn't tweeted about it. and then he signs the sanctions bill because it was veto proof and it was nearly unanimous passage by congress. and then basically criticizes congress rather than criticizing russia. >> yeah. i think that's a really important point, andrea. and that's why it matters so much that the congress on a broad bipartisan basis made very clear the traditional american foreign policy that is skeptical at the behavior of vladimir putin's russia. i think it really mattered to force the president's hand and to make it much harder for him

to avert the sanctions policy that congress passed. >> now, north korea, of course, is an even more pressing problem with the icbm launch by north korea with the defense intelligence agency analysis that they are two years closer to their goal of getting a nuclear weapon on top of missile such as this that could reach the continental united states. what about a plan from the administration that include s both a threat of military force, understandably, diplomacy, what are they doing and what should they be doing? >> well, again, this is an issue in which the president of the united states has said the time is nearly done for diplomacy, and secretary tillerson is encouraging the beginning of negotiations with north korea. so the administration, it is difficult to understand what the administration is trying to do.

and i absolutely agree with you that one of the real problems for trump administration foreign policy is that even where they have solid strategies like in the anti-isis fight, they're not talking about them publicly, they're not making clear to americans, and to our allies that allies can coordinate their actions in support of us and to threaten adversaries. you need a clear and consistent message from the top of the administration and the trump administration -- >> secretary tillerson yesterday sent a message to pyongyang saying we're open to talks, but now there is a lot of pushback, the state department cautioning he means only after they give up their nuclear program or indicate they're not trying to advance their nuclear program, which is a precondition that no one expects kim jong-un to expect. >> yes. i think that's right.

both on the purpose of the negotiations, which is denuclearization, that's absolutely the right purpose, but if that's a precondition for talks, i don't understand what the talks would be about. so i think they really need to, especially on an issue as volatile as north korea, and for the north koreans who are making such rapid progress towards an outcome we oppose, they need to get their policy in order, and they need to make it very clear and very public and very consistent. >> thanks so much, cory shockey, always great to see you. thank you for being with us today. and coming up, we'll talk about conflicts of interest, new questions being raised over president trump's former campaign manager and his access to the white house. the inside scoop is next right here on "andrea mitchell reports." once upon a time

a girl with golden locks broke into a house owned by three bears. she ate some porridge, broke the baby bear's chair, and stole some jewelry, a flat-screen tv, and a laptop. luckily the geico insurance agency had helped the bears with homeowners insurance. they were able to replace all their items... ...including a new chair from crate and barrel. call geico and see how easy it is to switch and save on homeowners insurance.

i think the general should relook at firing richard cordray, the cfpb, a person now all but running for governor in the state of ohio. >> i have to ask this, considering you've brought this up. do you have any business interest here? do you have a client that wants to see this happen?

>> no, no. i have no clients whatsoever. >> that was former trump campaign manager, corey lewandowski, of course, on "meet the press," setting off alarm bells about possible business conflicts after he seemed to call for the firing of the head of the consumer protection bureau. turns out he does represent banking interests and is still getting a payout from them. and there also may be an ohio political connection. so let's get the inside scoop from nick confessore, msnbc contributor. nick, what's going on here? >> well, see, andrea, the truth here is he does have a client here. corey lewandowski exited his previously lobbying firm, saying he didn't want to be a lobbyist, but started up a new consulting firm in may, and one of his first new clients was actually a previous client from the lobbying firm, a firm called community choice financial, which is a payday lender, based in ohio. and the entire industry for

payday lending is doing a lot of battle with cordray right now, and wants to see him out of the way. >> so we have issues here with lobbyists who have free access to the press and are still his friends and advisers. and some who are not lobbyists, but are still representing interests that are directly involved in officials -- in official business, potentially, at the white house. there's really no way to police this, is there? and this is not -- this is not unique to the trump white house, we should point out. >> no, of course not. and, of course, in the obama administration, i think the rise of these advisory firms was actually quite pronounced, because democrats who worked under obama did not want to be identified as lobbyists, but there were influential people who straddled that line. it's important for the viewers to understand that to be a lobbyist under federal law means you meet a certain definition, but across the broader issue of having clients and pushing their interests in partner has a much

broader definition. corey lewandowski is one of those people, but just one of many. >> i want to share with our viewers also what roger stone, long-time friend and adviser, in and out of that circle with the -- with the president, but mostly in rather than out. he told "huff po," as you know, none of us are really gone, speaking about scaramucci, saying the scaramucci still has the president's cell phone, private number. just because he's not in the white house no one should think his influence has gone. >> that's correct. look, the gate-keeping function in this white house is especially weak. now, this could change under the new chief of staff, john kelly. but what makes this thing about the advisory consultants, the people who are half in, half out so unique in this administration is the unprecedented access that the president gives to people who are outside the white house chain of command. there is a big kitchen cabinet. they talk to the president constantly. he listens to them on big issues. he assigns them big tasks, and he does not always respect the

gate-keeping function in the oval office. so if you can hire a person like this, or have a connection to them, it's better than having a lobbyist. >> there's also a credibility question. we were talking to glenn thrush about this, your colleague earlier, with all of the denials coming from the podium in the white house. this is -- sarah huckabee sanders at the briefing yesterday talking about the whole "washington post" story about don junior's statement. let's play a little bit of that. >> the statement that don junior issued is true. there's no inaccuracy in the statement. the president weighed in, as any father would, based on the limited information he had. he certainly didn't dictate, but -- like i said, he weighed in, offered suggestions, like any father would do. >> that's one way to cast it. but the "washington post" reporters who worked on that say that that is not what happened. that they had multiple sources who were standing by their story that the president was actually

dictating the statement from air force one. >> well, correct, andrea. and the important thing here is that the white house line right now would be a lot more credible if it wasn't a different line from the previous line. so they started out saying he had no role. the president's lawyer out there, this is the president's personal lawyer, jay sekulow, is out there saying he had no role. and then all of a sudden the line becomes, well, he had some role. so when the explanations keep changing, that's not credible. it's hard for the white house to defend what they're doing here. >> nick confessore, thank you so much. we'll be right back. more ahead. stay tuned to "andrea mitchell reports" right here on msnbc. from the first moment you met it was love at first touch and all you wanted to do was surround them in comfort and protection that's why only pampers swaddlers is the #1 choice of hospitals to wrap your baby in blanket-like softness and premium protection mom: "oh hi baby" so all they feel is love

wishing you love, sleep and play. pampers

done.rs. super-cool notebooks. done. that's mom taking care of business. but who takes care of mom? office depot/office max. this week, filler paper just one cent with

five dollar minimum purchase. ♪taking care of business.

thank you for being with us. that does it for this edition of "andrea mitchell reports." remember, follow the show online on facebook and on twitter at mitchell reports. chris jansing is up next right here on msnbc. chris? >> thank you so much, andrea. good afternoon. i am chris jansing at msnbc headquarters in new york. down to business? well, president trump does sign that new sanctions bill against russia into law and creates confusion at the same time. issuing two statements from the president on that one bill. is the signing a clue that he's finally getting the house in order? or is this just a house of cards? warning shot. the u.s. launches an intercontinental ballistic missile just days after north korea's latest missile test. with escalating tensions, new questions now about u.s. strategy after officials make what appear to be contradictory

statements. and a real dump. reports that the president's eyebrow-raising assessment of the white house is just that. but chelsea clinton is having none of it. she strikes back, twice. but let's start with the confusion surrounding the newly signed russian sanctions law after the white house released two different statements, both attributed to the president, and both, including serious attacks on congress. an early sign that new chief of staff, john kelly, has his work cut out for him. the question of will he or won't he was answered this morning when trump finally and away from the cameras signed russian sanctions passed by overwhelming margins in the congress. only five members out both houses voted against them. but while the president's public schedule focused on immigration and visa reform today, he made his feelings about the sanctions clear. in the releases, staffers now say were, quote -- a signing