year. there's been a good deal of reporting on how slow the policy review has been. in part because of sharp divisions within the trump white house between steve bannon the newly departed chief strategist and hr mcmaster. let's get into it with our reporters. kristen welker and phil rucker, from "the washington post" and msnbc political analyst. kristen, let's start with you. what are you hearing about the substance of what the president will announce tonight at 9:00 p.m.? >> hi, there, nicolle. this is what we are expecting. we are expecting the president to roll out his big picture strategy for afghanistan. that will include we think an announcement of an increase, a measured increase in troop levels. it is unlikely we are told he's going to get specific about that number. but of course the number we keep hearing up to 4,000. a defense department official saying that that is likely going to be the cap on how many troops he will add to the region.

i think there are other components to his strategy. as well as rooming out plans for how -- rolling out plans for how he wants to crack down on officials in taliban and improving the training of the afghans forces. both of those were critical components of president obama's strategy for dealing with afghanistan and it's an engagement, a conflict that continues to just increase in terms of its complication and in terms of the fact that the taliban has been making a number of gaining ground in recent months. so this is something that has bedevilled the president's predecessors, as you know, nicolle, as we have spoken about. the question is what is going to be different this time. it's not clear but that's the question that the president is going to aim to answer tonight. it does come after the ouster of his chief strategist steve bannon who was opposed to adding more troops to afghanistan. he wanted to put in private

contractors instead. that was a strategy that hr mcmaster was opposed to and the new chief of staff. this marks a new thinking inside this administration and also a departure from some of what we heard from candidate trump on the campaign trail who ran as a noninterventionist. that's not the reality in the white house. >> let me play for you defense secretary jim mattis on the topic. maybe foreshadowing of what we'll hear tonight. here he is. >> i would not -- i was not willing to make significant troop lifts until we knew what was the strategy. what was the commitment going in. in that regard, the president has made a decision as he said. he wants to be the one to announce it to the american people so i'll stand silent until then. until that point. >> kristen, this is a man that sort of understands and lives and reveres that chain of command. he's going to allow the commander in chief to make the

announcement, but it's a little window into paralyzed the policy had become. do you have any insight as to whether the departure freed up the policy process or is it a coincidence? >> it was one of the components that freed it up. as you pointed out at the very beginning of the show there had been a clash of ideas between steve bannon and mcmaster. i think what you'll hear the president say tonight is that this decision, this strategy, that he rolled out, came after a lot of discussions with his national security team. then of course as we reported on friday he met with the national security team, james mattis, and they hammered down on what the exact strategy should be. there were a lot of different options put on the table including total withdraw, nicolle. but it seems that the president decided to follow it a -- a lot of what his commanders were saying, they do need to have a larger troop presence there on the ground in afghanistan. >> all right, kristen welker, i

know you have other responsibilities, other duties, you day is probably not halfway over so thank you for spending time with us. phil rucker, donald trump has had a very, very contradictory and complicated and sometimes shallow relationship to the war in afghanistan. i think he's tweeted at various points agreement with president obama. disagreement with president obama. he's condemned the troop surges. he's condemned -- he's really taken a lot of shots at the way this war was conducted under other commanders in chief. what do you make of what's expected tonight from the president? >> well, it's a real evolution in donald trump's thinking about this war as a candidate. and dating back many years before that. he's been opposed to the american presence in afghanistan. he's felt like the country -- america, has lost too much blood, too much treasure. too many resources, too many people on the ground in what he had viewed for a long time as a real quagmire. as a war that could not be won. now that he's commander in chief

however he's getting input from generals, from commanders on the ground. he's understanding the complexities here. there are a lot of sort of repercussions for any kind of action or withdrawal throughout the region. and it's been a slow process. it's taken many months of discussions with his war council, but he's concluded that the smart thing is to add some troops on the ground, double down on the efforts in that country. the problem for trump though is you know, he likes the easy wins. he wants a big victory and there was no easy option for him. again and again he would get frustrated in the meetings with his national security team because there wasn't a victory without a lot of investment or loss of life. >> that's something i have heard over and over again. that -- i have to say in terms of the instinct of not wanting

to risk our treasure, our men and women at war, that certainly is a sentiment that a lot of americans feel. i think it's a sentiment that his two predecessors felt, but presidents bush and obama understood that only a reluctant commander in chief took the country to war. i understand the policy reviews were almost derailed by almost a petulant refusal to see no good options. >> that's right. in some ways trump has been channeling the views of the american people. the country itself is wary of war after 16 years now. and he wanted to -- you know, give the country an easy solution and just bring an end to it and proclaim victory and move on and that's not possible with the facts and the reality before him. he had again and again general mattis, general mcmaster, even now general kelly as the chief of staff has really been an enforcer to help get the president to a decision.

to sort of make a final decision here. and my understanding from talking to sources is that trump has become a little bit more comfortable with the final option here. which is to add some of these troops but it's a difficult road to get here. >> phil, stay with us. i want to bring in the panel. joining us is weekly standard founder and editor bill kristol. associated press white house reporter jonathan lameer. jonathan capehart and a former rnc director. can you pick up on this thread that no president wants to take the country to war. but the responsibility you have to our military is that no one has made a sacrifice in vain. that's why you undertake a war strategy to figure out how to win. or prevail. >> or at least prevent disaster. i think it's a simple withdraw from afghanistan would have been disastrous for us and in the

region, for pakistan, for a million other important national interests. i think president trump was led unhappily to the responsible conclusion. not as good as war troops which would have been better but president obama i think withdrew much too steeply. he deordered the surge, he stabilized the situation and then -- he withdrew and he was putting pressure on the commanders to go down further and further. which is why trump has to take it back up, 4,000 troops. i think it's an interesting thing, he deferred in the sense to mcmaster and mattis and kelly. and, you know, for those who -- i don't think trump is growing in the white house. i'm not sure he understands all the arguments but i have to say, if it is the way it's being presented he deserves some credit for making the decision. >> i heard today that the strategy was to put in front of the president an issue -- the

gravity of which would consume him and distract him from cable and twitter and there's nothing more grave than the debate about taking a country to war or increasing the number of troops there. but that there was an acknowledgment that they needed to change the conversation today. >> i think that that's right. this is the media camp -- camp david was part of this. suggesting to the grown-ups in the room, this is important. the air strikes a few months ago was a matter of national interest. this is even more so. this is the idea of sending american lives into harm's way. there's also a recognition in the white house that this has been a tough stretch for this president and in particular, coming off of what we saw last week in charlottesville. we had the american public who had not seen the president since his trump tower press conference. he had a bill signing at bedminster that was not open to the media. we'll see him addressing the nation tonight and this could be

reset is entirely too strong. but the idea of changing the conversation somewhat, putting him in the context of the presidency with the trappings of the office behind him. making a real important decision. >> jonathan capehart, this is exactly correct in terms of how the white house sees it. but just rip the curtain off. really not seven days after sort of suggesting there are two sides in a debate between neo-nazis and those who were there to protest them, he's going to play president by acting like a commander in chief. >> yes. and when it comes to theater and production he very well might succeed in doing that. here's the problem. one, it's not going to cloud the previous seven days. i mean, that's a stench and a black mark on his presidency that's indelible. but the problem he's going to have going forward, i'm going to make a prediction right now. let's say he reads the teleprompter well. he presents a plan that actually, you know -- >> is that where the bar is? >> yeah. >> is that what you're watching for tonight if you're on tv? >> yeah, i'm going to watch for

the performance, i'm going to listen to the policy and listen to the reaction of people in the foreign policy establishment and other folks to see whether they think -- >> because the bar is now officially underground. >> yes, it's below ground. but here's the thing. president trump always always always steps all over whatever good impression he makes. so the thing that -- not terrifies me, but that concerns me is he presents this plan and then when things go wrong, because this is war. things do go wrong. does he stand behind the troops? does he stand behind his commanders or does he throw them under the bus because he doesn't want to take responsibility of being held accountable for a plan that maybe one day hits the snafu or something horrible goes wrong. the commander in chief must take the good with the bad and he's shown an inability to go with the bad. >> mike, you and i worked for two men who took their lumps.

they both backed wars that became unpopular and became, you know, political liabilities for both president bush and john mccain. do you sense anything in president trump that suggests that, one, he's willing to sort of make a decision and then absorb and take the fall for the consequences of those decisions? and just talk about making a decision in this vein as our country's commander in chief four days after bob corker of the senate foreign relations committee questioned whether he had the stability and competence to be the president. is this the kind of man we follow in military decisions? >> well, he is. he's the commander in chief and whether we like it or not, he is. i think the easy thing for him to do is to say, hey, i made a promise during the campaign, we're withdrawing. he's been convince that's the wrong thing to do. >> is that his impulse? >> whether it was his impulse or

not, that's where he made the tough decisions. president obama talked about closing guantanamo bay. he didn't. ultimately when you get into the job, sometimes you see the gravity of it. i hope he grows, i think the jury is out on how it will be. when things go wrong 16 years in this war, but i think he's making the right decision for the right reasons in terms of getting advice from the right people. so in that case i think it's a good thing. how it goes and what corker said, i think he's talking about the things that happened last week. i think what you will see like with the air strikes in syria, you'll se a policy debate about this and some bipartisan policy debate. have a debate about an actual decision as opposed to his demeanor is a good thing. >> phil rucker, let me ask you if there is anything cynical about making an announcement about your country's military in the wake of kind of calamitous seven days this white house has endur endured? >> well, i guess that depends on

how -- who's judging that. i think what he's trying to do, what trump is trying to do is just draw a clear line and separate what happened last week and he's going to come out tonight as commander in chief and then we should stay tuned for the next 24 hours because he's going to arizona where he'll be at the border and do a big campaign rally in phoenix tomorrow night where i assume we'll have a very different kind of performance potentially. so he's just trying to act in the spot based on what the environment is. >> that's such a perfect point. there it is. they're screaming go to break, but i have to follow-up with you. i guess this is my point. everybody welcomes the presidential moments. i expect to see one tonight and i started to ask this question last tuesday and i i have been yelled at and screamed at by all my friends in the white house and the state department, why doesn't anyone resign? for nights like tonight. this is why we stay. we stay so when the president has to make a decision about our national security there are grown-ups advising him, but tomorrow he may be in phoenix,

you know, rocking it old school with sheriff whatever his name is. >> sheriff joe apayao. he might pardon him. >> am i crazy? >> you have to distinguish these things? >> why? it's the same -- >> it's the same guy. we can still think he shouldn't be president of the united states. but john kelly and mattis are not going along to help trump's approval rate -- >> i'm not saying it's a policy -- >> i think we need to put it on one track. i wish he'd cancel the trip tomorrow to bring home he's made a very serious decision. he should spend tomorrow briefing both committees on the foreign -- and on the phone with the nato partners. i think he's done a little bit of that today. he could do a lot more but you know i don't expect him to cancel that rally tomorrow unfortunately. >> again, we are back to careening from highs to lows to

lows to lows to. donald trump isn't the only one on a war fronting. steve bannon declares the trump presidency over. who has the most to fear? also ahead the russia investigation hones in on one individual who attended that meeting in trump tower arranged by don jr. to get dirt on hillary clinton. "the new york times" is reporting that another attendee has deep ties to russian intelligence. we'll be right back. four seconds on the clock, down by one. championship on the line. erin "the sharpshooter" shanahan fakes left. she's outside of the key, she shoots... ...she scores! uh... yes, erin, it is great time to score a deal. we need to make room for the 2018 models. relive the thrill of beating the clock. the volkswagen model year end event. hurry in for a $1,000 apr bonus and 0% apr for 60 months on a new 2017 jetta or passat.

so find a venus smooth that contours to curves, the smoother the skin, the more comfortable you are in it. flexes for comfort, and has a disposable made for you. skin smoothing venus razors.

the dinosaurs' extinction... you outnumbered. don't listen to them. not appropriate. now i'm mashing these potatoes with my stick of butter... why don't you sit over here. find your awesome with the xfinity stream app. included with xfinity tv. more to stream to every screen.

the struggle against violent extremism will not be finished quickly and it extends well beyond afghanistan and pakistan. there will be an enduring test of our free society and our leadership in the world. >> that was president obama announcing a troop surge in afghanistan during his first year in the white house. that marked a new chapter in the war that's now spanned three presidencies. one that president trump has railed against for the better part of a decade but he's announcing a new phase of the war. joining the panel now is major general robert scales military analyst and former commander to the u.s. war college and marc jacobson. general, let me start with you. are you heartened by what we expect to hear tonight that the president has one, landed on a strategy for afghanistan and two, that it includes sending more troops there? >> no, i'm not heartened.

to be honest with you, our military has been at this now for 15 years. after 9/11 our military leaders said this would be a long war, a protracted war. and every president from neocon with president bush to a globalist with president obama and now president trump have all promised to control, reduce the number of troops in afghanistan. and within what the first year, their second year of their administrations increased troop levels. i understand the logic behind it. i understand this new strategy, but this whole thing has a certain, i don't know, darwinian hidden hand at work here. that demands that the united states has been at this for 15 years and my great concern is that my grandson will retire from the military after serving in afghanistan. >> well, then let me follow-up with you. defense secretary mattis has been saying, mr. president, we

haven't fought a 16-year war so much as we have fought a one year war 16 times. it sounds like he may be of like minded assessment about what hasn't worked there. do you think that there's any sort of adjustment in our military strategy that could change that? >> that's right -- >> no, i wanted to follow-up with general scales on that. i mean, it seems like secretary mattis sees this as the way you do. 16 one year wars have been waged, they haven't been successful. it seems like you're sharing a concern with our current secretary of defense. does anything about his clear eyedness on this does that hearten you or do you feel any optimism that anything we do there could bring it to any sort of conclusion? >> that's a great point, nicolle. i know jim mattis. i know him well enough to know he's not willing to risk the lives of american soldiers and marines in afghanistan if he

doesn't have some hope for improving the situation there. then we'll hear some of that from the president tonight. let's reduce corruption, let's put pressure on afghanistan, let's improve the quality of the afghan army. these are things that will come from the president. but the americans want this to win, they want this over. but the israelis have been fighting a protracted war for 07 years. i'm not convinced that even the best strategy, even more soldiers and marines added to the fight in afghanistan is going to terminate this thing in any time soon. >> marc jacobson, let me give you the same question about mattis who stands in a league of his own, even in this incredibly polarized presidency of president trump. he's revered around the world. i wonder if you think he could be any sort of x-factor in

crafting the kind of strategy that would bring a reluctant commander in chief like donald trump along and then he might be able tos a sellable a strategy that his predecessors couldn't? >> well, general scales has stumbled on the great irony about afghanistan and we were joking about how, do you remember last time we were up in the middle of the night listening to the president give a speech about a troop increase and that was in 2009. secretary mattis very well aware of that. and he's -- i think he understands as does national security adviser mcmaster and general dunford there has to be something more than a modest troop increase. if the president simply says he's going to send a few thousand more troops to afghanistan tonight that's great continuity with the president obama policies. and i think it's really important that we hear from the president what the u.s. national

security interests are in afghanistan. what is his goal? we have to hear a clear articulation of what the president wants to eso out of the -- to see out of the u.s. commitment to afghanistan. >> i honed in on secretary mattis because it's been reported that he was given the authority -- simply increasing the troops was what was needed he was given that authority back in june but he refused to do that until there was a broader strategy and that policy review was as my -- as i understand from reporting about the topic held up and embroiled in an intrawest wing policy struggle. i wonder if by clearing steve bannon who was advocating for security contractors to be involved if mattis has more running room to put in place a strategy that has greater success. >> i'm torn here because on the one hand i'm cautiously is optimistic because mattis understands that there's a component here where we have to be focused on helping the afghan government develop the economy

along with some regional partners there too. mattis understands the u.s. can't go it along so that nato commitment will be important. and there are certain limitations in the whole operation. in the end, the president has to double down on the anti-corruption and electoral reform so i'm cautiously optimistic there. however, i'm not seeing anything that indicates to me we'll see a big change. that we're going to see effort in the nonmilitary efforts of support and operation afghanistan which are really key. instead, all i'm hearing about is the troop increase. that's going to get us nowhere. it simply kicks the ball down the road or to be pessimistic for a change on afghanistan we lose less quickly. >> all right. major robert scales and robert jacobson we'll be coming on you often in the coming days.

thank you for sharing your insights. let me turn to you, bill kristol. i worked with the first president who dealt with the challenges of being at war in afghanistan and now we're on the third. your thoughts. >> well, i think what jim mattis means -- i discussed this before he was secretary of defense, that we fought one year war 16 times is everyone wanted to get out as quickly as we could. totally understandable desire. who wants to be bogged down, but as a result under rumsfeld we had a lightfoot print. we got out as fast as we could. right after 9/11, bush had to send more troops back in '03. and we wanted to draw down and then president obama announced the withdrawal. do you think i think president trump is the right commander in chief why we have to be fighting there in a reasonably low level of violence, but we have to stay there for some time, do i think he'd coordinate as any other president might, with our allies and the civilian efforts, you know, you go to war with the

commander in chief. but one thing i would say is that the downside of just pulling out is so great i think that honestly if it is mostly buying time i still think that's better than the alterative. >> some reporting in axios that trump has lost both the agitators like bannon and mooch, but he's left surrounded by the architects of the conventional. does that have a connection to the more conventional approach this afghanistan? >> it might. but it goes back to what we talked about in the earlier block. what he says tonight and the policy that he outlines will be as good and the impression it leaves will last as long as the next time he says something that completely wipes out what he's told us and the rally in arizona tomorrow might be that moment. but look i want to hear -- i think marc jacobson was the one who talked about nato which made me wonder will the president

tell us about conversations he's had with the allies? with nato? with all of the other countries that have been working with the united states on afghanistan. you know -- >> i think he will be able to say that nato is going to match the troop increase. i think that's been reported. so to be fair, tillerson and mcmaster and those guys they have been trying to do some due diligence and work. >> are we talking about parallel presidenci presidencies? meanwhile, trump is trolling them on twitter. >> it's bizarre. i'll let others speak and you guys have reported on this but you have an extremely able foreign policy and with bannon's departure is unified. and i think without sniping in the white house. with mcmaster, mattis, pompeo,

still pretty able people and then you have a president who as you said, trolling. can that work for a while? i don't know. we'll see. >> but i think the other thing here is is marc pointed this out also what is the goal? we need to hear the goal from the president. it has to be more we need a win. it has to be something more robust and logical and something that people can put their hands around. >> tangible policy. >> there's the word i'm looking for. >> sadly, i have written a few of the speeches. up next, bannon's war. trump's embattled former strategist launches the first salvo. what powers the digital world. communication. that's why a cutting edge university counts on centurylink to keep their global campus connected. and why a pro football team chose us to deliver fiber-enabled broadband to more than 65,000 fans. and why a leading car brand counts on us to keep

their dealer network streamlined and nimble. businesses count on communication, and communication counts on centurylink. edible arrangements for summer. order in store or online.

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.

breitbart long seen as an

ally of the trump presidency may be a thorn in the side. the latest attack was on hr mcmaster, it has to do with the embarrassing moment for the president where he was asked about the navy destroyer's collision with an oil tanker that left five sailors injured and ten missing. >> that's too bad. that's too bad. >> saying it was mcmaster who failed to brief the president and that he and general kelly are responsible for the mistake, the story in breitbart includes a quote from an anonymous source that said the blame rests on the shoulders of general mcmaster and general kelly, both of whom should know better than to keep the commander in chief in the dark on these issues. the attack on the known enemy oh steve bannon comes on the announcement over the weekend that the trump presidency is over. i guess we'll see if that's true as the president heads off to arizona tomorrow. the home state of two republican

senators, john mccain and jeff flake, who have been critical of him in the last week. and as phil rucker pointed out at the top of the show, he's considering pardoning arizona sheriff joe arpaio, found in contempt of court, for failing to halt traffic patrols that targeted immigrants. where do we go from here? we're covering breitbart which is ludicrous in my view that we cover -- i mean, they're simply an arm of the jilted lover of the trump white house and smearing honorable people like hr mcmaster. what are we doing? >> they're a force. >> really? >> they are. they -- >> they have been after -- i mean, everyone -- >> we saw their influence in last year's election. they mobilized early on behind trump even before steve bannon jumped ship to steer that campaign. they wield influence.

not quite fox news, but they matter. we have full anticipation their targets are not even democrats or establishment republicans but some in the white house. >> do you know what would stop them? make them stop, president trump, you call breitbart and tell them to not to attack your security adviser. it doesn't go down like that unless the president want it to. >> but steve bannon has signalled that jared kushner, ivanka trump, gary cohn, mcmaster they'll see negative story about them. steve bannon said he won't go after trump by name but he'll hold the administration accountable if he doesn't fulfill the campaign promises like build the wall. >> and bannon told the president i'm going to go back to breitbart and i'm going to attack your enemies in the republican establishment, sort of implying in the white house and on the hill.

and president trump said, yes, i need you to do that. trump wants that civil war within the -- >> he wants the air coverage. that's right. >> let me go back to the president's stability and competence for the job. if you're green lighting someone who was so crummy at internal warfare that he got caught doing it. let's not sugarcoat anything. there are people in politics who haver that knives out to get -- who have their knives out to get it. i witnessed it in other campaigns in which i worked but the good ones let the actions and the outcomes speak for themselves. i have never seen a group of cry babies. steve bannon is the biggest cry baby i have ever seen in my life. he lost an internal war because he tried to smear the national security adviser and the president's kids now he's out me and my website are going to get you? >> this type of infighting is disloyal to the president himself. it's disloyal. there's a reason we have been unable as a country to get anything done on the domestic policy front right now.

that's complete knife fighting inside the white house and that extends beyond to members of the congress. do you want to go to the white house and have a meeting and talk about it and in the next day it's on "the washington post" or breitbart and you're getting knifed about what you said? >> no. >> it's disloyal to the president and it harms the country and harms the president. >> i read that the trump presidency was over. i think i tweeted something, i said phew. do you think that's promise or a threat? >> i think it's a threat. you know, people knifing each other in the back and the front in the west wing, but, you know, i think to jonathan's point, the idea that you have this force that is breitbart that is joining in on the knife fight is something that can't be us norred. the fact its being sanctioned by the president you know if bannon is giving air cover to the president for whatever reason i don't know what -- i don't know what the reason is. you elect a president to get things done. but if you have this outside

force that has outside influence that's, you know, shooting at you have -- at the people in your administration who are trying to do things, plus people on the hill who the president needs to get legislation passed to get on his desk so he can sign it and help the american people. you're not going get anything done. >> to be fair to trump he wants to change the republican party. he hates the republican establishment. it's not bannon who attacked mitch mcconnell but president trump. whatever you think of it i think it's nuts, it's not going to work, it will divide the republican party. mike and i were talking about this we'll have republicans in 2018, we'll have ten senate primaries are where the trump candidate is against the establishment candidate and he nominally supported luther strange and then the morning after, hey, interesting race. good luck to both of you. who is going to win the -- and

then who knows, i think the degree of chaos, it's not just the trump white house. i think we're really close now a civil war within the republican party. >> he's never been a true republican. he's more interested in score settling than passing legislation and -- >> more interested? he's maniacally obsessed with trolling people on twitter and -- >> i worked at the a.p. i feel diplomat. >> he just watches tv and then attacks everyone from the cable host to a member of congress that doesn't say your hands are beautiful. >> he's quick to accept personal responsibility for failure so he's looking to point out scapegoats. the breitbart can be the entity that goes after them for him that's fine. >> all right. when we come back new reporting out today about that now infamous trump tower meeting to get dirt on hillary clinton. what we are learning about the ties between a participant and the russian intelligence services that may be of interest

to bob mueller. don't go anywhere. i kept looking for ways to manage my symptoms. i thought i was doing okay. then it hit me... managing was all i was doing. when i told my doctor, i learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of moderate to severe crohn's disease even after trying other medications. in clinical studies, the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission. 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. just managing your symptoms? ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. tand the alzheimer'sf association is going to make it happen. but we won't get there without you. visit alz.org to join the fight.

♪...nausea, heartburn,♪ indigestion, upset stomach, diarrhea!♪ nausea, heartburn, indigestion, upset stomach, diarrhea!♪ here's pepto bismol! ah. ♪nausea, heartburn, indigestion, upset stomach, diarrhea!♪

there should be no place for hatred, bigotry and racism in this country. and he should have said that very clearly. he did at times but then he wavered back and forth. >> given your concerns about that, senator, at what point though given what we have heard from your republican colleagues too does that talk into action? at what point if any do you not support for example his renomination? >> well, i didn't support the president when he was our party's nominee. >> what happens, he's already running for re-election what happens next? >> it's far too early to tell now. there's a long ways between now and that point. >> do you think he'll be the party nomination? >> it's too early to say. >> that was susan collins, too early and too difficult to say

if president trump will be the republican nominee in 2020. part of the reason might be that nobody knows where bob mueller's investigation is going to end in. today "the new york times" details the latest development in that investigation. focusing on a russian ex pat with ties to vladimir putin. who met with the trump campaign in the months before the election. writing quote, interviews with the -- his associates and documents reviewed by "the new york times," indicate that mr. akhmetshin has much deeper ties than previously known. he has an association with the former deputy head of a russian spy service, the fsb, and a history of working for close allies of vladimir putin. let's bring in our putin whisperer, ken dilanian. what's the significance of this development that special counsel bob mueller is looking more deeply into not just the meeting and how it came to pass and how

all of the trump campaign senior leadership ended up in the meeting. but who was in the room with them? >> well, there's no doubt that this is significant that the special counsel is looking at this russian lobbyist rinat akhmetshin and he has to raise money to pay attorneys to deal with that inquiry. but what's interesting about this "new york times" story is what's not in it. which is no allegation that this man was actually an asset of the russian government or a russian spy. which some u.s. officials had suspected. i mean, there's a lot of interesting reporting about his ties to oligarchs and he's told people he knew paul manafort. that would be significant because paul manafort was in this trump tower meeting which the trump team has portrayed as a nothing burger with some russians they didn't know. in fact, if they knew paul manafort when he went into the meeting that puts a more

sinister cast on the meeting. that being said, the new reporting shows that the man had maybe closer ties to some russian oligarchs than was widely understood. while he was lobbying in washington and becoming an american citizen and a lot of the lobbying he did tended to benefit the kremlin, nicolle. >> let me put two strings together that probably are presented to you often. a lot of political observers say that on the crazy scale, donald trump goes off the charts when there's a development in the russia probe. i think most political watchers would call last week a 15 on the richter scale of trump crazy. so was there anything happening behind the scenes last week on the russia front? were the investigators, you know, in any sort of phase of scheduling interviews or closing in on sort of their list of white house officials they'd like to interview? i know that on his way out, steve bannon suggested that reince priebus should be queried about sort of the tick tock of

donald trump's decision to fire jim comey which is the act that makes him a potential person of interest for whether obstruction of justice occurred. so i wonder if you see any correlation from the investigative side of the scale between trump's behavior and the russian probe? >> i think that's a great hypothesis because after all, i mean it's sort of amazing that there's day that goes by in washington when a grand jury investigation of the president of the united states isn't the top story. obviously charlottesville eclipsed that story, but we know that the mueller team is plodding along, is doing its work. and the house and the senate. there's other developments. there's a libel lawsuit against buzzfeed related to the publication of that dossier where the author of the dossier, christopher steele, may now have to testify in court in this lawsuit. so it's going on on many levels and it must be putting some pressure on the president and

the people around him who may know things that we don't know about who is being called in to testify, who is being questioned, what documents are being requested. to doubt this is putting pressure on the trump presidency. >> ken dilanian thank you for spending some time with us. real quickly, jonathan lemire, i hear from inside the white house that they see the president's behavior directly correlated to anxiety about the russia investigation. >> there's no question there are people who suggest that. he is at his most erratic i guess when something like that is happening. >> yeah. >> that he is -- >> that's difficult to control. >> people are trying to keep him on track, he's more easily distracted. he's more prone to lash out and take to twitter to go after somebody. they try to shield him from some of this but obviously that's impossible. he's the president. he knows what's going on. it's not just about him, but this is something that recent developments touches his family. his own son is a major focus of this and that's something he has a hard time staying calm about. >> exactly.

all right, up next president trump is hitting the road again tomorrow but he may not be getting the reception he's hoping for. thank you so much. thank you! so we're a go? yes! we got a yes! what does that mean for purchasing? purchase. let's do this. got it. book the flights! hai! si! si! ya! ya! ya! what does that mean for us? we can get stuff. what's it mean for shipping? ship the goods. you're a go! you got the green light. that means go! oh, yeah. start saying yes to your company's best ideas. we're gonna hit our launch date! (scream) thank you! goodbye! let us help with money and know-how,

so you can get business done. american express open.

so you can get business done. i expect a lifetime guarantee. and so should you. on struts, brakes, shocks. does he turn everything to gold? not everything. at midas we're always a touch better. book an appointment at midas.com

the last thing he's got to do, being very candid here, is he's got to quit stepping on himself. he had a very good infrastructure press conference the other day, and then he stepped on it, blew it, guaranteed that it wouldn't get covered. that's like a kwaubl who goes out and throws the ball down to the other side and fum bells on

the first play of every possession. he's got to be more disciplined and he's got to work as part of a team. and generally he could end up being a remarkable great president, but he's got to make a couple of corrections. >> donald trump will be holding a campaign style rally in phoenix, arizona tomorrow, a visit the mayor of phoenix has already asked president trump to reconsider out of concern that it will spark violence. stating if president trump is coming to phoenix to announce a pardon for former cher rif joe ar payo, then it will be clear that his true intent is to inflame emotions and further divide our nation. it is my hope that sound judgment prevails and that he delays his visit. jonathan, this is out there because president trump has talked about pardoning the sheriff. >> right. this rally would be a flash point regardless. he always draws massive protests whenever he goes out to the

southwest. he told fox news that he was consider it. he didn't commit to the timing. we don't know this is going to happen tomorrow, but he spoke warmel about sheriff joe. he feels loyal to him. he amend at several rallies with him. he suggested he was a good man, he got a raw deal and he would consider pardoning with him. >> honestly, you were kmuks director. wouldn't it be smart just as a political matter. he could say this is a serious moment for the country. he can stick by his guns on charlottesville and his ridiculous statements. he can say i've made a very serious speech tonight about afghanistan. i'm going to let everyone calm down. i'm just going to disappoint my fans in arizona and put it off for a month. he would get a lot of aplaus and none of his fans would care. i'm going to make a prediction that he won't do that. >> i'm guessing he won't because you and i think it's a good idea. the two arizona senators, he's created enemies with jeff flake

and john mccain. >> whenever eels had good moments and tomorrow there will be he stems on it himself. this is not a staff issue. you're right with the two senators there, senator flash and mccain, he already has built in flash points. so you're right. the smart thing to do would be to talk more about afghanistan, talk in a very serious way and really take this presidential approach. this is inviting controversy. you're actually stepping on your own pardon story. >> also no one typically pardons anyone until the final days of a presidency. sneak in a quick break. we'll be right back. huffed and he puffed and blew the house down. luckily the geico insurance agency had helped the pig with homeowners insurance. he had replacement cost coverage, so his house was rebuilt, good as new. the big bad wolf now has a job on a wind farm.

call geico and see how easy it is to switch and save on homeowners insurance.

four seconds on the clock, championship on the line. erin "the sharpshooter" shanahan fakes left. she's outside of the key, she shoots... ...she scores! uh... yes, erin, it is great time to score a deal. we need to make room for the 2018 models. relive the thrill of beating the clock. the volkswagen model year end event. hurry in for a $1,000 apr bonus and 0% apr for 60 months on a new 2017 jetta or passat.

thanks to bill kristol, january than la mere. that does it for our hour. i'm nicolle wallace. "mtp daily" starts now. >> hi there, nicolle. in it's monday, forever is going to start tonight. tonight a total eclipse of the presidency? >> i think the president failed to meet the standard that we would have expected a president to do in a time like that. >> after charlottesville, president trump tried to turn the page, but changing the subject won't change the divisions in the republican party. plus, after slamming the war in afghanistan on the campaign trail. >> wasted six trillion dollars on wars in the meelgds east. we could have rebuilt our country twice. >> president trump will address the nation tonight on the path forward. and