8:00 eastern with stephanie ruhle. "deadline: white house" with nicolle wallace starts right now. hi, everyone. it's 4:00. donald trump today ended an obama-era program that granted protection to children who came to america illegally through no fault of their own. the decision to end daca or deferred action for childhood arrivals, came down to the wire for president trump. according to new reporting from the "new york times," aides were so unsure about which way he would go that, quote, as late as one hour before the decision was to be announced administration officials privately expressed concern that mr. trump might not fully grasp the details of the steps he was about to take. and when he discovered their full impact, would change his mind, end quote. the white house hung today's decision on a policy of not governing on emotion. how nice. and punted the issue to congress. here is attorney general jeff sessions earlier today. >> i am here today to announce

that the program known as daca that was originated under the obama administration is being rescinded. the department of justice advised the president and the department of homeland security that the department of homeland security should begin an orderly, lawful wind-down, including the cancelation of the memo that authorized this program. this will enable the department of homeland security to conduct an orderly change and fulfill the desire of this administration to create a time period for congress to act should it so choose. >> as protesters took to the street, president obama weighed in on facebook, writing, let's be clear. the action taken today is not required legally. it's a political decision and a moral question. whatever concerns or complaints americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn't threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through no fault of their own, who pose no threat,

who are not taking away anything from the rest of us. let's get right to our reporters covering this developing story. chief white house correspondent for nbc news, hallie jackson. julia ainsley, national security reporter for nbc covering the justice department and homeland security. peter baker, the chief white house correspondent for the "new york times" and an msnbc political analyst and kimberly atkins. i know you attended the briefing a little bit ago. sarah huckabee sanders was put i thought back on her heels a bit about why the president didn't make the announcement himself with immigration being such a centerpiece of his whole campaign for the presidency. >> why he left it up to his attorney general to come out and instead do the on-camera announcement. sanders pointed to the paper statement, the rather lengthy paper statement from president trump. >> no one who reads him on twitter thinks he wrote it himself. >> the last line sounds like a

tweet he sent, putting the eggs in the congressional basket. the congress will be the ones to get it done. he references the "new york times" article discussing that according to their reporting the president's advisers wondered if the president fully understood the consequences of his decision. based on our reporting, we think he made up his mind a week ago, if not longer, to lean towards rescinding daca. the question was how it was going to happen, how it would get unwound and if there was a way to try to have congress be able to step in here. as somebody who has been covering him, his administration, was on the campaign trail, this has always been an issue on which he seemed conflicted. the interview he did can chuck todd on the plane talking about how the families need to go back what he called to their homes, meaning d.r.e.a.m.ers and their parents. i think about what we heard in the oval office recently. we love d.r.e.a.m.ers, he said. d.r.e.a.m.ers should rest easy.

telling dick durbin about an hour ago that he looked, according to senator durbin. looked him in the eye and said we're going to take care of those d.r.e.a.m.ers. don't worry about it. this is a president conflicted. the white house is talking publicly about that sort of choice weighing on the president. here is what sarah huckabee sanders had to say. >> the president has been and i think part of the reason that this is complicated and one of the reasons he has wrestled with this back and forth in large part is because this is not an easy one. and certainly something where he wants to be able to make a decision with compassion but, at the same time, you can't allow emotion to govern. and this has to be somewhere where the law is put in place and it's something that he would somewhere if congress puts it before him. >> quickly, two points. if congress puts it before him, we don't know what congress will put before him, if anything. if it is a standalone piece of legislation that just focuses on

daca. sarah huckabee sanders seemed to say the president wants something more comprehensive. would he veto it? there is no clear answer. the other part of it is what the end game looks like for these d.r.e.a.m.ers if the president does in fact want to treat them with heart and compassion and give them protection as he says. would that mean legal status? the answer was not clear on that either. >> peter baker, let me play the sound from then candidate trump with chuck todd during the campaign. let's watch that. >> you'll rescind the d.r.e.a.m. order. daca. >> we have to make a whole new set of standards. >> you're going to split up families, deport children. >> we'll keep the families together. >> keep them together out? >> they have to go. >> we'll show great heart. daca is a very, very difficult subject for me. i will tell you. we'll deal with daca with heart. >> peter baker, i am not buying it. if he was conflicted, why not leave the protection in place so that 800,000 people who came

here as children too young to make a choice about whether to break a law or not, were protected until latiegislation passed. he certainly, as a man who put three travel bans in place appreciates the power of the legislative branch of government. why not protect these people? >> what they would say is that they've created an orderly process allowing these people to stay for the moment and gives the ball to congress. anybody who is currently here will not be kicked out tomorrow. if you have a two-year permit expiring before march can get it renewed for two more years. some people will be able to stay up until october of 2019. but what the problem is is that it now kicks it to congress, which has shown a phenomenal inability to deal with immigration over the last ten or

20 years. >> right. >> the idea that in the next six months, in addition to everything else they have on their plates, they'll find a solution, seems like an uphill climb. >> your reporting also suggests that his own aides didn't believe that he grasped the policy details. it was toward the end of the updated piece on your paper's website today, that piece i read at the top of the show, that was stunning, an aide saying as late as an hour before the announcement was made they were not sure he grasped the consequences of the policy decision he was about to make. >> well, that's right. it's not, you know -- one point they were talking about the idea that this could simply delay the decision for six months. it doesn't delay the decision. it decision is made. >> the program has ended. like you said, they can apply -- they can apply. they are all registered. the question i think a lot of people have is that, without the protection, there is nothing -- they're not prioritized, but we've seen since inauguration other people who weren't

priorities who were simply registered at local i.c.e. offices be deported. i wonder if he is aware or if the reporting that you have suggests that maybe there was some lack of awareness that, without the protections, certainly deportation is possible. >> deportation is possible, and without work permits, obviously, it becomes much harder for people to earn a living or, you know, contribute to society. and i think that's -- he is somebody who has expressed sympathy, as you have shown in these clips, for these people. the more that aspect of the decision is focused on, i think his aides were concerned that he would have second thoughts, that he would rethink it because he doesn't want to create a situation that puts a lot of people in hardship. what jeff sessions is saying, on the other hand, is this is unconstitutional, it's not based on a legal foundation. if congress wants to do it, fine. but this is not legal, we can't defend it in court. >> julia, let me bring you in on the legal side of this. jeff sessions is one who knew

exactly what he was announcing today. i wonder if that's why he was sent out to make the announcement, he was arguing that there was a deadline in place because of the attorneys general who were going to sue. can you walk us through a legal fact-check for what the white house was really facing today. >> of course. so they were facing this september 5th deadline, that being today, when the attorney general of texas and other conservative attorneys general were going to amend a case in order to legislate against daca. if the white house did not rescind it. but of course, that has been called a manufactured deadline. a lot of people think they could have let the court process play out and let congress have that deadline instead. choosing sessions, of course, to come out and make this decision really put this more in that legal framework and allowed a member of this cabinet who is an obvious immigration hard-liner and is also sort of the grandfather of a lot of these people who are pushing for these

administrative policies to make this himself. a lot of people said that jeff sessions as attorney general would never have defended this in court, so they allowed him to be the face of this while allowing trump to distance himself from this decision that he has said he has been so conflicted about. >> kimberly, i think that's sort of getting at the crux of this. this is the ultimate kind of having it both ways, but it's also, i think, the most brazen display of the president's political weakness that i have seen in the entire presidency. so afraid of his 33% base that he can't do -- let's give him the most generous benefit of the doubt, that he really did have some problems with ending daca. why not do what every president before him has always benefited from politically by standing up to his own base? bill clinton did it? why not stand up the base and especially with all the

reporting about how jared and ivanka and the so-called moderates in the west wing were opposed to what they did today by ending daca. >> i think, if there was ever something that would put to rest this idea that ivanka and jared are serving as some sort of moral moderator in the white house, this is it. >> let me jump in. because i agree with you. they are either the most impotent white house advisers in the history of the american presidency or they're lying about everything and they say to the press if something is unpopular, oh, i was against that. >> right. it's sort of cover for them. at the same time, it's donald trump who is in the oval office and making these decisions. and of course, i think, as a lot of people, including former president barack obama pointed out, and i think correctly so, this was a political decision. there was no urgency. there was nothing going wrong with this daca program as it was being implemented that caused this urgent action, this very

drastic action that has caused such a reaction. this was a political decision. he wanted to keep -- do things to keep his base happy because, as we have discussed before, we have not yet gotten a repeal or replacement of obamacare. the prospect of tax reform looks slim at this point. there is no infrastructure. he has to give them something. this seemed like an easy way to do it, and he had a very eager attorney general willing to make the decision, make the announcement, even though he went. >> hallie, can you jump in on this, the internal white house dynamics. you talk to everybody. i wonder, behind the scenes, off camera, in private, what they say about how this white house staff broke down in terms of who advised the president to end the program as he ultimately decided to do and who suggested that he find some middle ground and not go with what hard-liners like steve bannon and breitbart and the hard core base would have wanted him to do.

>> it's clear to anybody who has followed the trajectory of jeff sessions over the last several years that stephen miller was a critical part of this decision making process. sometimes people forget that miller, while he is seen as sort of a steve bannon protege, very linked to steve bannon, actually has a lot of different pieces in play, and when you talk about the internal palace intrigue part of it in a lot of different factions inside the white house and has been -- has the trust of the president, has been with him on the campaign trail from the beginning talking about this sxa exact kind of immigration policy. this is a hallmark of his. it should be no surprise that he is, of course, a real voice and sort of push behind what we are seeing now when it comes to ending daca. you bring up, though, the steve bannon/breitbart wing. we have new reporting out now about how september is going to be, in the words of one source familiar with the sort of ban

bannon strategy. i had a couple people describe it as the strategy now will be to pick off one globalist at a time inside the west wing, starting with gary cohn. that this is what we're a going to see over the next couple of weeks from that part of the base. even though steve bannon may not be in the best wing. there was talk when he left that he would be real active from the outside and all signs point to that. >> this idea that donald trump woke up this morning on twitter, peter baker, and said congress must do its job, daca. i guess means congress must do something with daca. this is not really a well-oiled machine, the white house to congress. you covered the president i worked for who advocated comprehensive immigration reform. president obama advocated comprehensive immigration reform. they both failed with far more effective legislative affairs options. what is the possibility that

anything will happen in congress to preserve daca? >> well, look, you can see what the play is here, right. if you want daca, he sees to the democrats, give me money for my border wall. you have some sort of a bill that increases enforcement of immigration while also trying to fix this program that's now been rescinded. and in any other congress, any other white house, you might see two sides coming together with let's scratch all sides bill. whether that can happen here or not, i don't know. we haven't seen evidence of that across the aisle cooperation or deal-making in the trump presidency. art of the deal may be the book title but we haven't seen fruits of that yet. this will be a test of it. >> thank you all so much for spending time with us. when we come back, more divisions for the gop. how today's decision on d.r.e.a.m.ers further fractures a republican party largely at war with itself.

this is your brain on donald trump's lies. a new piece of the effect of the sheer volume of donald trump's mistruths and the surprising comments that john mccain made while abroad defending american values like truth, fairness and freedom. what did he know and when did he know it? that's always the key question in any investigation. as the investigations into russia heat up, we'll tell you who else might need to hire a good lawyer. ♪ sailin' away on the crest of a wave, it's like magic ♪ ♪ rollin' and ridin' and slippin' and slidin' ♪ ♪ it's magic introducing the all new volkswagen tiguan. ♪ higher and higher, baby the new king of the concrete jungle.

when i was too busy with the kids to get a repair estimate. i just snapped a photo and got an estimate in 24 hours. my insurance company definitely doesn't have that... you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance.

for tech advice. dell small business advisor with one phone call, i get products that suit my needs and i get back to business. ♪

throughout history, the one meal when we come together, break bread, share our day and connect as a family. [ bloop, clicking ] and connect, as a family. just, uh one second voice guy. [ bloop ] huh? hey? i paused it. bam, family time. so how is everyone? find your awesome with xfinity xfi and change the way you wifi.

i don't want to see a whole thing of 6 and 8-year-old kids being made, you know, one totally uneducated and made to feel that they're living outside the law. let's address ourselves to the fundamentals. these are good people. strong people. >> i believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and who have lived here even though sometime back they may have entered illegally. >> republicans like me are listening to those two on a loop. republican presidents ronald reagan and george h.w. bush didn't mince words when it came to their positions on how people who would now become d.r.e.a.m.ers, the hundreds of thousandsen undocumented immigrants brought to the united states as children should be treated. today president trump ended the program that protects them and called on congress to fix it. harold ford jr. and two other former members of congress.

david jolly, republican from florida, donna edwards. democrat from maryland and john pedores, from the "new york post." what's become of the republican party? >> bush and reagan were speaking of people who never acted under their own volition, right. that's who we are talking about with d.r.e.a.m.ers. they didn't have the ability to make a decision to break the law. that's the class of immigrants we are talking about. a step back. today shows us the complete disconnect between today's white house and republican leaders in congress. congress doesn't want to wrestle with this issue. donna and i wrestled with it for years on our side of the islais. we took the position that the president didn't have the opportunity to underenforce the law but congress couldn't bring up legislation and own its constitutional responsibility. donald trump has dropped it in the lap of mitch mcconnell and

paul ryan. history tells us when mel martinez tried it, it didn't work. when marco rubio tried it, it didn't work. they don't have the votes to do this. they've given paul ryan something that could undo his speakership just as we saw with john boehner. >> two wrongs don't make a right. i mean, he is trying to -- i understand what you're saying. this is the white house argument that obama didn't have the authority to do this. these are a group of human beings, 800,000 human beings who as of today don't have the protection -- i understand how the program works. but they now are not protected from deportation. >> this is the fault of congress just as much as it is the president. i will share a personal anecdote. i voted against president obama's executive actions because i actually was one of the reasonable republicans who said article 2, section 3, says the president has to enforce the law and congress has to pass the law. when i turned to my leadership and said what will we do about

it? a member of my leadership said do you know what the people would do to us if we passed immigration reform? congress does have to solve this. there is a constitutional argument for why this administration is not in a position to fix this issue. the congress -- >> i do think that they're -- been listening to this for 20 minutes. you cannot let barack obama off the hook here. he did something very nervy. he knew it was likely unconstitutional. part of the effort he made with the parents of d.r.e.a.m.ers has already been ruled unconstitutional by the courts. the problem we face here is that he took a step that he was not able to take, something that i sort of support but nonetheless, yelling at republicans for taking up an unconstitutional action by a president is something that we cannot -- you have to establish the predicate,

which is that the president of the united states before donald trump did something that no president has ever attempted to do before, which was write, enshrine a piece of legislation from the oval office in a speech and in a memo. that is not the way our system is supposed to work. >> i mean, is donald trump functioning the way the system is supposed to work in any way, shape or form? >> no. you want to -- >> so what? >> i attack him for that every day. i am not going to let obama off the hook for doing it first. >> i don't disagree with you, but obama is -- he is retired. he is out of the picture. donald trump today had the ability to not leave 800,000 americans who serve in the military, who do other productive things in society -- if you are committing crimes you're already on the list for deportation. >> i agree. >> he had the power to leave in place legislation -- >> dave was talking about in 2014 how he acted. i think talking about this without reference to president obama's unconstitutional action

is somewhat unjust to where the mess that we are in right now. he is part of the creator of the mess. >> nicolle -- >> for five and a half years -- >> let me pause. we're watching president trump, who was just asked about this. >> the two leaders of our tax-writing committees, chairman orrin hatch and kevin brady, who have been working on tax reform for a month with our secretary of the treasury, steve mnuchin and gary cohn, our national economic council director. since the day i took office, we have added 1.2 million private-sector jobs, and a lot more than that if you go from the time we actually got elected, november 8th. including 125,000 manufacturing jobs. we just had another very good month for manufacturing in the jobs. you all probably saw that. if we're going to keep the momentum going and allow the

economy to truly take off as it should, it is vital that we reduce the crushing tax burden on our companies and on our workers. we pay the highest tax of any country in the world on businesses. and we can't keep doing that. last week i repeated my principles for tax reform. first we must make the tax code as simple as possible. it's extremely complex. it's not fair. and it's extremely hard to understand. so we want to make it as imam as possible. second, we must provide tax relief for middle-class workers and families. third, we must restore our competitive edge which we've lost. we're doing fine, but we lost the competitive edge. you see what's going on all over the world. so we can have real job growth throughout america. we can't be the jobs magnet of the world if we continue to tax our industries at rates 60%

higher than companies in other countries. can't do it. finally, we must bring back trillions of dollars that are currently parked overseas. we have, in my opinion, $4 trillion. massive amounts of money that can't come back to our country because of our tax code and because of the rates. and this is more than just tax reform. this is tax cutting, to put it in a very simple term. we are going to cut taxes. we are going to reduce taxes for people, for individuals, for middle-income families. we are going to reduce taxes for companies, and those companies will produce jobs. tax reform that follows these principles will create millions of new jobs and ensure that more products are stamped with the very beautiful letters and words "made in the usa." it's time to lower our taxes, bring back our wealth, and make america the jobs magnet that it

can become and pretty quickly it's really, in other words, an expression i don't know if too many of you have heard it. it's time to make america great again. has anybody heard that expression? i don't think so. so that's what we're doing. we're making america great again. you see it in the numbers. you see it with jobs. you see it with companies moving back in. they're moving back in at very, very big numbers. they are coming back into our country. you haven't seen that for a long time. we are very proud of that. we are now going to discuss tax reform and tax cuts, and i appreciate you being here. thank you, everybody, very much. >> mr. president, how is the daca treating -- >> i have a great heart for the folks we're talking about. a great love for them. and people think in terms of children, but they're really young adults. i have a love for these people and hopefully now congress will be able to help them and do it properly. and i can tell you, in speaking to members of congress, they

want to be able to do something and do it right. and really, we have no choice. we have to be able to do something. i think it's going to work out very well and long term it will be the right solution. >> thank you. [ overtalk ] >> thank you very much, everybody. >> that was barron trump donald meeting taking a question from our own kristen welker about the d.r.e.a.m.ers. saying he loves them. not showing love for them today. >> i don't think d.r.e.a.m.ers are feeling the president's love. if that's the love you deliver, it's the kind of love that keeps you out of school, that sends you back behind the covers. and these are d.r.e.a.m.ers, young people who are making contributions in jobs, schools, in the economy. so the president didn't have to act. there was no urgency to act. and the fact is that, if congress were going to act, they

had five years to do it and they didn't do it then and they're not going to do it now. this really just throws a monkey wrench into the lives of 800,000 young people. >> i understand what you're saying. that there was a -- there were legal issues, there were constitutional issues. i understand these points. we were at an unprecedented time of mayhem. we really chose today and these 800,000 human beings to restore normalcy? >> it's strange. the president indicated that, when donald trump jr. was faced with questions about his involvement with russia he was on a plane, and as a father, he felt he would do what any father would do, help write a statement. yet i listened and was struck by sarah huckabee sanders who said emotion should not govern big issues. >> this is a man who became president by tapping into fear, anxiety. >> out of the gates he offered an immigration executive order and was given an opportunity by the courts to correct it. it was sweeping.

i understand the president has that authority. john and i were having an off-camera conversation. every court said no and laid out how you could fix it. he never attempted to fix it. now you have a group of young people, as he said, young adults, who really have done nothing wrong but be born and happened to be born in the greatest country in the world. now his message to them -- and i understand what john said, you can't let president obama off the hook here. i like him being on the hook where he is. he said, i'm going to take a risk here. this president would not take a risk. his risk, it's a big one. he is giving it over to paul ryan and mitch mcconnell, chuck schumer and nancy pelosi, members of my party who have done an abysmal job getting anything done and said you have about 180 days to get this resolved. clearly emotion didn't govern with this. the real tension, as president obama aptly said, is the political tension between what he said on the campaign trail and supporters. the more brazen thing he did was

to suggest with the kkk and nazis that there are good people in that group. >> they weren't all born here, but they are wholly innocent of having done anything. some were brought here as very young children. >> they didn't have any control. they were not -- they were brought -- they didn't come here -- choose to come. they were brought here. >> right. let me ask you about something our -- our mutual friend, sally bradshaw said. she participated in 2012 in an autopsy of everything that had gone wrong when the republicans lost and said, if hispanic americans here the gop doesn't want them in the united states, they won't pay attention to our next sentence. in essence, hispanic voters tell us our party's position on immigration has become a litmus test measuring whether we're meeting them with a welcome mat or closed door. the problems seem to have only gotten worse since 2012 when she

i think accurately diagnosed the problem and i think we've gone down every year since my old boss won i think close to 40% of the hispanic vote. how do decisions like today further seal the fate of the republican party? >> it's the rise of the tea party and the trump movement. at the end of the day donald trump better be careful. if congress does solve this, they'll put a daca resolution on his desk that he has to sign into law or veto. what happens to his base there? if congress solves this -- this is why i am pessimistic that they will, ryan, mcconnell and the establishment would essentially be taking the party back from the tea party movement and the trump movement. they've shown an inability to do that thus far. i don't think they're going to be able to do it. >> two things. one is that the autopsy came out, a lot of people on the right bought into the notion that, you know, without a softer line on these matters, that republicans would be punished. and trump got the same percentage of hispanic voters that romney did.

>> did a little better, actually. >> which was less than bush and mccain. >> yes. but he won the election despite the autopsy said no republican will win the presidency again if they don't change their tune. so trump is operating with that knowledge in his pocket. that's number one. number two, the weirdness of what trump is proposing here is that ryan and mcconnell essentially put forward a piece of legislation that democrats will vote for that republicans will not. okay? you assume, if they want the d.r.e.a.m. -- a d.r.e.a.m.er bill, every democrat will vote for it and he will need 24 republicans in the house to vote for it, to make it law. every one of those republicans will have a target on his forehead from breitbart, from the same people who got eric cantor, the house majority leader out in 2014 in a primary. he is actually putting his own

party's majority at risk in the house and in the senate by putting this in their pocket by creating a civil war in the primary season for republicans, if they do what -- >> do you really -- you really think the current republican position on immigration is sustainable? i think that donald trump is the only one that could win as the guy that ran on all the anti -- i mean, i think the diagnosis from the autopsy is correct and that donald trump was a different kind of phenomenon. >> it's a multi-generational problem for the house -- for the gop. the fact is, doing what you suggest is actually called governing. i think the american people -- >> you're talking about the consequences. we don't have a disagreement there. >> i understand the consequences. the fact is that that's a multi-generational loss for republicans if they choose to take this course with these d.r.e.a.m.ers. and they're going to have to face those consequences. >> yeah, but everyone who is voting in the house is thinking about november 2018 and not

november 2030. donald trump is not thinking about the republican party's fortunes at all, period. >> do you think he wants a bill that protects d.r.e.a.m.ers or no? >> i think he probably does. i am just saying if you sort of game it out, he is putting his own party in incredible risk. >> he might lose control of the house by doing so. >> he might. >> think about if this plays out and nothing happens with congress, which is not a far-fetched -- >> probably the most likely. >> what happens if you are one of these d.r.e.a.m.ers or what happens to sort of broader immigration. >> you guys are all elected officials. you tell me if there are, you know, hundreds of thousands of people who sort of disappeared -- like we have never had anything like this before -- in april or may of 2018 -- >> they put themselves into the system. >> right. >> we run the risk that they also disappear under the covers. we'll hit pause. when we come back we'll put these questions to someone who knows. stay with us. for your heart...

your joints... or your digestion... so why wouldn't you take something for the most important part of you... your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is now the number one selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember.

essential for vinyl,

but maybe not for people with rheumatoid arthritis. because there are options. like an "unjection™". xeljanz xr. a once daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well. xeljanz xr can reduce pain, swelling and further joint damage, even without methotrexate. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts and higher liver tests and cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. needles. a must for vinyl. but for you, one pill a day may provide symptom relief. ask your doctor about xeljanz xr. an "unjection™".

joining our conversation now hector baretta, chairman of the latino coalition. he comes as a surrogate for the trump administration. he is a former administrator of the small business administration under president george bush. i want to read you a statement from senator john mccain who said president trump's decision to eliminate daca is the wrong approach to immigration policy at a time when both sides of the aisle need to come together to reform our broken immigration system and secure the border. what do you say in response to that? >> well, look, there is a lot of republicans who are saying similar things. we already saw speaker ryan. we have seen a congressman who has an act to put forward. these things are not mutually exclusive. many of us wish something could have been done about daca but we all knew it was going to expire.

i remember the old movie, i'm shocked, i am shocked. it reminds me of all the people standing up now saying i didn't realize an executive order was not permanent. it wasn't legislation. now it is time for congress. many of us see this as an opportunity. we both remember, during the bush administration, we tried to get legislation passed the right way. and now is an opportunity for congress, both sides, they can't hide, they need to fix this once and for all. >> but you and i worked for someone who supported comprehensive immigration reform, who championed it with an address to the nation. this president -- and i know you serve on his coalition -- he champions the wall. i wonder how you square the beliefs of this president with the one that you and i both served. >> well, look, we knew this from way back, that if we couldn't reassure the american people that our borders were secure and that we weren't going to revisit this. remember, this is an old movie, 1986. reagan did pass comprehensive immigration reform and said, this is the last time.

we both know that is not the last time and it won't be the last time unless we do these things in conjunction with each other. we can have national security, and we can have a common sense immigration policy that works for everybody, that works for our economy, that even works for those d.r.e.a.m.ers and that works for american citizens and our security. that is vitally important, and we do agree on that. >> if it was a foregone conclusion that he had to do this, why all this sort of ruse about how he was hemming and hawing? why make such a big production about how his heart hurt, how he liked the d.r.e.a.m.ers and how he felt for them. it doesn't seem credible if it was a foregone conclusion and no one, as you said, should have been shocked, shocked, shocked that he rescinded it today. >> we're talking about two different things. >> not really. he ended daca today. he has taken an expansive view of the authority and power of the executive branch. certainly you can concede that

point. can you concede the point that he has taken did shall he has said -- he said to chuck todd that they must go. then he said they can stay. he has never been clear on daca. while that isn't the only issue on which he has been unclear, he has never been totally clear about children. and people who came here -- >> what he was -- nicolle, what he was clear about was a lot of the executive orders that were passed in the last administration, after the president told us for years that they were unconstitutional, that he was not for them and that, once he was president, he would do away with them. he was crystal clear about that. he has also been saying since getting elected that he feels compassion for them. i take him at his word. >> why? there has been so action to suggest he feels compassion. if he had compassion for 800,000 people who were protected this morning before 11:00 a.m. when daca was rescinded he could have left it in place. he could have defended them -- give him the benefit of the

doubt. why not protect the 800,000 d.r.e.a.m.ers who are serving in the military, who aspire to run small businesses. you gave out small business grants for a living. you know how many of them are hispanic and latino. why not protect them until congress did their jobs? >> nicolle, he didn't do anything for the first year he was in office. if this was something that was top of fold, he would have begun the process a long time ago. he think they have been struggling with it and weighing it and he is trying to do something to lead us to solution. the expiration of daca would not lead us to a solution. him continuing daca would not lead us to a solution either. he knows he won't be able to do an executive order and fix this permanently. we need congress to do that. and that's what we have been advocating for ten years. it's time for them to put up, if they really care about the d.r.e.a.m.ers. we all care about them. we don't want to see them rounded up and taken out.

the way it was done in the last administration was definitely not an effective way to lead to permanent reform and a solution that works for everybody. >> hector barreto. thank you. please come back. harold ford. >> he is in a tough spot. curious if he thought the d.r.e.a.m.ers program had worked and if he believed it was working and had worked, why wouldn't he advocate for some sort of continuation or at least urge the president to lay out some sort of predicate for the congress to follow. he was hard to follow in one way because i -- he said for ten years they'd been trying to do this. this president put himself on the line -- the former president put himself on the line to do something. the current president put himself on the line to protect our borders from what he believes terrorists coming from seven other nations. >> predominantly muslim nations. he put himself on the line politically, legally, in terms of the constitution, to ban people from predominantly muslim

countries. >> i ask my former colleagues because i don't remember. if this thing expires in march and you are serving in the military, what happens? >> i think you lose any claim to status, to protected status. >> you're serving the country with a gun and you are no longer considered an american. i'm -- what does this mean? >> i believe your individual application has a finite time line. say you renew -- >> we call you back from afghanistan -- i wonder how many of these young men and women are in afghanistan tonight. >> to your point, nicolle, this president has been brazen about executive overreach. his first 100 days was about over reach in complaining that president obama had done too much of it. he said i'm going to give a speech today about growing the economy and on the same day say we're throwing out 800,000 people who are contributing to the economy. >> rendering meaningless all the leaks to the "new york times" about how he struggled with

this. i don't buy it. if you're going to stop protecting 800,000 people and return to some sort of constitutional loyalty -- i am not sure he knows what's in the constitution -- okay. spare me the emotional turmoil. >> also i think it's because he is -- you could hear this from hector. he is conflating the need for immigration reform with daca and these d.r.e.a.m.ers. the d.r.e.a.m.ers, as we said, are young people who were brought here not on their own, and we've given them a protected status to be able to stay here and work and continue to contribute in the economy. that is not comprehensive immigration reform. and the president actually hasn't set out any parameters to do either. >> look, comprehensive immigration reform is not going to happen. mr. barretto was wrong. there was a bill in 1986. that was the last time there was immigration action. reagan was right. it was the last time. because this country cannot agree on what it wants on immigration. it is possible to deal with this

one issue -- >> right. >> -- particularly if you make it -- if you can connect it somehow with something that republicans want, right? so that's why everyone is saying, money for the border wall versus, you know, legalizing the d.r.e.a.m.ers in some fashion. i don't think that that is that bad a deal for democrats. here is why. because the border wall is an idiotic idea. it's a joke. it's a pr stunt. it's nonsense, right? that's nonsense. and daca is not nonsense. give them $10 billion for some stupid wall, and then you can get the d.r.e.a.m.ers in exchange. the question for me -- this is, again, for you guys. will democrats vote for an idiotic border wall in order to get what they want with daca? >> we'll vote for $10 billion for harvey aid. >> here is brand-new donald trump tweet. i look forward to working with ds and rs in congress to address immigration reform in a way that puts hard-working citizens of our country first.

what do you think, donna? >> that's so confusing. >> are there d.r.e.a.m.ers serving in the military? >> there are! your question was a good one. do you remember how with the muslim travel ban mattis had to get involved and carve out iraqi translators. we have to hit pause. when we come back truth and consequences. in the time of trump a senior statesman abroad finds himself having to defend basic american values. are we still that shining city on a hill? people would ask me in different countries that we traveled, what is your nationality and i would always answer hispanic. so when i got my ancestry dna results it was a shocker. i'm everything. i'm from all nations. i would look at forms now and wonder what do i mark? because i'm everything. and i marked other. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com.

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 (upbeat dance music) (bell ringing)

lawmakers returned to capitol hill this morning after a five-week recess. among them was senator john mccain, who has been undergoing treatment for a brain tumor. >> why on earth would john

mccain feel the need to say all that? "new york times" columnist charles blow has a theory and it's this -- >> let's bring in michael steele, msnbc political analyst, my partner in group therapy. michael steele, what say you? >> yeah, there's certain li a stress on the political system as illustrated by the debate you've had for 45 minutes. it touches on every aspect of our life and culture. the president is his own definition of self and his own definition of facts and his own definition of truth. and that reality plays out in policy, it plays out in politics, and it plays out for a lot of our global partners in a very disturbing way, where they

were once reliant on the united states that was consistent in its view of the world. and most importantly, in its view of itself. because that's where the value is. the principles that underpin everything we stand for seemingly now are up for grabs. and it is men and women in the voice of john mccain for example, not just a domestic but global stage, that tries to give that some context and to give some peace of mind, if you will, to those concerned about what direction the country is going in. >> can you give some context or peace of mind to any of the 800,000 dreamers whose lives are potentially impacted by today's decision to end daca? >> well, no. and the fact of the matter is, neither did what the former president obama provide, as well. it left that up for a future grab. and we're now here is the future, it's right now. so the only thing that congress

can do in my view is one, something that is going to be very hard to do. that is to grandfather in those who are here. and it may shut down the process for future generations. but hopefully, based on your conversation, there's some degree of effort to get a comprehensive immigration policy in place. that's now going to force the congress to move and act in a way that goes against what it has done in the past. so that's the reality, that's the truth. you're not going to separate these young people from their families. you have a situation, nicole, where you have an immigrant parents that came in with a child, a 4-month-old at the time. here they are 15 years later, but they've had a child since then who is a u.s. citizen. what do you do with that family? how do you go to that mom and dad and said you and your other child have to go, but the kid you have here stays? that makes no sense. so comprehensively, the congress is put on the spot and you're right, republicans don't want to have to deal with this. but guess what?

put your big boy pants on, because you're going have to. >> i want to come back to this idea of constant lying and ask you about the news friday night that the entire -- i think there were half a dozen tweets accusing president obama of tapping his wires. it was the first term that donald trump used. doj found that there was absolutely no evidence that donald trump's wires were tapped. so how do we operate in this post-truth, post-fact world? >> donald trump's greatest failings are moral ones. and they're represented in the lies. he has a constituency that believes every day in whatever binary choice he puts in front of them. then you have a constituency that frankly held their nose. they knew he was a liar. but they supported him to hold on to power. then there's a collection of

republicans, and i represent many of them, that wanted this president to succeed. if you asked me in january, i would say i didn't support this president but i want him to succeed. but seven months later, i am a never trumper. when this president goes to houston and tries to show empathy, he's lost all credibility. >> one thing about this lying thing, i don't think he was lying when he said he thought obama tapped his wires. >> does that make it worse? >> he's a believer in conspiracies. and he is a -- not only is he a floater of conspiracy theorys, but he is a believer in them. and we have somebody in the white house who is reckless about about emoting his own paranoid ideas. this is one case that you could make a solid case that he believed he was telling the truth. he just didn't care about waiting for the facts.

>> does that make him as bob corker said unstable and not sufficient for his job? >> i wouldn't say it makes him stable. you know, he's -- >> we can't diagnose him. >> i'm not a psychiatrist. i wouldn't give him points for stability on this one point i would say. >> donna, what do you think about the news dump on a friday night that there was no evidence that donald trump's wires were tapped? >> all the rest of us knew that president obama did not tap wires. >> correct. >> i grew up in a military family, and you were not allowed to call somebody a liar. it was impolite, especially a president of the united states. >> we wrestle with it here. >> but every single day, we have to call the president of the united states a liar, because what he does is lie. he does it with impunity. he does it without thinking about it. he does it naturally. that is really difficult for the

rest of us -- >> two positive things. jeff sessions is back. and two, i say to my friend, michael steele, you look good on that show "grays" my friend. you looked good, brother. >> thanks to michael steele, who will star on the next show when he's available. thanks to my panel. that does it for our hour. "mtp daily" starts right now. hi, chuck. >> welcome back to you. >> thank you. >> good to see you. and happy labor day, post labor day. if it's tuesday. what happens to so-called dreamers now? tonight, president trump ends protection for the so-called dreamers. >> the department of homeland security should begin an orderly, lawful windown. >> the president promises heart and compassion in