msnbc's "andrea mitchell reports" with andrea mitchell. the authority slams the russians leading the investigation. >> i didn't make a phone call to russia. i had nothing to do with russia. everybody knows it. that was a democrat hoax. it was an excuse for losing the election. phone a friend. the president praises putin after their chummy phone call. even as we learn how the president does not want to hear negative facts about russia from the cia. >> he said very nice things about what i've done for this country in terms of the economy. then he said also some negative things in terms of what's going on elsewhere, but the primary point was to talk about north korea. and tax cut and run? can republicans strike a deal before the holiday break? and did marco rubio get his price on the child tax credit?

>> unless they can figure out a way to add to the 1100 figure, i won't support the bill. >> we have an update this hour. and good day, everyone. i'm andrea mitchell in washington. as president trump dives deeper into his controversial slamming of the russia investigation, ignoring a host of comments from both parties including the republican senate intelligence chairman, that the issue of collusion is still wide open. >> there is absolutely no collusion. that has been proven. when you look at the committees, whether it's a senate or the house, everybody, my worst enemies, they walk out and say, there is no collusion but we'll continue to look. >> the president gave a readout of his call with vladimir putin saying it focused mostly on kim

jong-un. >> prthe primary point was to tk about north korea because we would love to have his help on north korea. china is helping, russia is not helping. we would like to have russia's help. very important. >> and he predicted success for his tax bill. >> i have seen it. i think it's going to do very, very well. i think that we are going to be in a position to pass something as early as next week, which will be monumental. >> but more criticism for a favorite target, the fbi. >> it's a shame what's happened with the fbi, but we're going to rebuild the fbi, everybody, not me, when everybody, the level of anger and what they've been witnessing with the fbi is certainly very sad. >> and he did not rule out pardoning michael flynn. >> reporter: would you consider a pardon for michael flynn? >> i don't want to talk about a pardon for michael flynn yet. we'll see what happens. let's see. >> joining me now is msnbc

correspondent kristen welker, white house reporter ashlynn parker and washington correspondent greg miller. foreign special agent cliff watts and jeremy peters, as well as former cia officer and daily intelligence briefer, david preece. first, kristen welker, out there on the south lawn, it must have been very cold but the words were hot. tell me your biggest takeaways today. >> reporter: i think the biggest takeaway was the clip you just played, andrea. the fact that you heard president trump not rule out a pardon for michael flynn. i have been speaking with sources familiar with his discussions, with his attorneys. i am told that there has been no discussions as of right now about an actual pardon for michael flynn. so i think that is important to point out. but still, the language is important, the fact that he responded to that question is significant. now, i asked him, when did he learn that michael flynn lied to

the fbi? of course, we all remember that tweet that got so much attention in which he said he fired him because he lied to the vice president and the fbi. his legal team walked that back. when i asked him the question today to really put a fine point on it, andrea, he said, "you know the answer to that question." the reality is we don't know the answer to that question. we're still waiting for the answer. it's clearly of interest to reporters but investigators as well. he doubled down on his criticism of the fbi. likely the fbi under james comey, you heard him say, we're rebuilding it now. just two weeks ago he said the fbi is in tatters. of course, he's talking about some conflicts he's uncovered with the ranks there at the fbi. really doubling down on his fire and fury as it relates to the fbi, and we've seen some pretty serious backlash by way of him making critical comments of the

law enforcement, andrea. >> and to greg miller, because you were part of the team reporting on -- extraordinary reporting that the president rejects criticism of vladimir putin, russia and all the rest. in his daily intelligence brief, putting the cia on the spot so they put things in writing with the understanding that he's not going to read the full brief and verbally they just ignore the things that they know will set him off. >> yeah. so this is -- the intelligence officials we spoke with emphasized that we're not withholding critical information from the president, but everybody we talked to said that there is a great deal of massaging of this that goes on to try to avoid drawing his ire, and to try to avoid, as one official told us, having the daily briefing go off the rails, which is what happens if he's confronted with sensitive information about russia and the interference in the election. so as you just said, there are coping mechanisms, if you will.

they'll put material in the written product so that the intelligence community can say, look, it's there, it's there for the president, we're not withholding anything, but it may not be called to his attention orally in that daily presentation. >> david preece, you're an expert on this. you used to give the daily brief. these are the crown jewels of american intelligence. we've had differing ways of different presidents accepting it verbally, in writing, every day, in person. but in my experience, this is the first president who is, from all their reporting, which is extensively reported, not taking it in, not either reading or -- i moon, they're editing it. they're basically trimming their sales. it's unprecedented. >> in the reporting, i didn't see it, unless greg can fill us in on this. i didn't see anything that they were taking out russian analysis from the written daily brief give ton tn to the president.

they simply weren't calling it out in the oral briefings. >> what's the result of that, though? >> it is up to the reporters to adapt to the president's style. but when they change their conclusions in the analysis to meet the president's wishes. that is a fine line the reporters have to walk. >> the reporting is he doesn't read it, so he's not taking it in. >> we don't know how much he reads. we haven't seen that definitively written. but if the president is not taking it on board from reading it and not from the oral briefings, then what happens? does the president take away a different message from the intel community than they're trying to give? i'll compare it to george w. bush. the intelligence briefings every day were telling him how bad things were. the implication was the intel committee wasn't working. we seem to see the opposite. reporting from greg and others

is showing he's pushing the reporting away, which means the policy discussions that need to happen aren't happening. >> and cliff watts, the criticism of the fbi is in sync with this also, because it's the cia and the fbi in the briefings that offended him on russia. he's increasingly insulting both agencies. >> comey was the one that really brought the dossier to his attention was actually trying to help inoculate him against those claims, and he sort of pushed that away and shoved that away, and we know the history of comey. but even more, he's degrading the snuinstitution, and what's scary in this scenario is not only his personal battles with the fbi, he just gave a speech about how do we improve criminal justice around the country? and the most important element of that may be the fbi. that's why they're the federal

entity. he's now degrading their ability to do that job. if you're showing up in trump country, they may not help you, they may not believe you. it hurts investigations, it does not help them. >> how damaging, ashley, do you think the whole controversy over the fbi e-mails, the republicans harping on it, those republicans, at least, who are trying to undercut the mueller and congressional investigations. there's no law against fbi officials having their own personal opinions, but there's no indication from any of the evidence that's been presented so far that their personal political opinions infected the subsequent investigation that took place a year later. >> that's true, but i think it is incredibly helpful to republicans and the president trying to discredit the fbi, especially trying to discredit mueller's investigation. it gives them something they can point to. president trump all along has basically said the system is rigged. as you mentioned, he's attacked

these agencies in an unprecedented way. but one thing that often happens with president trump is there is always -- or often a kernel of truth to what he's saying, and now he has the evidence to point to to back up his claim that the system is rse rigged and that t text messages could be potentially biassing. i think you'll hear a lot more of this from the president to try to make his point. >> and jeremy, the president planning to head to camp david later today. we know that he's there on the brink of what we think might be victory on tax cuts for them. short-term victory, perhaps, because it is politically so unpopular. but the fact is there is some indication, and we'll get into this a little bit later, that they may be picking up the votes. they may have a deal that marco rubio can accept. we have yet to hear from rubio on this. >> apparent victory it may end up being, andrea, and i just

don't right now see any other option for the republican party but to pass this bill. that's what's so unusual about it. when you talk to republicans behind the scenes, they admit this is not a great bill. some may even tell you it's a bad bill. but the need politically for them to do something that isn't catastrophic to their own self-interest is so great that they've got to pass this, even though it's quite a mediocre piece of legislation. and coming on top of all of this russia stuff we've been talking about, it's even a greater need for them to get something done. because next year is an election year with an intensifying investigation around the president and his aides. it's going to be brutal. >> and i would even question calling it mediocre. because according to every independent analysis of this, it is really terrible economic policy. bad to have a tax cut at this point the way this is structured, not helping the middle class. kristen welker, the white house

has a very big megaphone, though, on social media and the president himself in person. they're going to try to sell, sell, sell this assuming they do get the final votes. >> absolutely. the president has been making his final pitch throughout the week, including on wednesday when he gave that big speech here. we asked him, peter alexander, my colleague, if he had actually seen the final bill. he said, yes, he's seen it. it will do very well. i asked him if he would be willing to increase the child tax credit to get marco rubio to yes, and he indicated that, yes, he is. and that was really our first sign that they were getting close to a compromise package so they can unveil their final piece of legislation a little bit later on today. but look, the president needs this win. he didn't repeal and replace obamacare as he had campaigned on, and so for this white house, for this president, getting something done on tax reform is really do or die so that he can have a legislative achievement under his belt, andrea.

>> and greg miller, let's talk about vladimir putin. yesterday they put out a readout that he was calling -- or whoever called whom, that the call was this part putin praising president trump on the economy and advancements in the u.s. in the president's annual four-hour news conference yesterday. that's pretty weird. and once again we heard about this call first from the kremlin and not the u.s. they only responded to it afterwards. >> it's really interesting, and i'm sure david would hit on this point, but other former cia officers who deal with russia regard this as a sort of putin's masterful ability to manipulate trump from afar in some ways. he's intentionally praising trump during putin's annual press conference. he knows those words are going

to resonate with the american president. he knows how desperately sometimes trump seems to crave that kind of attention and praise, and so -- i mean, this is -- he's frfrom moscow to was, he is making that connection. and trump calling him to thank him for it just reinforces just how much he values that praise from putin. he is putting the russian president in a position of evaluating the american president. it gives putin a great deal of power and influence. >> and it's remarkable that the white house even puts that out in their four or five-line readout, that that's the main point that they're telling us, the president really appreciated that flattery from vladimir putin. >> i'm not sure we need to call this masterful strategy. it doesn't take a trained kgb officer to see it. it's right there for the taking and he's exploiting what's

available to him. >> this is a president who has created his own reality and lives in that. he is a man who built a tower with his name on it on fifth avenue and lived inside of it for decades. so to have all this positive reinforcement coming from his enemies is a really dangerous thing for the country. >> ashley, i want to follow up. obviously we'll be drilling down more into rex tillerson and the north korea policy coming up. but give me your take on rex tillerson's relationship right now with the white house and the president, because we've seen the nfc pushing back against what tillerson said just a few days ago about wanting talks with north korea without preconditions, and now, as we're about to report and show you, he has edited his prepared text today at the security council and taken all of that out after criticism from the white house, from the nsc, that he had gone too far, too forward leaning. where do you think things stand from your reporting from the white house perspective about the tenure of the secretary of state?

>> so i think the relationship between the two men is what it has been from almost day one, which is abysmal. it sort of goes on a scale from deeply abysmal to only slightly abysmal, but they've never had a good relationship. they sort of temperamentally don't get along, and a lot from what we're hearing from the white house is while they also have different world views and the president does say, rex is so establishment in his thinking, it's really more that personal chemistry that's lacking and what has hurt the secretary of state. and he also -- i think he's been very frustrated with the white house at times, with the president, the way the president has undercut him repeatedly, and we were just talking about how the president loves praise, and secretary tillerson does not always do a good job at holding back his dismay. we've heard he sighs, he rolls his eyes. so i think the disappointment is irreparable and the one-year mark is going to be it.

>> interesting in that tillerson is one of the few people that actually pushes back on some of the key policy issues, trying to focus on diplomacy with north korea, with iran, and that's partly, ashley, why i think he got himself into some real trouble. the iran deal, wanting to stick with it knowing what the world view is if we end up getting out of it, if the president decides to abandon it next month when the next deadline takes place. ashley? >> i think that's exactly right, and i think the secretary of state was thrust into this sort of no-win position where he is the person, he's the nation's top diplomat, and his job was to sort of go out and hear from all these foreign leaders and other diplomats saying, what's really going on, and his job is to kind of reassure and soothe them, but the problem is those reassurances and that soothing often contradicts the world of the president who doesn't like to be contradicted. >> ashley parker, thanks to you,

thanks to everyone else in the group. what a way to start a friday. and looking at the united nations. toughening his language to be able to talk to north korea. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" only on msnbc. stay with us. but on the inside, i feel like chronic, widespread pain. fibromyalgia may be invisible to others, but my pain is real. fibromyalgia is thought to be caused by overactive nerves.

lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. i'm glad my doctor prescribed lyrica. for some, lyrica delivers effective relief for moderate to even severe fibromyalgia pain. and improves function. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions, suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worse depression, unusual changes in mood or behavior, swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects: dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain, swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who've had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. with less pain, i can do more with my family. talk to your doctor today. see if lyrica can help.

rex tillerson is at the united nations for meetings on the north korean threat. as he said in his speech last week, the white house made it clear it was not happy with tillerson's approach. the japanese also wanting to toughen that language. president trump also wanted to comment today before leaving the white house. >> we have a lot of support. there are a lot of nations that agree with us, almost everybody. we can't let that happen, and

we're going to see what happens with north korea. we hope it works out. >> joining me now is ambassador wendy sherman, former secretary of state for political affairs and a global a fires contributor, and john mclaughlin, an msnbc security analyst. nice to have you both on everything happening around the world. first, john mclaughlin, let's clean up things on the president's daily brief. we know the president spends a lot of time every day with mike pompeo, the cia director. he really likes getting this delivery. but what we're hearing with extensive reporting from the "washington post" is that it is in writing, in full, with all the language that we would understand about russia and threats, but that the verbal brief avoids some of these more sensitive topics. what concerns would you have about that?

>> if that's true, andrea, it's a very bad thing. i've briefed four presidents and none of them liked to hear unpleasant information, but they all want to hear it. they all know it has to be part of their tool kit as they try to figure out international affairs. so i can see circumstances where you might not want to put it in front of the president in a room full of people, but the director can always, as i have done on a number of occasions, take the president aside or speak to him privately and say, there's something you really need to know here, mr. president. and in my experience, presidents have appreciated that. i would hope that that is going on here, because you don't ever want to wall off important bad information from a president. >> this gets to his distrust of the fbi, his distrust of the cia. we saw it on day one of his presidency when he went out to langley. >> it was terrible. he went out to langley and stood in front of that wall of the fallen cia officers and

disparaged the intelligence community. it was really quite astonishing. i think we're at a really tough moment, andrea, where we've got a lot of mixed signals around the world. what you just reported on north korea is a part of that. i have reason to understand that the north koreans thought they had an understanding with the administration, that if they were quiet for 60 days and didn't do anything there would be talks. instead they got sanctions slapped on them. so for secretary tillerson to say at the u.n. today that he needs a sustained period of time before we can talk to them, that's the condition, it's going to confuse the heck out of north korea. >> and this is a time when i frequently thought there was some hope of backchannelling. because jeff feltman, an experienced former u.s. diplomat who is now the political director at the u.n., has just returned from pyongyang. as tillerson mentioned and the japanese and others mentioned, he had significant

conversations. that's a real intermediary who understands our state department very well. >> indeed. i have spoken with jeff and he had about 15 hours of conversation, sometimes four hours at a time. quite extensive, quite unusual for such talks, but he came away, as he reported to the security council, very discouraged, really being concerned. he went not with great expectations but he came out with even fewer, and i think that's why we've heard the secretary general of the u.n., mr. gutierrez, say that it is really time to get to dialogue in whatever way we can. we should keep up sustained pressure on north korea, no doubt about that. that's important, but that's to get somebody to the table in seriousness. it's not going to stop their program. >> let me play what h.r. mcmaster had to say. after tillerson said we'll talk about the weather, we'll talk about the shape of the table, we just want to talk. but we can't talk while a device is being fired off. which is a reasonable thing to say. this is what mcmaster then had to say. >> there was some reporting

yesterday about secretary tillerson saying we're open to negotiations, but those negotiations are not -- or talks are not an end in and of themselves, and there would be no preconditions to those, he said there would be no preconditions. what that means is we're not going to relieve any pressure on north korea or give in to any demands they might make for payoffs. >> it's not the first time a national security adviser would be undercutting a secretary of state. we've seen this in both administrations. but it's very clear the white house is taking a tougher line. let me ask you another question about the possibility of warfare, biological weapons. i've been doing some reporting and there's been other reporting as well that there is concern in the agencies that especially after what happened in kual

kuala lumpur after an agent was used to kill kim jong-un's stepbrother that there could be a developing system. >> i think the intelligence community has believed for a long time that north korea has a biological and chemical ability, and they're prepared to mobilize this and use it on special forces that would be sent south in the event of a conflict. that's another reason in my mind why there is merit in some of the -- in the direction that tillerson is basically recommending here. and if you look carefully at what he said in his atlantic council speech, he was really talking about talks about talks. he wasn't talking about full-scale negotiation. so i'm remembering that one of the great warriors of the 20th century -- >> you mean henry kissinger? >> i mean winston churchill. >> sorry. i was thinking about the shape of the table in paris. >> in fact, in diplomacy, i don't know whether wendy would put it this way, but in

diplomacy, sometimes process is our most important product. get them at the table. talk about where you're going to meet, who is going to be there. but to continue my quotation, it was winston churchill who said that in the midst of war, he said that to jaw-jaw is better than war-war. i think that's where tillerson is coming from here. >> let me switch to iran for a moment because that's the other regime that you dealt with so intensively. we don't know what the president is going to decide to do. he certainly signalled he would like to tear up the deal but he had the u.n. ambassador yesterday in an unprecedented way declassifying debris from missiles that she argues were iranian produced, sold or distributed to the iranian-backed rebels in yemen fired at rijad. the question of whether it's a violation of the u.n. resolution is when were those weapons transferred, before or after that resolution? but the bottom line is they're really ramping up their efforts

to create -- to portray this as an outlaw regime. do you think that's helpful? >> there is no question we're all concerned about iran's maligned behavior in the middle east. what these weapons were when they happened, who they belong to is really open to question. when iran speaks, unfortunately with colin powell, we are going to be suspect at the u.n. because we've put information on the table before in the case of iraq which didn't turn out to be true. >> and which colin powell said he was unaware of. >> he was unaware of. these are probably not missiles, even if they're iranian missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons, which was the fundamental concern of what's called annex b of the 2231 u.n. council resolution that endorsed the comprehensive plan of action, the iran deal, but i think there may be something else going on here, which is if the administration is trying to show that they are pushing hard against iran on its activity in

the region, and if that creates a basis for the president to say he is victorious and that he will keep the jcpoa in place and not tear up the iran deal, that would be okay. >> i think wendy has put her finger on what may have been the real agenda here. in other words, the president painted himself into a corner back in october when he refused to certify iranian compliance, because at that time he said, if i have to do this again, i'm pulling out of the agreement. well, none of the things that he had said would have to happen to prevent that have occurred. so that corner is narrowing as he approaches mid-january when he has to recertify again. i think part of this, as wendy was suggesting, i think, is to create the preconditions for him to say, well, we're in better shape today so i can certify again. because pulling out would mean -- would mean that iran can move, should it choose to, to a nuclear weapon very quickly.

>> john mclaughlin, wendy sherman. i can't think of two better guests. thank you both so much. up in the air, can republicans pass a tax plan before flying out for the christmas break? one key holdout got his wish today. will it be enough? you're waumtching "andrea mitchl reports" on msnbc. patrick woke up with back pain.

but he has work to do. so he took aleve. if he'd taken tylenol, he'd be stopping for more pills right now. only aleve has the strength to stop tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. aleve. all day strong.

firstthen you put yourselfareer. through school. got the degree. you've given it your all, to reach the goals you've set. don't let student debt hold you back. refinancing student loans with sofi can save thousands. so you can get where you've always been headed... sooner. see how much you can save with sofi. the leader in student loan refinancing. and secretary tillerson again speaking to the security council.

let's listen in for a bit. >> they're responsible for these tensions. they alone must take responsibility for these tensions, and they alone can solve these tensions. >> i thank his excellencey, mr. tillerson, for his statement. i shall now make concluding remarks in my capacity -- >> when the secretary of state was referring to they alone, of course he was referring to north korea. this is a special meeting of the security council today on north korea, and tillerson has already, in his speech, made the point that china is still letting oil get through to north korea in contradiction of the sanctions, and that russia is not being cooperative enough. meanwhile, back here on capitol hill, progress for the president on taxes. house ways and means chairman kevin brady speaking on capitol hill moments ago saying they do

have the votes. i think we have that tape here. can we play that? >> the conference committee has come together, and we've delivered for the american people. we remind everyone this is our tax bill. it belongs to the american people. this conference committee reflects these priorities. the committee report is valid. it will be filed in pro forma session at 5:30 this evening. at the same time it will be made public to the american people to look at the new tax code we're proposing before the house and senate votes on it next week. >> kevin brady, the house ways and means chairman, saying that there will be votes next week. msnbc's garrett haake joins me now from capitol hill. the holdout was marco rubio. we heard him say he wants $11 million for the tax credit for the american people. they brought it up to $14 million. is rubio now a likely yes?

>> reporter: it's certainly point that go way, andrea. rubio recognized he's in a moment of maximum leverage here with very little margin of her ror for th -- error for this bill. he went back to an amendment in the senate. that amendment was in a rnarrow defeated and he had the ability to squeeze a little more out of this bill. he did get fundability for the child tax credit. the house isn't saying officially that's good enough. they want a chance to review the entire bill. it's unlikely he'll get more than that, the bill is done. rubio is an unlikely character as someone who will stand up to try to stop this bill for not getting exactly what he wants. i think it is the kind of thing he is likely to accept, though his office is not coming out and saying it at this point. >> and he can say he stood for something, got something for people in his constituency.

it's a good political issue. let's just say he advises to donald trump to run for a second term. >> he pointed out there was an opportunity to take money out of the corporate tax cut and put more money directly into the pockets of families. the child tax credit is one of the most popular elements of this tax bill, and by saying, hey, why don't we raise the corporate rate a little bit, which is what he said originally in this bill, so we can put money directly back into the pockets of family, it's a very popular stance, and it squeezes leadership. they don't want to see members of their own conference vote no on this because it doesn't do enough to help middle class families. >> very briefly, garrett, i know it's under 500 pages, hasn't been printed yet. you haven't been able to read it, the experts haven't been able to read it, but it is going to votes, the senate, the house and finally passage next week. john mccain is in the hospital.

they need every vote. and corker is still a no as far as we know, correct? >> as far as we know. there is nothing in this bill to change corker's view on it, although his office is making him officially sit on the fence but it's impossible to see a yes. the big thing is having american people here to see this done. john mccain is out, but simply having membership in the chairs when they bring this to a vote, presumably on tuesday. >> and mike pence has delayed his trip a few days just to make sure this is done. could another of the nominees be benched after disastrous performance on capitol hill that has now gone viral? and why joe biden wants to apologize to anita hill. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports." stay with us.

we've got auto insurance, homeowners insurance. had an accident with a vehicle, i actually called usaa before we called the police. usaa was there hands-on very quick very prompt. i feel like we're being handled as people that actually have a genuine need. we're the webber family and we are usaa members for life. usaa, get your insurance quote today. what's going on? oh hey! ♪ that's it? yeah. ♪ everybody two seconds! ♪ "dear sebastian, after careful consideration of your application, it is with great pleasure that we offer our congratulations on your acceptance..." through the tuition assistance program, every day mcdonald's helps more people go to college. it's part of our commitment to being america's best first job. ♪ if yorheumatoid arthritisevere and you're talking to your rheumatologist about a medication,

this is humira. this is humira helping to relieve my pain and protect my joints from further irreversible damage. this is humira helping me reach for more. humira has been clinically studied for over 20 years. humira works for many adults. it targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. 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. talk to your doctor and visit humira.com. this is humira at work.

♪ this holiday, the real gift isn't what's inside the box. it's what's inside the person who opens it. ♪ give ancestrydna, the only dna test that can trace your origins to over 150 ethnic regions... ♪ ...and open up a world of possibilities. ♪ save 20% for the holidays at ancestrydna.com.

. well, the jury is out on one of president trump's judicial nominees up for a lifetime appointment on the district court. the federal judge has a lifetime appointment after he struggled to answer basic questions about the law after a confirmation hearing. the exchange between republican senator john kennedy and peterson is stoking speculation that another of the president's

people could be derailed. >> have you ever had criminal? >> no. >> bench? >> no. >> state or federal court? >> i have not. >> can you tell me what the dobear standard is? >> senator kennedy, i don't have that readily at my disposal. >> do you know what a motion in limine is? >> yes, i have -- again, my background is not in litigation. >> do you know what the younger abstentor doctrine is? >> i've heard of it, but again -- >> how about the pull man abstention doctrine? you'll see that a lot in federal court. >> i guess he never watched "perry mason." let's get the inside scoop from susan page and margaret callson,

daily beast columnist. these questions were being asked of senator kennedy, a conservative from miami. susan -- and this is after two other nominees were taken down. even the republican-led judiciary committee is not going to tolerate these kinds of lifetime appointments. >> you know what margaret and i were doing in the green room before we came on? we were studying up on things you would ask about. you would think someone going for a lifetime appointment would study up on questions he would likely get, especially when there were questions about his qualification. he was not judge-qualified by the aba so he might have expected there would be an effort, but by democrats, not a conservative republican, if he knew what he was talking about. >> and it's one of those regulatory agencies that is so discredited for decades. they don't regulate. they don't call fouls on illegal

contributions until two years after an election. margaret, that is not a qualification to be a lifetime. >> no, it is one of the most disreputable of the commissions that we have and there is no crossover in duties, really, between a district court judge and that kind of commissioner. and the aba is very conservative about the unqualifieds it gives out. a lot of people get through that screen. and the number of -- trump's is about 8%, and from 1989 to 2016, it was .7%. so a jurist like senator kennedy looks at this and says there is a level below which we are not going to sink. >> in fact, the chairman of the committee, chuck grassley, another conservative republican, is taking a hard line against some of these judicial nominations by president trump. and so this is -- he is taking a stand that you don't always see against a president of your own

party. >> and one quick note about this in the era of omarosa and her resignation and all of that, the fact is that virtually all of these, if not all of these nominees for u.s. attorneys' positions and federal judgeships have all been white men, no diversity at all, and, in fact, circuit court judges have been confirmed by this grassley committee to such an extent that this president in his first year has gotten confirmed more federal judges, lifetime appointees, than any other president in history, 228 years. grassley put that out to point out they are only rejecting a few. >> he held out not only supreme court but district judge courts of obama waiting for this moment. i think it was 12 for trump, and there were three in all eight years of obama. >> let's talk about an extraordinary admission from joe biden about anita hill. a lot of us who covered the

thomas hearings know that he was one of the men, it was an all-male judiciary committee, biden was the ranking democrat, and there were a number of republicans especially. orren hatch, arlen specter, let's see, alan simpson and others who were really tough on anita hill, and in terms of jurisdiction and procedure, she was not permitted to come back the second day with polygraph test results, which we understand from all the attorneys, did prove that she was telling the truth. so here is joe biden's interview, in fact, with teen vogue, i think it is. he said, i voted against clarence thomas and i insisted the next election i campaigned for two women senators on the condition if they won they would come on the judiciary committee so there would never again be all men making a judgment. i wish i had been able to do more for anita hill. i owe her an apology.

he said he believed her. >> he said he believed her, but he did not allow her to defend herself in the way her supporters thought he should have those years ago. and i think this is a sign of two things. one is changing attitudes toward these issues, more of a willingness to believe women who are accusing powerful men of misconduct. the other is joe biden's own political ambitions. if he plans to run for president in 2020, this is an issue he needs to address. >> in fact, he had been criticized before, and then he had come back, and with great credit, had gotten passage of the violence against women act, and he then proceeded legislatively in the following years, margaret, to do a lot of good things for women. >> yes. he compensated for that. but it is strange to say, i believed her but i voted for clarence thomas. this is like, i believed roy moore's accuser but i voted for roy moore. and it's hard to have it both ways there for biden, but

congratulations to him for saying i owe her an apology. >> margaret and susan, stay with me. we're going to go to the u.n. at the stakeout because questions are being asked of rex tillerson. clearly expressed by the members of the security council today. we simply cannot continue to accept the progress of north korea's program. we will maintain the pressure campaign and, in fact, we undertake efforts to increase the effectiveness of the pressure campaign both through a combination of the sanctions regime, full implementation and compliance of the sanction regime, as well as unilateral actions on the part of many, many countries to send the message to north korea through diplomatic steps as well as economic steps that we do not accept the pathway you're on. we hope that this pressure campaign will cause north korea to alter its course, re-examine whether this is truly going to lead to a more -- more security

for the regime, and whether it is possible for them to even sustain an economy if they continue the path they're on. we're going to continue our diplomatic efforts. those options remain open until other things may foreclose the diplomatic option. with that, i'll stop there and i think we can take a couple questions, perhaps. >> thank you, secretary tillerson. michele nichols from reuters. we heard a lot from you about north korea. i would like to ask you about myanmar. as you were aware, two reuters journalists are arrested andunk. is the u.s. considering further sanctions on myanmar over human rights abuses? >> well, our local representatives at the mission in myanmar, the embassy are expressing our concerns over the detention of individuals, demanding their immediate release or information as to the circumstances around their

disappearance. we are continuing to examine the circumstances around all of the events since the august attacks that have led to the enormous migration of people out of myanmar. and have already identified one individual and we are examining other possible individuals to hold responsible for targeted sanctions from the u.s. >> how important is a free press in myanmar? >> a free press is vital to myanmar's transition and becoming a viable democracy. we want myanmar's democracy to succeed. we know it is a process that they need to work through. this particular crisis is a real test of whether they're going to be able to effect a successful journey to democracy. >> mr. secretary, you previously said preconditioned talks to north korea is the regime agreeing to give up its ballistic missile capabilities. on tuesday you said that wasn't

realistic. today you didn't mention the issue at all despite your prepared remarks. does it remain a precondition for the united states and are you and president trump on the same page whether and when to engage in talks? >> the president's policy on north korea is quite clear. there's no daylight at all between the president's policy and the pursuit of that policy. and the president's been very clear that we're going to lead this pressure campaign, unite the international community and keep the pressure as much as we can and increase it where possible. most recently the president called president xi personally and asked him to -- for china to cut the oil supplies off to north korea to increase this pressure. that is intended to lead to diplomatic talks. in the meantime, the president's been very clear. militarily we'll be prepared should something go wrong. and our military is prepared. with respect to the talks, the pre -- we are not going to

accept preconditions. you heard others have called freeze for freeze. we do not expect freeze for freeze as a precondition of talks. we do not accept any relaxings of the sanctions regime as a precondition. we don't accept humanitarian assistance as a precondition. we are not going to accept preconditions for these talks. as i indicated in my remarks, our communication channels remain open. north korea knows they're open. they know where the door is. they know where to walk through that door when they want to talk. thank you. >> rex tillerson trying make the best of a lot of speculation that there is a wide gap between him and president trump on what conditions would be required before there would be talks with north korea. susan page, margaret carlson, rejoining us john mclaughlin

back with us now. when we look at what he just said about north korea and preconditions, he's basically saying, the president and i are on the same page, but at the same time saying there are no preconditions for talks and the door is wide open. i'm not sure how you square that circle. >> i think he's trying to thread a very tight needle here, andrea. in other words, what he said right at the very end struck me that the door is open. they know where it is. they just need to walk through it. that's a pretty good thing for a secretary of state to be saying at this point, given all of the circumstances surrounding the north korean problem. so, i think he's managed to reaffirm the president's posture, but also emphasize that all of this pressure is leading, he hopes, to some sort of talks, negotiation. and going back again to what he said originally at the atlantic council, it's clear he didn't mean full-scale negotiations, talks about talks is what he was

looking for. so, i think he's preserving enough of his position here that -- that he's done about as well as he could do in these circumstances. >> susan page, what about satisfying the national security council and the president of the united states, that he is not being too soft on north korea? >> well, what must foreign leaders think about this to see the president and his secretary of state at such odds on fund mental questions, like what is the right nuanced approach to take toward north korea, i think it must undercut the power of u.s. policy, especially for a secretary of state who is widely rumored to be on the way out the door himself. i think it makes very difficult for the united states to pursue in a consistent, coherent way our biggest national security challenge. >> i think the door is a better metaphor. maybe ittette closed a little, but susan and john are right. i mean, the gap between the two

is so great and everyone knows it. you can't paper it over with a few minutes of -- >> it's the classic problem you see all around the world when you talk to international friends, particularly those who are in government. the classic problem is they never know whether to believe the president's advisers or whether whatever they've heard will be up-ended in a tweet the next morning. so, the question whether the advisers, secretary of state, secretary of defense, is really speaking for the president is always an open question with officials of other governments. i suspect that's another side effect of what we're seeing here. >> now, in fairness, over the years i've seen john kerry undercut by the obama white house. i've seen colin powell undercut by president bush. once he was in ariel sharon's house, we were standing right outside the door and as they were walking out, i got a call that the president had just gone

into the rose garden and announced back in washington a whole new policy towards israel and settlements. not what the secretary of state was negotiating. then you have a situation where the secretary of state can never be credibly forceful with another foreign leader because they just say, i'm going to call the president, i'm going to call the white house. >> not that this has never happened before. it's that it's never happened with the kind of routine quality that it's happened in the past. >> on twitter, the velocity, the temp mental quality of don't waste your time. >> it's the context pipts the sound and fury, the little rocket man. it's all of that. what you say, andrea, about previous circumstances, absolutely true. it's what happens among grownups in government. but that's not what's happening now. >> when did we have grownups in government? as we go into this final week of congress, susan, and the

politics of all this, it's clear that marco rubio will come on board. $1400 is better than $1100. all things being equal, with mike pence not heading to the middle east in case he's needed as the decisive vote, they'll get this tax package. >> what a relief for republicans because they were about to finish the year where they control the house, the senate and white house, and got nothing accomplished. they'll head into the midterm election year in a better position than they would be if they couldn't get this through. >> it's an achievement down the road will haunt them, but an achievement on the board for now. >> thanks to all of you. we are going to have to leave it there for the weekend. thanks to all of you again. have a great, great weekend during this holiday season. that does it for us. for this edition of "andrea mitchell reports," follow the show on facebook, twitter. craig melvin is up next. >> enjoy your weekend.

good friday afternoon. craig melvin from msnbc headquarters in new york city. firing at the fbi. president trump this morning ft. slamming the russia investigation and he went after the fbi again. the president saying, it's a shame what's happened with the agency and vows to rebuild it. he also said it before making an appearance at fbi headquarters. also, pleasing putin. as the president emphatically denies collusion with russia, calling it a bureaucratic hoax, he reveals president putin has had glowing praise for him. the details of their friendly phone call. and harassment scandals. nbc sits down for an interview with the lawyer of one of matt lauer's accusers. he asks those looking for the identity of his client to please stop. she's terrified. the lawyer also said that men have to do more. we start with republicans inching closer to a vick stotor tax cuts. president trump ending the week