from afghanistan. quote, haiti had sent 15,000 people. they all have aids, he grumbled, according to one person who attended the meeting and another person who was briefed about it by a different person who was there. 40,000 had come from nigeria. once they had seen the united states, they would never go back to their huts in africa, recalled the two officials who asked for anonymity to dus a sensitive conversation. sarah sanders denied the president used those words, hut or aids. in a statement, sanders tells nbc, general kelly, general mcmaster, secretary nielsen and all other senior staff actually in the meeting deny these outrageous claims. it's both sad and telling "the new york times" would print the lies of their anonymous sources

anyway. >> garrett, this "new york times" piece is not a headline the white house would like to have to talk about. they clearly denied the reported words were used. what more are they saying? >> the white house went right back to their core playbook for this kind ever thinof things, t statement from sarah sanders denying the guts of this story. the smear of the "new york times" in the back half of this story. and the white house has essentially changed the subject. they're not engaging with the story. the president's not on camera today, neither are any of his top aides. the president has been tweeting about his ongoing feud with senior leadership with the fbi, singling out andrew mccabe. in a series of tweets this afternoon, they've decided, or at least the president has, that that is a conversation they would rather have, than defending themselves against the claims in this "new york times"

story any further than what sar sa huckabee sanders has already said. >> as part of this, there's reporting on the interaction between the secretaries. one of the back and forths is about rex tillerson. quote, as the meeting continued, john f. kelly, then the secretary of homeland security and rex tillerson, the secretary of state, tried to interject, explaining that many were short-term travelers, making one-time visits. but as the president continued, mr. miller -- >> the examples you've been reporting on, dissatisfaction, unhappiness with secretary

tillerson. >> it's hard not to read this as another example of the knives out for rex tillerson at this white house. really from the day reince priebus stepped aside, rex tillerson has been the official tie to this white house who has had the most rumors, the most attacks, the most anonymous aides sniping at him, suggesting he would lose his job or resign or be replaced. this is another example of that. for a man who has long looked to be the odd man out in this white house and among the president's closest advisers. it's clear there are people in this white house who want to make sure that these types of stories about rex tillerson continue to get out into the ether. and from my day job, it's interesting, because on capitol hill, tillerson is one of the people most respected by republican senator when is they look to this white house and to the people close to the president. so there's really some ongoing tension there between the secretary of state, his white house, and other republicans, who very much want to see rex tillerson continue in this job.

>> all right, garrett, thanks so much. now, earlier, i spoke with "new york times" chief white house correspondent peter baker and i asked him about the white house pushing back on the report from the "new york times" and the language that the president allegedly used. here's what he said. >> we're very confident in our sources, obviously. this is a report by my partners. they spent a lot of time on the story, talked to a lot of people, and in the end, we wouldn't have published it if we didn't feel confident in what our sources were telling. >> the language has raised a lot of eyebrows, because of the travel ban, because of the ninth district court saying, no, this is not good, but we'll wait until the supreme court makes its decision. then we have daca on q-1. what might be the imp kagedzs of this reporting? >> i think the implications are,

it reinforces the way this president approaches immigration. he thinks we've had too much of it, period. not just illegal immigration, but even legal immigration. he thinks the country has been hurt by immigration in the last few years, and he's got a very raw understanding and evaluation of the people who come into this country, whether they even be permanent residents, or in the case of the numbers he was reading from this particular list, you know, short-term, one-time visa travelers, people just visiting. he thought it was going to show people that he wasn't keeping up his campaign promise to close the borders to people who want to come in. >> if this reporting does come to pass here, and again, nbc has not independently verified this, is the ability for the chief of staff here, general kelly, certainly probably looking at reporting like this, going, this is exactly what i've been working against since day one,

since i've taken this job. as chief white house correspondent, what do you know about how this reflects on the ability to control message? >> well, general kelly has said any number of times, it's not his job to control president trump. it's his job to give him the best information he can, so that he can make the best decisions possible. but you certainly understand that in the circumstance like this, he understands the damaging nature if those comments were to be made public. he cleared the room after these comments were made, of other staffers, so the conversation could continue with just a handful of really top, senior advisers. and even then, people who left the room could hear through the doors of the oval office, the president very irate, very upset, very eenven belligerent some of his top people about why people kept coming into the country despite his orders to restrict travel. >> peter baker, thank you so much.

for now, let's turn to republican lawmakers who may not be all smiles about that report, but were all smiles heading home for the holidays. with the 2018 landscape beginning to take shape, republicans will no doubt try and make the tax bill a cornerstone of their re-election efforts. house speaker paul ryan saying earlier this week, the results from the bill will help win over skeptical midterm voters. >> any concern that this won't translate into a political win for republicans? >> no concerns whatsoever. i gotta say, if people are out there on tv, telling mistruths, disguising the facts of this thing, that's going to make it unpopular. when people see their withholding improving, the jobs occurring, a fair tax system, a simpler tax code, that's going to produce the results. results are going to make this popular. >> but a recent nbc news/wall street poll shows democrats with a double-digit lead. politico is reporting that,

quote, those closest to president trump are bracing for a possible bloodbath, which could eliminate republican congressional majority. in recent weeks, some of the president's advisers have taken it upon themselves to warn him directly about the fast deteriorating political environment. joining us now, wimy panel of experts. tamara, starting with you on this, looking at the polling, looking at the warnings that reportedly are coming in to the president, is he hearing them? will we see a bloodbath? >> i'm definitely not in the prediction business, that's for sure. but if you look at a couple of recent states where there have been votes, you see trouble for president trump and his base and

republican lawmakers, particularly in the suburbs where, in particular, republican women have strayed, or where support is waning. in virginia, you saw say very energized democratic party, sort of remarkably, the same thing in alabama, where democrats haven't elected someone in a very long time to statewide office. so there certainly are a lot of signs out there of potential trouble which is what people here in washington are looking at, which is why you have people in marginal districts announcing that they're retiring and things like that. >> josh, as you look at some of the reporting, the article from the a.p., for instance, saying it's not as bad as the democrats are making it, and it's not as good as what the republicans are making it, we're talking about the tax plan. if that reporting comes to be

true, might it be that in 2018, this is not going to hurt either side a lot or a little? >> on the politics of the tax bill, republicans do have a point in that the politics, the perception of how people are reacting to the tax bill is out of proportion to the tax cuts that it provides to over 85% of americans. more people think they're going to get a tax hike than a tax cut when the vast majority of americans are actually going to see their taxes cut. reality is going to come into play next year when people start to get a little more money in their returns, and perhaps the politics are going to move a little bit in the republicans' advantage. but when you look at the big, 2018 picture, the big question is, is it going to be a democratic wave, or a democratic tsunami? and i don't think the tax legislation is going to have a significant impact. we've seen elections in the past year, where democratic turn-out is hypercharged, democrats across the board, young people, millenials, you name it, turning out to the polls to vote in off-year elections. you have a very big swing in the

suburban areas where some traditionally republican voters have moved to the democratic party in the last year. the only question republicans are really hoping to change is their own turn-out, the base of their party. they're hoping this tax bill can get more republicans to the polls to mitigate the already very challenging environment that the party is facing. >> as a part of this, i want to bring in new analysis from the non-partisan joint committee on taxation in congress, saying every income group will get a tax cut in 2018, but it also says that taxes will go up for people with lower incomes over time, as you saw there. founder of d.c. report and syracuse law lecture, david k. johnston. david, give us your appraisal of the tax bill. there's been a lot said on both sides of the aisle in terms of what's good and what's not. >> this is literally the worst tax bill the american congress

has ever passed. first of all, it gives corporations that siphoned profits out of the united states and put them into the accounts of their offshore subsidiaries, tax breaks as high as almost 80% if they bring the money back. why would you reward people for deferring paying their taxes into the future with a huge tax cut? especially when they only need to change one line of federal tax code in the 531-535 sections to make these companies bring it back, or be hit with a penalty tax. secondly, lots of people in the middle class are going to discover that, yes, they're going to save some money, maybe 20, $30 a week, from their labor, but at the same time, they're not going to be able to deduct state and local taxes above $10,000. many of them are going to find services they want are not going to be available. we've already heard orrin hatch say, in effect, there's no money

for the children's health insurance program. jimmy carter taught us, real tax reform means lowering the demand for government services and having healthy children, children getting proper nutrition in the boom awomb and they're born, in the long run, as well as tax reform and health care. so it's donald trump that has to be benefitting from this, despite that sarah huckabee sanders says. >> and you've seen, david, the reporting on how much donald trump potentially could gain, $11 million, based just in terms of him individually, versus the everyday american, which as you were saying, could be maybe dozens of dollars in some cases or hundreds of dollars, and how that thematic might play out, david. >> well, that $11 million estimate comes from the tax return of donald's that i got last march. and it's a perfectly reasonable estimate if trump has the same

income. he may well have a higher income today for all we know, but he will save vastly disproportionately on this, and i'm sure that the democrats will hammer this issue home. i don't think it's a clean shot for the democrats because people are going to say, gee, you know, i haven't gotten a raise in years, but a got a thousand bucks more take-home pay this year. and by the way, those companies that are like comcast, which owns this station, that are giving bonuses at the end of the year, they get to deduct 35% next year, only 21, that's why they're paying the bonuses this year, instead of next year. >> thanks so much for your perspective. always good to have your brain with us. you heard what david was saying, it could be a thematic used against republicans, but on the other side, on the flip side, democrats don't necessarily have a gimme. >> well, richard, here's something to look at as well. the gop, we would be on a

downhill slope in the midterm elections coming up in 2018 if we had not passed anything. you've gotta remember, this is now going to be the centerpiece of what we're going to be able to hang our hats on. and we have passed something, and we do think it's a good bill. and thank goodness the rnc has been raising money in record leaps and bounds so they can get the message out. i know rona mcdaniels has come out saying they'll spend money to get some good pr and explain the new tax-code bill to the general public, which is, i think, fantastic. but i think going forward, i would have said that mid terms may not be looking so good. anything can happen. i've seen anything, i've been in this business a long time. i've seen anything. but i will tell you that i think that it looks a little better for us now that we did do something. and i think that finally, you're going to see the republicans getting a little bit more unity in their party where they hadn't

had before, and we had so much division. and on what david was saying, i understand that a lot of the democrats are pointing out all the negative parts that they see for the bill, but they didn't do anything. nobody cut any deals to get some things that they wanted. and i understand a lot of democrats are very passionate about some things that they view as negative in the gop tax bill. but why didn't they cut some deals? why didn't they get one piece that they could say they fought for? >> there's joe manchin who wants to get in and i have a feeling chris has a perspective too. chris? >> the truth as to why democrats didn't negotiate with republicans, republicans didn't want to negotiate with democrats. my former boss, senator manchin is a perfect example. here's someone you could have cut some deal with, and he was completely cut out of the process. once the republicans realized they needed to get something done, it didn't matter to them about creating a good bill or one that had bipartisan support, they just wanted a bill done.

and here's, i think, the reality as to how this plays out politically. yes, everyone likes maybe a little bit more in their pay that may come from this tax cut, but the reality is, the incredible disproportion of money goes to the wealthiest again and to corporations that already have record profits. so as a narrative for the republicans going into the midterm elections, you literally are reinforcing the very negative narrative that democrats are going to be out there pushing in every midterm election. so i think the problem republicans have -- >> i want to bring in tamara now just to finish off this segment for us. this is sort of a preview, is it not, tamara, of what we are going to see in 2018? and so do they cancel each other out? at least the arguments made on both sides, vis-a-vis the tax plan? >> these arguments are

definitely going to be made. one fascinating thing if you look at the history of tax cuts in politics, if you go back to the recovery act under obama that was very much targeted to the middle class, $20 a paycheck put into people's paychecks, people at the end of that year thought their taxes had been raised. so in a lot of ways, it comes down to messaging, and people getting these sort of tax cuts that on average everyone should, in theory, on average, get some amount of a tax cut. the question is, how much they feel it, and whether that matches up with their perception. >> okay, tamara. i had to tag you to help me out with that one. they're a tough bunch but we can handle them together. sit tight, we'll have more of you later in this hour. when we return, though, pressure mounts on jared kushner. inside the new reporting on his family's business. plus, new year and new white house. inside the high profile

departures as the year comes to a close. stick around. it's your last chance of the year to get our best offer of the year: zero percent financing for seventy-two months, plus an extra one-thousand cash back across a full lineup of ford cars, trucks and suvs. so hurry and save big on america's best-selling brand. it's the final days of the ford year end sales event with zero percent financing for seventy-two months plus an extra one-thousand cash back! see your ford dealer before jan 2nd and save.

well, thomas, you've got prediabetes. but with more exercise and a change in diet, it can be reversed. but i've tried exercising, and it just makes me hungry for bacon. i love bacon, too. and who really likes to exercise? not me. me neither. nobody! [both laughing] mmm! so we're good? what? oh, you still have prediabetes... big time. it's what's inside isthe person who opens it.x. give ancestrydna, the only dna test that can trace your origins to over 150 ethnic regions. save 20% for the holidays at ancestrydna.com.

welcome back. the president is weighing in on the future of top officials at the fbi. a new headline in the report from "the washington post" reads, facing republican attacks, fbi deputy director plans to retire early next year. justice department officials telling nbc news there has not been any formal notification of mccabe's intent to retire, but his official confirms his eligibility to retire with

benefits in march. mccabe was on capitol hill this week twice for hours meeting with house lawmakers. he's been a target of republicans and the president as james comey's right-hand man. after the news broke, the president wrote this on twitter, how can the man in charge, along with leaking james comey of the phony hillary clinton investigation, including her 33,000 illegally deleted e-mails, be given $700,000 for wife's campaign by clinton puppet string investigation? joining us now, eric columbus, former senior counsel to the deputy attorney general from 2009 to 2014, and former special counsel of the general counsel of the department of homeland security from 2014 to 2017. tamara, noel, and josh still with us as well. eric, kick us off. you know the justice department well. how will rank and file fbi agents react to the news of

this? >> well, this is absolutely astounding to see the president go after someone, an fbi official by name. it's not the first time he's done it. he did it in july. he has a bee in his bonnet about andrew mccabe. it may be in part because it's been reported that comey spoke to mccabe after comey had that somewhat disquieting dinner with trump. >> you already have out there, the very question, at least by the investigations, the four on the hill, that of special counsel mueller, and the question of obstruction of justice and the president coming out against another fbi leader, in this case the deputy director. how might this be construed legally, potentially, in these investigations? >> i don't think it really has any specific legal effect. i don't think it's really an act

of obstruction. it may, however, make it a little more difficult to -- or a little easier, rather, for trump to try to play off any comments, any testimony given by mccabe, or by fbi general counsel jim baker, who is apparently being reassigned and trump tweeted about that also. trump can just say it was sour grapes that these people back up jim comey's testimony, because they were losing their jobs. and so that i think is the game trump is trying to play here. >> josh, moving on to jim baker, what's the word in terms of why he's being reassigned? >> well, look, there's a lot of pressure coming from the white house and there's a lot of politics throughout this whole shuffle. you saw what president trump tweeted just earlier this afternoon, and you saw what congressional republicans have been saying in these hearings, involving deputy director mccabe.

the reality is, what republicans are trying to do is throw sand in the face of the umpires, throw some sand in the face of the fbi. and it's had a political impact. if you look at the latest nbc/"wall street journal" poll, the fbi's ratings have decreased noticeably in the last year. and i think the real goal is to create skepticism about bob mueller's investigation,s as far as the white house is concerned. and bob mueller barely has an above water approval rating with republicans, it's gone down precipitously because of what republicans have been doing, in terms of questioning the partisanship of the fbi. so this is all about politics and republicans are having an impact on public perception. >> noel, why are republicans pushing for this narrative as is the illusion or the intimation here? >> you know, i was just thinking about something when i was listening to everybody comment and this has really gotten to be sort of a circus. you've got the gop, the inner

workings of the fbi, you've got mccabe. if i were mccabe, i would take advantage of my being eligible to retire and i would get out. this is not fun for anybody under the trump administration in that environment. it's a circus mixed in with a battle of the tweets. now if there was ever any doubt what the president or the white house thought of mccabe or anyone associated with him, it's out there on twitter. so it's really gotten to be a very sticky environment. like i said, if i were mccabe, if i were eligible to retire, i'd like to take that and take advantage of it and get out. >> tamara, will mccabe just go in march, retire as noel is saying, or might he try to resist? might he try to fight the criticisms coming from the white house, from the president himself? democrats coming out of the meeting with him on thursday, were suggesting, hey, mccabe,

please say, we want you there in the fbi. >> yeah, i honestly have no idea what andrew mccabe is going to do. that's a personal choice for him. but i do know that there are people who don't want him to be pushed out because they worry about the precedent that could set. and certainly mccabe has been in the crosshairs of president trump since before he was president trump. he talked about him in campaign pea speeches. he's tweeted about him five different times going back to july. this is not new that he's earned the ire of president trump, and he's generally kept his head down and has had been incredibly tough job in the last year. he filled in, he was the interim after comey was fired and had to go up to the hill and testify in public, and then again as part of these ongoing investigations, was behind closed doors for like two days, full days of testimony

this past week. >> part of all of the testimony, the investigation, the backdrop, which is just getting wider and wider, "the new york times" reporting that federal prosecutors are seeking bank records concerning president trump's son-in-law, jared kushner's family company. "the new york times" sources four people briefed on the case, saying the brooklyn prosecutor subpoenaed records from deutsche bank on kushner companies where kushner held the position as chief executive. he still owns part of that business. it's unclear for now what records prosecutors are seeking. "the times" reporting there's no indication that this has anything to do with special counsel mueller's investigation, but the u.s. attorney has been investigating the kushner business's use of a program known as eb-5. overseas investors poured half a million dollars in investments in real estate projects in the u.s. can get visas. when you look at this, and the

reporting say it's not attached to all the other investigations, but one has to ask, because we've heard deutsche bank within the context of the other investigations, put those two together and what's your perspective in terms of this looking into jared kushner's family business. >> well, we don't really know, richard. there's so many different angles here. there's of course the mueller angle, the eb-5 angle, but there's also the possibility, maybe even the likelihood that it's about something else altogether. i think the "wall street journal" reported there was a $285 million loan that deutsche bank made. we know that kushner's opwnershp of a building at 666 -- should have expected it with that

number. it could coincide with the mueller investigation in terms of whether any of kushner's actions were in any way influenced by the financial situation that his family company was in. and so there may not be a nexus now, but there could be down the road, depending upon what is found. >> eric, tamar a thanks so much. coming up, mitch mcconnell says entitlement reform is not on the agenda for next year. others say it is. who's right on that? [lance] monica, it is absolute chaos out here! gale force winds, accumulations up to 8 inches... ...don't know if you can hear me, but [monica] what's he doing? [lance] can we get a shot of this cold front, right here. winter has arrived. whooo! hahaha

[vo] progress is an unstoppable force. brace yourself for the season of audi sales event. audi will cover your first month's lease payment on select models during the season of audi sales event.

welcome back. i'm richard lui at msnbc headquarters in new york city. kmart is paying over $32 million to settle whistle-blower lawsuit involving prescription drugs, which comes after a former kmart pharmacist claimed the company was selling drugs at one price and then inflating that price when filing for reimbursement from the federal government. ohio governor john kasich signed a bill into law that restricts doctors performing abortions based on the diagnosis of down's syndrome. it makes it a fourth degree felony and requires the state medical board to revoke the

physician's license in convicted. and a federal appeals court struck down president trump's travel ban, ruling that it discriminates on people based on their nationality. when we come back, there's so much left that did not get done in 2017, we're going to talk with our panel about what's left on congress's desk when 2018 begins. msnbc live right after this. ♪ one is the only number ♪ that you'll ever need ♪ staying ahead isn't about waiting for a chance. ♪ because one is... it's about the one bold choice you make that moves you forward. ♪ ...that you ever need the one and only cadillac escalade. come in for our season's best offers and drive out with the perfect 2017 cadillac escalade for you. get this low mileage lease from around $899 per month. ( ♪ )

the president is going to start infrastructure and welfare reform. >> you're going to see this administration move on vigorously to an agenda which will include infrastructure and welfare reform. >> i think you can expect welfare reform, infrastructure, immigration reform all to be top of mind and something that certainly we'll be looking at and talking about a lot over the first part of next year. >> a little bit of a preview there from top white house voices on their hopes for 2018. that's in somewhat of a contrast to mitch mcconnell. >> i think the democrats are not going to be interested in entitlement reform. so i would not expect to see that on the agenda. >> i think the repeal of the individual mandate takes the heart out of obamacare. we want to steady the insurance markets if we can, and i think we'll probably be addressing that part of health care sometime next year. >> but the rest of it is not on your agenda or -- >> well, we obviously were

unable to completely repeal and replace with a 52-48 senate. we'll have to take a look at what that looks like with a 51-49 senate, but i think we'll probably move on to other issues. >> joining us now, former romney 2012 deputy press secretary and still with us, josh, chris and ryan. ryan, we heard from leader mcconnell, looks like he's focusing on just one thing. that's different from the white house. what do you make of it? >> i think mcconnell is speaking about the reality in the senate. if we're having a closely divided senate after the election of doug jones in alabama, i don't think the leader seeing a lot of big ticket items getting through, given now divided the senate is. and the swing votes we have in the matter, who don't always go with the party on everything, so i think he's just talking about the fact that some of the items may not get any democratic support and may be difficult to

get through given the makeup of the body. >> what's your take on what might be doable? >> what's not doable is entitlement reform. just in terms of social security, 86% of republicans, 90-plus percent of democrats support maintaining or increase funding for social security. so once you get into the social security medicaid programs, you have a lot of political blowback. in terms of what may -- and i qualify "may" -- be possible, infrastructure i think is one possibility. but -- >> how big on infrastructure, do you think? >> but here's the problem, because you have a tax cut that's about 1.5, $1.8 trillion, depending on the math, now you add potentially, another 500, 600 million or more potential infrastructure bill. the math doesn't add up. so then you have republicans balking because of the deficits and democrats balking because it's not enough. i think it's going to be really tough. it's tough in the midterm election under the best circumstances. it's going to be even more difficult given the politics of this president and the

republican party divisions and where the senate's going to be, to get any kind of major, significant piece of legislation done. >> noel, infrastructure, how much? >> infrastructure is the key here, richard. and i think if they can come together, i can see them coming together, democrats and republicans, on something like infrastructure. a lot of people were very critical of paul ryan when he came out of the bag, hot to go on obamacare, the repeal and replace of that, which failed miserably, when he could have started out with something that could have gotten bipartisan support, which is infrastructure. i've got friends on both sides of the aisle here, especially in the transportation department, and you've got elaine chao, who is mitch mcconnell's wife and they've got some great programs and some great things they could do. and i think infrastructure is going to be the key here with starting to see bipartisanship at work and at play. and from there, getting used to working together, can you see other things being passed.

>> ryan, you didn't say infrastructure. infrastructure workable here, would you say half a trillion? >> i think it remains to be seen. i do think it's the one issue on the agenda that would get some bipartisan support, but it will also get resistance from deficit hawk republicans that don't want to spend a trillion dollars on infrastructure improvements. so it will be a delicate balance, something the president will need to negotiate with his own party, as well as the democrats, and i don't know if that will be able to get done. it was very hard negotiating with his own party to health care. that didn't work, the obamacare repeal. so i don't know. he'll have to use a soft tone if he hopes to get democratic votes with this, instead of attacking them on twitter. i don't know if that's possible in this administration, but perhaps. it would be a good talking point for the president and for the party in an election year to get something done, working across the aisle, but i don't know if it's doable at this point. >> rythanks so much. coming up, president trump

bulking up the military presence in afghanistan, including a plan to send lethal weapons to ukraine after running on an isolationist platform. trump's military policy in action next.

i love taking care of my mom. it wasn't easy at first. she learned how to better communicate her needs. and you learned how to not ignore yours. i discovered how to make healthier meals. and i discovered how much i enjoyed them. narrator: becoming a caregiver is a learning experience for everyone. find articles, tips and tools from experts and others who have been in your place. the caregiving resource center at aarp.org/caregiving. vice president mike pence is

back on u.s. soil after a surprise trip to afghanistan, that happening thursday. pence met with the country's leaders and spoke to troops at a rally-style event, where he touted president trump's strategy in the country and said he believes victory is right around the corner. earlier this year, president trump decided to send more than 3,000 more troops to afghanistan, to enhance u.s. efforts there. meanwhile, the pentagon acknowledging for the first time this week, multiple ground operations in yemen. the pentagon says the goal is to disrupt the ability of al qaeda in the arabian peninsula and isis yemen to use space as a hub for terrorist recruiting and training. this comes as yemen is in the middle of a civil war and as the country deals with what the "washington post" refers to as the largest cholera outbreak in history. the number of cases there has reached one million people. joining me now, nbc news national security reporter courtney kube. thank you for being here. all these headlines, why is the

pentagon just now acknowledging these operations in yemen? >> well, remember, we knew that there had been u.s. troops in yemen because of the mission earlier this year that killed navy seal ryan owens. of course it owens. it came into a political issue. his mother at president trump's first speech at the state of the union earlier in the year. we knew there were some missions that occurred but the u.s. central command, the command in charge of that region, the u.s. military, this is the person that put out a comprehensive look with a little more detail about exactly what the u.s. military has been doing there. we also know from this press release put out this week that the number of air strikes in yemen in 2017 has been five times as many as it was in 2016. so in has definitely been an increase. a dramatic increase in operational tempo in yemen and the question is why. one reason is, they're going after more offensively after al qaeda in the arabian peninsula.

there's a new and growing presence of isis in yemen. this all comes as yemen is involved in this bloody and terrible civil war, which is another u.s. military mission there. the u.s. is a are the positiving the coalition that's backed the internationally recognized yemeni government. >> and another important headline on this saturday in terms of u.s. foreign military operations is president trump's plan to send anti-tank missiles to ukraine. fill us in on that. >> reporter: right. so nbc news, we reported in august that there was a proposal that had gone to the white house for about a $50 million package. we don't know the exact cost of the one president trump approved, but the pentagon and state department actually signed off on this idea to send these javelin anti-tank missiles to the opposition fighters in ukraine over the summer and it took several months for president trump to approve the idea. one of the reasons this is pretty controversial, the state

department says it's defensive weapon. i would actually call it more of a deterrent weapon than defensive. an anti-tank like this is a kimmer. a javelin goes in, hits the top of the tank. russians have a lot of t-91 tanks, so it targets the turret, the most vulnerable part of a tank. defensive or not, has potential to wound and kill the people inside that tank. >> if anybody can do this in 30 seconds you can. iran and u.n. security council imposing new sanctions on north kor korea. >> reporter: right. comes after north korea tested its third icbm recently. and there is growing concern about any kind of a potential additional nuclear attack there. we'll see if this has any impact. u.n. security council passed a number of resolutions now against north korea, and they are really being squeezed, but china continues to send them coal and natural resources.

we'll see if this has an impact. >> great to you have around. courtney kubiak, normally you and i talk at 3:00 in the morning. great to get perspectives to close out the year and start 2018 in terms of what the u.s. is doing militarily. appreciate it. >> have a nice evening. thank you. back with more right after this. stick around. ♪ when heartburn hits fight back fast with tums chewy bites. fast relief in every bite. crunchy outside. chewy inside. tum tum tum tum tums chewy bites.

there are 130 million girls around the world who are not in school today. girls are not in school because of economic issues and they have to work. there's early child marriage, there's war and conflict. at the malala fund we help girls stay in school. there are some really amazing people around the world doing incredible work. the malala fund invests in education champions who work in the community and do advocacy and pave the way so that girls can actually go to school. to have the expertise of our financial partner, citi, guiding us is very important. the fact that citi is in countries where girls are vulnerable ensures that we are able to get funds to the people that we're working with and expand with great confidence. when girls go to school we're going to maximize their talents. we could have a solution for climate change in that girl. that girl could be the next nobel peace prize winner.

money managers are pretty much the same. all but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investments never does. and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management.

you may have already seen previews for the film "the post" starring -- well, fairly well

known tom hanks, meryl streep, paying the "washington post" editor and publisher who exposed the starting truth about america's role in the vietnam war. this documentary, the most dangerous man in america tells a true story of the whistle-blower who gave them the pentagon papers. >> i began xeroxing the mcnamara study in the fall of 1969. at the end of the day, working at my end, i would put several binders into my briefcase to take with me. walking past the security guards, i could feel my heart beating. i couldn't help thinking about the dozen or so secrecy agreements i had signed over the course of my career in government. the task seemed endless. i auv worked through the night. early in the morning i returned the papers to my safe at rand and headed home.

i'd get back to my house on a narrow beach in malibu. i loved to body surf and would go in every morning before i went to bed, and i remember at some point during this -- being in the waves and the sunlight and looking back at the hills of malibu and thinking, how can i be doing this? how can i be giving all this up? >> i was 13 at the time. he said there was a secret history of the vietnam war that he'd been reading and had a copy of this. and he had decided that he wanted to make a copy of it and make it available to congress. he described it in terms of sieve the disobedience would i help him. i don't suppose he needed my help but it was risky and important to him and it was important to him that i be a

part of it in some way and that very afternoon began copying the pentagon papers. >> you can watch the full documentary, daniel ellsberg and the pentagon papers, that's tonight from 9:00 to 11:00 p.m. eastern time right here on msnbc. that wraps it up for us this hour here at msnbc. i'm richard lui. stay with us for updates and breaking news as it happens and camp camp me on instagram and twitter. "all in with chris hayes," that's next. you all have a great night. tonight on "all in" -- >> you are fake news. >> the immediate yao demedia de >> what they're doing is fake news. >> the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period. >> it was also the year of free

press rising to the challenge. >> and just posted by the "washington post," they have 30 sources. >> stories that changed a presidency. >> breaking news tonight. health secretary tom price is out. >> and the relentless reporting it took to break them. >> the stakeout we did at dulles airport. >> the uncovered separate that sparked a reckoning. >> numerous allegations of sexual misconduct that spans decades. >> the battle over the truth itself. >> why should americans trust you when you're providing information that's -- >> i was given that information. >> "all in" starts right now. good evening from new york i'm chris hayes. at the very start of the trump administration on day one, sean spicer made clear what posture the white house would take towards the press. >> this was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe. >> these attempts to lessen the enthusiasm of the inauguration are shameful and wrong.