west wing of the white house, was hanging out in the lobby 13 times, 15 times, hour after hour. guess what? this white house doesn't function like fdr's did. it's a disgrace and we all see it, we know it, and this is what the book proves. >> all right. my thanks to don hileman, jonathan and steve schmidt. that does it for our hour. we're going to sign off. "mtp daily" starts right now. hi, chuck. >> trying to figure how schmidt just said fdr. i could say william henry harrison either. >> one word can work in three wars and six presidents. >> i love it. thank you. if it's thursday is bannon banished? tonight -- the trump/bannon divorce. >> i'm not aware they were ever particularly close. >> i don't talk to him. i don't talk to him. >> the president gets the kids, but can he control them? we'll talk to a longtime trump adviser quoted through the new

bombshell book "fire and fury." plus, the war on weed. jeff sessions just says no to state marijuana laws. what the new crackdown really means for legal pot use. and do not adjust your television sets. >> we have a message from a special guest. >> the surreal optics of the president's special appearance at today's white house briefing. this is "mtp daily" and it starts right now. ah a good, cold evening to you. i'm chuck todd here in washington and welcome to "mtp daily." we begin tonight with the fire, the fury and fallout from michael wolff's explosive book. we're going to speak in just a minute with one of the president's longtime advisers, who is at the center of that fallout. quoted as calling mr. trump and idiot and, expletive "fool.

and more important, we'll break down what it means in this epically dysfunctional prill environment. the president's lawyer ares threatening legal action against steve bannon for allegedly libelling the president. threatening action against michael wolff are and his pub lirrer, too, in case they didn't want to help book sales even more. the white house unloaded on this book this afternoon calling it every name in the book. >> there are numerous examples of falsehoods that take place in the book. complete fantasy, and just full of tabloid gossip. >> disgraceful and laughable. >> it is absolutely laughable. >> i mean, that's one of the most ridiculous things. >> this book is mistake after mistake after mistake. >> tabloid gossip. full of false and fraudulent claims t. is full of false and fake information. >> that book is full of lies. >> however, steve bannon is not disputing anything -- of his quotes, as saying in the book.

perhaps as bit of damage control did sing the president's praises on his radio show last night and the president today made sure that point that out. even though he told us yesterday bannon had lost his mind. here's mr. trump earlier at the white house today. >> did steve bannon betray you, mr. president? any words about steve bannon? >> i don't know. he called me a great man last night. so, you know, he obviously changed his tune pretty quit. >> and with mr. trump, you might wonder how banished bannon really is? but you can't ignore the toxic atmosphere around this trump-bannon war, adding to the atmosphere facing republicans turning towards the midterms. folks, steve ban han been consumed by the monster he created. as conservative radio host charlie sykes points out, created an ecosystem that demanded loyalty. what happened to the bannonites now? to put it another way in a trump/bannon divorce, who gets the kids? who can handled kids?

the gop is celebrating, but the monster created remains. bannon said it itself. there's a special place in hell for republicans not loyal to the president and that should still terrify the establishment even if bannon's gone. folks, this is the most unpopular president in modern history after year one. already dragged down republican candidates everywhere you look in 2017. some still survived but barely. and four in ten americans want congress to consider impeaching him. that's the political landscape. bannonesque loyalty says the president could cost the gop in tight races, but so could bannonesque disloyalty. if the start of 2018 proves anything, it's that 2018 is going to be about one thing. trump. joining me now is sam nunberg, the off again/on again longtime trump adviser and frequent persona in the explosive new

book "fire and fury." by our count in there at least ten times. mr. nunberg, welcome back to the show. >> thank you. >> i don't know if you've seen the full book yet. >> i have not. >> fair enough. let me start with what was in actually the "hollywood reporter." put it up and get you to give explanation. everybody in the west wing tried with some panic to explain him, meaning trump. and sheepishly, their own reason for being there. he's intuitive, gets it, a mind met with his base but palpable relief of an emperor's new clothes when nunberg fired by trump credited with knowing him better than anyone else came back into the fold and said widely, he's just an, expletive fool." all right. explain. >> first of all, i don't remember exactly saying that, but certainly sentiments i have said sometimes. i mean, look, the president acts on his own tune. you've known this, chuck and covered him. he's somebody not following

normal procedures. will meet with a foreign leader and not do a formal briefing. go a debate and doesn't want briefed on all the issues. he does it his own way and is very, very stubborn. that's the way he got there. i told you that privately. i'm a colorful guy, in new york and i could tell you, too, i've been sued by him and i'm sure he's said much worse about me. that said, i'm a supporter of his and he's a very, very difficult person to work for. >> interesting. by the way, speaking of lawsuits. i'm curious. how serious should michael wolff take the lawsuit that president trump has just threatened at him? given that you've been sued before. does he follow through? >> you know, this is going to be interesting, because the spread from the oval office and certainly something historic. we've had a lot of historic instances here. i think issue and steve, by the way, should give an apology to

don junior and the trump organization for what he said to michael in terms of money laundering and in terms about that meeting, which i disagree that it was treasonous. i disagree with the fact steve characterized the meeting as treasonous. steve may have cross add line and probably regrets it. i've spoken to steve. he said it was kind of out of context and that's michael wolff's -- the way i feel about michael wolff and the things he's quoted me on. i'm not disputing what i said or the semblance, michael is like a screenwriter. creates a narrative. takes instances you talked about and combines them all into a paragraph. you know, i was not with the campaign formally from september of 2015. yet he puts me in a paragraph going -- with roger ailes, which goes into 2016. goes into the fact that the president said i could be the most famous person in the worlds. from a conversation, chuck that i had with the president in

2014. so i think that steve and the president eventually will, as history has shown, will talk and ficker this out but i think steve crossed a line there. in terms of what he said about don. >> i want to go back to the lawsuit threat. this is not a first time the president threatened to sue things. is this something that people should worry about? should steve bannon worry about it? should michael wolff? obviously steve bannon signed an nda. you've signed one. the supposed basis of an attempted lawsuit. are they frivolous or not? >> ndas especially with public figuring are very, very hard to enforce and this is probably, trying to send a message to steve here. trying to say, look, i don't want you going around saying things as if the excerpt put in "the guardian "a are going to make the mueller investigation, give it credence to last longer. by steve saying something along the lines, the money laundering,

goes back to don junior and calling that meeting treasonous gives impetus for people on the hill including republicans that want this investigation going on. >> curious. can you decode what the president said earlier today when asked about steve bannon, right? and the president shot back, well, he called me a great man last night. >> right. >> tells me, sam, that he's obviously, number one, up late watching television. because every cable channel i think was recording the bannon radio show to see what he would say. he saw that. i don't think he was listening to sirius xm last night. maybe he was. >> maybe. >> does that mean it's inevitable bannon is back in the fold or is this a bridge too far? >> i think it was bridge too far for steve to comment on don junior and the trump organization. if you want to comment on jared or ivanka, look, they're in the arena. they decided to go to the west wing. that's all fair game, but to target don the way steve did, i think that was a barrier that it

president trump is not going to -- i often said to people, you can say things about donald trump and he will wash it over, eventually make up. but attack his family, his business, that is a, that is a bar too far. on the other hand, they're symbiotic in a weird way. breitbart in a lot of ways, whether people like it or not, is the conscience of the trump presidency. it's the conscience of conservative nationalism and isn't going anywhere. >> i want to ask about a couple excerpts. for my producer's sake, excerpt number three here. it's about this. it says, is trump a good, intelligent person a capable person? asks sam nunbernunberg. i don't even know but i know he's a star. explain further. is it the lack of intellectual curiosity? a lot of people had fun on twitter with your supposed briefing on the constitution to him and things like that.

walk us through that. >> well, my point was, to michael, was the point was, when i was thinking about donald trump and the first time i saw him actually in the political arena was in 2011 at scpac. something about him. he walked into the small conference, a star. obamaesque for republicans. the issue whether or not he would be a good president, whether or not he was cerebral, compared to obama, editor of law review? issue whether he was esoteric? no. what he had, something like "it." like arie gould from the hbo "entourage" show talking about vinnie chase about. he was a star. a special commodity. something that roger stone had seen about him in a long time and able to be this, this amazing character where, for instance, when barack obama said, i'm a rorshach test, 45 reasons why people support me. donald trump was that way when

he first announced. going back, finish one point quickly. that's what steve bannon brought back into the campaign when he joined their very late, whereby all public estimates, hillary would be elected president. and steve came in and brought that back in and brought it home. >> ask about the last thing. michael wolff does an interesting excerpt six. put in. essentially compares -- makes the case that nobody on the campaign wanted to win. and it was sort of like a, like right out of the producers and's they didn't mean to. the campaign came to an end trump himself was sanquine, ultimate going never to win. told aide sam nunberg, in this excerpt, michael wolff goes on to talk about kellyanne conway had a job lined up, michael flynn a lobbying career lined up. everybody had their next act lined up, ready to go and oddly excited about it? >> the point was, when i talked to michael about that, it goes to a conversation i had with

then mr. trump in 2014. look, the minute barack obama won virginia and florida in 2012, donald trump had decided he was running for president that night in 2016. i had said to him in 2014, we're going to a flight in the southern republican leadership conference in new orleans. i can't guarantee you'll win the primary. by the way, he was much more confident about winning the primary than i was. i told him you'll do well, and 100 years, you don't win the primary, even not the presidency, nobody's going to remember or talk about who won those, but still write about you and never going to be able to say you were a perennial tease. at that point he said to me, that's right. i'll be famous. that will be it, my thing will be etched in stone. >> interesting. sam nunberg, you know this man about as well as anybody i have run into. mr. nunberg, thank you, sir. appreciate it. joining me now, conservative commentator and msnbc contributor mr. sykes. welcome, sir, charlie sykes. >> thank you.

>> i want to go into the point you made about bannon at the beginning, and you sort of, the irony, compared him to rhodes pierre. swallowed up by the revolution he started. the "wall street journal" has a report, bannon -- breitbart board member, considering out of thing bannon if they can figure out a way to do it. is bannon headed to alba? >> he certainly could be, and you know, you look back on this and how incredibly tone deaf he was. he created this vast media ecostiteco stit system on the right but it was never really about ideas. increasingly about the tribalism and increasingly about this cult of personality. in retrospect, yeah. steve bannon created this, you know, this echo chime ber th that -- chamber that makes his

criticisms impossible. you see what's happened? the extent there's a republican civil war, it is incredibly one sunshine i one-sided. did you notice people lining up behind steve bannon? >> it is, but mitch mcconnell is very happy today. able to drive a wedge between bannon and trump. but there's still an anti-establishment fervor out there, out there before donald trump was on the scene. frankly before steve bannon was a household name. i think what bannon did was marshal the forces. if bannon's not there to do it, who picks up the anti-establishment, anti-mcconnell wing of the party? a mark levin? that world? who can tap into that? >> that's an excellent question, because there are still two problems here. this is the vulnerability donald trump has. he ran as a populist nationalist who would pay attention to the forgotten man and steve bannon still has that visceral

connection with that base. in the presidency, he's created a gilded age. a presidency more steve mnuchin than steve bannon. so if somebody wants to come at donald trump from the populist right, there is some vulnerability there, and then before the republican establishment gets too giddy about this, remember, as, you know, influential as steve bannon was, this presidency was never shaped by steve bannon. it's shaped and defined by donald trump and he is not changing. >> in the epilogue of the book there are quotes that muse, that supposedly steve bannon has been telling people instead of, if i was president, when i am president. is that a notion to take seriously? in the populist wing of the party? >> no. that is completely delusional. and so delusional it makes you wonder, maybe that was some of the affinity between donald trump and steve bannon. i have to tell you, though,

chuck that as i read through the excerpts i had a reaction i was not expecting. i actually found myself hoping that this account was inaccurate. hoping it is exaggerated, bu as many stories as we've heard about the disfunction and the clown presidency, when you start to think through the implications of what the people close to donald trump think about him, what they have seen him do, and their evaluation of this presidency, it's genuinely scary. i say that as somebody pretty critical of the president. can did really be this bad and how bad can it get? >> part of me, funny you say that. this book, at times you want to make sure you're not using bias, but this has an "open secret feel to it." he didn't write anything unusual if you followed closely the first year of his presidency. >> yes. that's right. you read some of the reporting that's going on. maggie haberman and others, what

they've been doing. painting this. which is why as you read this, it's consistent with that other reporting, but it really gives you this sort of nightmarish sense. even listening to sam just a few minutes ago. these are people who have pushed and have supported donald trump and yet apparently in their heart of hearts, they look at him and think this is not a man capable of doing the job. who is, who is fit for this office. commands the world's greatest nuclear arsenal and looking at each other, can you believe this guy is the president? >> charlie sykes. anyway, i give you the steve mnuchin then steve bannon characterizati characterization. a good one too. a good 24 hours in terms of phrases. much appreciate it. "fire and fury" arthur michael wolff joins me in-studio. don't miss it this sunday exclusively on "meet the press."

up ahead, president trump is sending a message. surreal video appearance in the white house briefing room, while he was just likely yards away. we'll be right back. it's a lot easier to make decisions when you know what comes next. if you move your old 401(k) to a fidelity ira, we make sure you're in the loop at every step from the moment you decide to move your money to the instant your new retirement account is funded. ♪ oh and at fidelity, you'll see how all your investments are working together. because when you know where you stand, things are just clearer. ♪ just remember what i said about a little bit o' soul ♪

welcome back. president trump appeared at the white house press briefing this afternoon. i say "appeared" because, well, that's what happened. >> we have a message from a special guest i'd like to share with you. that i'll ask you to tune in to the screens and then i'll continue from there. >> thank you for being with us today. the historic tax cut i signed into law just two weeks ago before christmas is already delivering major economic gains. >> look, the reason it was a surreal moment is president trump is physically at the white house today. he could have simply walked down the hall from the oval office to give the statement. but the white house opted a pre-recorded message instead. perhaps the staff didn't trust

his ability to stay on message and touting the real impact of the tax package and thanking companies like comcast announcing bonuses or pay raises for employees? the whole thing, he's just yards away to open with a video press release. very odd. more on "mtp daily," right after this. over more ways to enjoy seafood with new tasting plates small plates, with big flavor- like yucatan shrimp covered in chili-lime butter and caramelized pineapple. and if you like hot, buttery maine lobster, get your hands on this petite red lobster roll. for new entrees, explore globally-inspired dishes like dragon shrimp with a spicy soy-ginger sauce. with so many new dishes and all the classics you crave, what are you waiting for? come taste what's new at red lobster.

you've got to get in i know what a bath is smile honey this thing is like... first kid ready here we go by their second kid, every parent is an expert and... ...more likely to choose luvs, than first time parents. live, learn and get luvs "fire and fury," a lot more. bring in tonight's panel. eugene and msnbc news contributor, and national political reporter and a columnist at the "washington post" and nbc news contributor as well. welcome. i'll start with one excerpt and let you go nuts. and from "the atlantic" works an interesting piece. the details of the book "fire and fury" make it unforgettable and potentially historic. we'll see how many fully stand up and in what particulars. even at a heavy discount it's a remarkable tale, but what wolff

is describes is an open secret. george? >> a religious skeptic in 19th century england wanted to have carved over the portals of all the churches of england, three words "important if true." this book is unimportant if true, even if true. in the sense as mr. fallow says, mr. trump is an open book reading himself to the country for 30 years. this is not news. now, this excites a lot of people and a lot of chatter about the 25th amendment and all the rest, but the behaviors and attitudes and the persona that have people talking about him being unfit for the presidency are the behaviors,sona of the p into him the presidency. >> the temperament issue george was getting at is the reason every newspaper editorial came

out against him. some simply on temperament. >> except we remember that on the 63 million people, some voted for him despite his temperament, not because of his temperament, and thought as president he was going to be a different kind of person. that he would be changed by the office. a bunch of people didn't want limb to be changed by the office. i think the interesting thing, too, chuck, was talking about sort of where the republican party now goes from here with the breitbart and bannon world, and what's really fascinating to me is not just because i completely agree there is still a market for an anti-establishment sort of -- >> there before bannon. >> yeah. >> there since -- >> i don't remember seeing bannon in the aiken race or the steve -- >> but also disgruntled moderate suburban voter who voted for donald trump. not just the never trumpers, not the folks who had been in the establishment crowing against

them forever, the group spending ate of time in 2018 and beyond are the people that voted for donald trump. either are independent leaning or republican leaning, maybe even voted for barack obama before. but that this temperament issue is no longer are just one of those, like, well, we'll get over it, but is defining how they view this president and they may want to see democrats in congress as a check on the president. >> gene? >> just on the book, i mean, george is right. it's not an open secret in that it wasn't a secret at all. right? it was just open. it was -- but the thing about the book is that to read it from the inside, from all of these voices -- from bannon. opens with kellyanne conway. i mean, the people who were right there, on election night, on various days during the early administration, it still is shocking. it's still -- it still gets to you to see it it narrated from

up close and personal. just how chaotic it is. >> i guess, then -- the question that fallow asks, if it's an open secret, then the pressure now is not on democrats if they win. it's on republicans currently in congress. what do they do, george? >> just what they've been doing so far. said, well, we have an agenda and have to, the constitution is picky about this. you pass something. he has to sign it and we'll put as much as possible on his desk and tried to hermetically seal themselves off from the other end of pennsylvania avenue. >> can they keep doing that? >> of course not. >> right. and it feels like at least the first year of the presidency, an off year. in a campaign year, you can't. right? >> you become defined. they are defined by the president. it is remarkable, though, that you've seen on capitol hill, there is a lot going on. this gang of four sitting down and they're going to put together some sort of continuing resolution. going to figure out the funding

issue and the government. >> and this chaos actually makes republican have to deal quicker. >> quicker and you can cut a lot of deals when not a lot of people are paying attention without the intense focus on what's going on. if it weren't for this we'd all be on capitol hill. >> and paul ryan says, this year, take on entitlements system. mitch mcconnell says, not going to happen, but it's certainly the sort of thing that does not happen without president's buy-in. one of the things this president has been clear about is that the great entitlement crisis that should motivate conservatives is one thing he won't touch. >> he won't touch. but earlier this week before the book, the president of the united states taunted the leader of north korea. about who's nuclear button was bigger. right? that sort of thing is going to continue, and the constitution says that, hey congress, you have a role to play here. you're, you know, supposed to decide matters of war and peace.

you can constrain a runaway executive and they have to make decisions. >> i want to? you about this question -- i was -- i have to admit, i was stunned a bunch of democratic senators decided to bring in a psychiatrist to try to -- i thought, look, to me there's two ways of separating this. i think -- if democrats go down this road, they could make him a martyr. have the temperament conversation. maybe he's cracking under the pressure. that is something that all of us wondered about. how could he handle the multiple incoming when it happens? but is there a disservice we do when we go down too far the psychiatric road? >> it's malpractice on the part of the psychiatrist. in 1964, 1,189 psychiatrists at the behest of "fact" magazine, happily deceased, analyzed barry goldwater for whom i voted cheerfully without ever having met him and diagnosed him schizophrenic, and as, like, hitler in many ways.

of course it's an abuse and this yale psychiatrist, who i have a hunch didn't vote for him, and i have a hunch has never met him, to come down here and lecture a receptive audience of gullible democrats to medicalize their political differences. >> this is exactly what republicans are hoping for. right? that democrats, of course, overreach. now, when you look at democratic candidates running in congressional districts that are swing districts or republican leaning, they're not talking about psychiatrists or impeachment. at least at this point. but if what you see is the national democrats pushing this message, republicans go, thank you very much. we're going to take that and run with it. >> and you get pushed -- where are you on this? >> that's a very good point, and also probably the political ramifications. however, if the president is baying at the moon, right? doing things that are clearly

unbalanced, that call into question whether or not he is stable and fully in touch with his responsibilities, what are you going to do? just going to ignore that or not? how do you make that judgment? >> i guess i make the argument, temperament issues, that everybody is observing, temperament issues all of us observed for 40 years with donald trump. it's not like this idea he's cracking or supposedly -- this has been the same guy i've covered. >> well -- you know, there are people who have known him a long time who make a slightly different argument. slightly different. now, there's more incoming now. right? there are pressures you could never have unless you're president of the united states, and anyone would be a bit frazzled under such pressure. >> i think the line's got to somewhere be on that temperament line versus mentally unfit line. whatever that line is when we have this conversation. anyway, i'll stop there. pause it here. free to come back, stick around.

up ahead, attorney general jeff sessions' blunt message on marijuana. the department of justice is taking on blue states over pot. i have type 2 diabetes. i'm trying to manage my a1c, and then i learn type 2 diabetes puts me at greater risk for heart attack or stroke. can one medicine help treat both blood sugar and cardiovascular risk? i asked my doctor. he told me about non-insulin victoza®. victoza® is not only proven to lower a1c and blood sugar, but for people with type 2 diabetes treating their cardiovascular disease, victoza® is also approved to lower the risk of major cv events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. and while not for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (announcer) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away

if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing, or swallowing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. gallbladder problems have happened in some people. tell your doctor right away if you get symptoms. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, indigestion, and constipation. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. change the course of your treatment. ask your doctor about victoza®. he gets the best deal on the perfect hotel by using. tripadvisor! that's because tripadvisor lets you start your trip on the right foot... by comparing prices from over 200 booking sites to find the right hotel for you at the lowest price. saving you up to 30%! you'll be bathing in savings!

tripadvisor. check the latest reviews and lowest prices.

we'd killer. renewing his fight over marijuana. we'll talk to the governor of colorado, next. ted macular degeneration, amd, i wanted to fight back.

my doctor and i came up with a plan. it includes preservision. only preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd backed by 15 years of clinical studies. that's why i fight. because it's my vision. preservision. that's why i fight. and when youod sugar is a replace one meal... choices. ...or snack a day with glucerna... ...made with carbsteady... ...to help minimize blood sugar spikes... ...you can really feel it. now with 30% less carbs and sugars. glucerna. i knew at that exact moment, whatever it takes, wherever i have to go...i'm beating this. my main focus was to find a team of doctors that work together. when a patient comes to ctca, they're meeting a team of physicians that specialize in the management of cancer. breast cancer treatment is continuing to evolve. and i would say that ctca is definitely on the cusp of those changes. patients can be overwhelmed ...

we really focus on taking the time with each individual patient so they can choose the treatment appropriate for them. the care that ctca brings is the kind of care i've wanted for my patients. being able to spend time with them, have a whole team to look after them is fantastic. i empower women with choices. it's not just picking a surgeon. it's picking the care team, and feeling secure where you are. surround yourself with the team of breast cancer experts at cancer treatment centers of america. visit cancercenter.com/breast and i heard that my cousin's so, wife's sister's husband was a lawyer, so i called him. but he never called me back! if your cousin's wife's sister's husband isn't a lawyer, call legalzoom and we'll connect you with an attorney. legalzoom. where life meets legal.

what has changed the president's mind?

why is donald trump thinking differently today about what he promised the people of colorado in 2016? >> the reverse course today. >> welcome back. that was republican senator cory gardner of colorado earlier today railing against a reversal of an obama policy. doing away with a hands-off approach enforcing marijuana federal laws in states where it's legalized. in 2013 the obama administration said feds would look away looking at distribution to minors, drug gangs and beyond state borders. today's change can decide how aggressively to enforce federal anti-pot laws themselves. it's about freeing restrictions but can be a major buzz kill for the multibillion dollar industry and yes, it is now b.

joining me, the governor of colorado. one of four governors who send a letter in april to sessions and secretary mnuchin to uphold this policy. welcome back to the show. >> glad to be back. >> all right. has anyone changed because of this directive in the state of colorado regarding the sale of recreational use of pot? >> no. i don't think anything's changed today and i don't think it's going to change. up know, i think maybe general sessions was sending a shot across the bow or continuing to express how much he disagrees with increasing any consumption of any drug. marijuana included, but, you know, i've talked to so many people that, the justice department has high priorities. heroin, sex trafficking, all of that stuff. >> there's been an argument that says that this is a, a meaningless change in this respect. a u.s. attorney in the state of colorado, for instance, because maybe the idea of legalized pot is popular, may have his own,

his or her own political ambitions and isn't going to target an industry that the state that is popular with voters. is that what you expect and how that this law won't -- this new directive essentially won't get enforced? >> i think what the directive said was that u.s. attorneys can in serno cases go outside the boundaries of the previous restraints. i don't think it's directing anyone to do that, and, again, they've got much bigger priorities. if you look at it, 66% of the people of america live in a state where some form of marijuana has been legalized. so that's two-thirds of the country. i can't imagine it's to the benefit of the trump administration or the justice department to thumb their nose at two-thirds of america. >> one of your early challenges had to do with essentially what do you do with the money? right? for early-on, i think many banks were uncomfortable working with

businesses, doing transactions involving marijuana. so it was very much cash based. that's since loosened up. are you concerned that banks are essentially going to freak out again and not do business with marijuana companies? >> no. i am concerned about that. and banks are by nature, they're skittish. i don't mean that in a bad way, but if that's what happens, i will speak loud and firmly in that, you know, we're working as hard as we can to make sure we diminish and opt politically eliminate the black market. drug dealers don't care who they sell to. if we're pushed back into a cash-only situation, that's putting out the red carpet to the criminal elements, to the black market, hey, open house again. come get back involved. >> at this point, does the justice department mope emo cha? that's what it was. a reminder just a change in party affiliation in the executive branch can change a

directive like this. is it time, since oh many billions are at issue, have you talked with the senator, time to codify this, pass a law through congress so the justice department can't decide whether to reschedule marijuana as a drug or whatever? shouldn't congress take the lead here? >> and i have not talked to senator gardner today, but we have had a number of discussions on this, and maybe it's time for congress to take that next step just as question when the act was repealed and alcohol became legal, in those states that chose to do it. and maybe this -- this is going to be a huge nationwide experiment, it already is a huge nationwide experiment. maybe now if states are the laboratories of democracy, maybe they pass a law that allows states, when they choose to, with certain guardrails to go out and see what medical and recreational marijuana what does that look like and let it be banked, be done more safely. again, two-thirds of america is

living in a state where some sorm of marijuana is legalized. i think, congress, again, could be as cautious as they feel they need to be but maybe we've reached a point where we become reckless by our inaction. >> i'm curious. you've been very careful and want to go trankmentally. i get that. is it time to pass a federal law that legalizes it? no. because i think this is even in colorado, people i greatly respect are still adamant that this is really a bad thing for the state, and a bad thing for america. i think that we've got to, as we implement our rules, our regulations, our enforcement procedures, we've got to make sure we demonstrate we can digest this and the old system, we know how bad it was, demonstrate the new system is significantly better, and that comes in time. >> are you saying -- are you not ready to declare legalized marijuana in colorado as success? >> well, i have not urged other

governors to follow our model, except where their voters displayed that intention and that envision. we have eliminated many of our problems and many of our worst haven't happened, haven't seen a lot of the evils we feared but i'm not willing to say -- i still want a little more time to keep examining the data and looking for unintended consequences. this is a big deal. let's not rush into it. we don't have to change everything overnight. >> right. before i let you go, are you still in the, i'm thinking about it category for president in 2020? >> yeah. i guess you'd say -- i get -- somebody asked me that, asks me every week. >> i figured i'd be today's reporter to ask. you're in the "i'm thinking about it" stage?

>> still just thinking about it. >> thank you, sir. up next, if president trump really want to change the way washington works, i know something that really needs changing. we'll be back in a minute.

welcome back. tonight i'm obsessed with the new story dominating washington today. the one everyone's talking about. the one all over tv.

the one that affected every person in this area. snow, of course. all one inch of it. one inch of snow. there are cities where one inch of snow would barely be worth a mention on the local news. here, it's the lead story. in the capital of the greatest country on earth, unwinone inch snow, oh, the humanity. fortunately there are people who are, or not from here, who have perspective lp a tweet from senator heidi hide kaeitkamp, wt call it a snowstorm. we call it snow, and ron john n johnson, washington, d.c. may be frozen from a bomb cyclone but in wisconsin this is perfectly good working weather. then senator steve daines, some cold weather comes to the east coast are and it's called polar vortex and bomb cyclone. in montana we refer to it at january good to know washington

has sense of humor after all 37d and dear northerners we get that this weather is no big deal for you. now, please, shut up. hopefully we'll dig out of flurries and have at least a two-hour late start by tomorrow. s to amaze me: change. i see it in their eyes. it happens when people connect with nature, with culture, with each other. day after day i'm the first to see change. to see people go out, and come back new. princess cruises. come back new. sail with the #1 cruise line in alaska. 7-day cruises from $599. visit princess.com are made with smarttrack®igners material

to precisely move your teeth to your best smile. see how invisalign® treatment can shape your smile up to 50% faster today at invisalign.com

and it says my family and i have not communicated with steve bannon in many months. nor do we support his actions and statements. i support president trump and the platform which he was elected. the merciers are very important to breitbart. if bannon wants to help kelly ward in arizona, that's who you want funding your super pac. >> for somebody who already, at least when it comes to his

political influence, has not proven to have a whole bunch of money behind his rhetoric, there's one last place he can go to get some of that money. he's very good at getting attention and in the news media. he doesn't deliver much in terms of of what candidates need which is cash. i don't think he's going to be able to do it. he wasn't going to be able to do it whether he had the backing of these folks or not. >> i said this before. is he all -- >> he's erected this enormous scaffolding of fame on the basis of no achievement. he is what the late librarian of congress defined as celebrity. that someone well known for their well knowness. >> that's steve bannon to you? >> that's it. >> he's a kardashian. >> he had the ear of the

president of the united states, right? he presumably doesn't have that anymore quite the way he used to. although you never know with trump. people become enemies one day and friends the next day. >> he did provide an important -- sam nunn brought this up. the president can dismiss bannon all he wants. bannon brought a message when the election was going off the rails. >> he understands how to codify that message. how to hammer those issues, immigration, for example, the wall, so he has his finger on something. it's not as if steve bannon is the kind of guy, he's not a charismatic candidate. he can't go out and run. >> he's now a vacuum. somebody will pick up the anti-establishment mantle. >> it's the president.

they were talking about the big beautiful wall the mexicans would pay for. immigration, all that stuff. he focuses -- focus is not the first adjective that springs to mind. >> i guess galvanized is good. >> galvanize. >> it does raise an interesting question about when the debate with daca begins and where the breitbart wing is in terms of of making a public declaration. >> so weak, a weak bannon right now when they're talking about daca. jeff sessions' war, does he win it or lose it? >> he'll lose it eventually. on states rights, federalism grounds. mr. hickenlooper before he beca that, he went into micro breweries. i'm going home to have four parts gin to one part vermouth.

that's called a martini, my recreational drug of choice. a much more dangerous drug by history's carnage than marijuana has proven to be. >> one of my favorite questions, what's more dangerous? a cigarette, a joint or booze? and you could, some would say all the above but pot wouldn't be enough one. thank you. thank you all. up ahead, another twist in a very twisty election. ♪ it's a lot easier to make decisions

when you know what comes next. if you move your old 401(k) to a fidelity ira, we make sure you're in the loop at every step from the moment you decide to move your money to the instant your new retirement account is funded. ♪ oh and at fidelity, you'll see how all your investments are working together. because when you know where you stand, things are just clearer. ♪ just remember what i said about a little bit o' soul ♪

you or joints. something for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember.

in case you missed it, we have a saying around here. if it's tuesday, somebody is voting somewhere. if it's thursday, somebody is pulling film canisters out of a stoneware bowl for the house of deflgts that's right. he was declared the winner. today's tie breaker comes after a recap and a court challenge and a revoked concession biancy. in case you missed it, today's spectacle is not the end of this saga as the loser of the name drawing, shelley simons is allowed to request a second recount. simons said she is not conceding and all options are on the table. stay tuned for the next episode of win, lose or draw. that's all we have for tonight. we'll see you later tomorrow for

more "mtp daily." "the beat" starts right now. hello. i'm kris jansing. tonight the trump white house has gone to war with steve bannon, with a journalist, and with one of the largest publishers in the country, all over this book, "fire and fury" that book originally slated for release next week has now moved up its on sale date to tomorrow and it is already on the best seller list. that means we can hear specifics in the book because he was he would only comment when it is released. and trump demanding, he stop making disparaging and outright defamatory brarks the president and his family. trump's lawyers also fired off a cease and desist letter to the author