been done and there may be a government shutdown in about 32 hours. this busy hour is coming to a close for me. i'm going to see you back here tomorrow 11:00 a.m. eastern with stephanie ruhle. 3:00 p.m. eastern find me on social media. right now it is time for deadline white house with nicolle wallace. >> hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. trouble on the first floor of the west wing. that's where the oval office and just a small handful of other key advisors to the president sit. it's also where tensions are at a high water mark today for the president and his second chief of staff, general john kelly. while kelly's initial appointment was universally praised, it seems some in the west wing think it was a very bad idea for him to call the president's views on immigration not fully informed in meetings on capitol hill yesterday. here's kelly trying to describe the president's evolution on the wall in an appearance on fox news. >> this president, if you've

seen what he's done, he has changed the way he's looked at a number of things. he said very definitely changed his attitude towards daca issue. and even the wall once we briefed him. there are places where hygrograph kelley, geo graphically a wall would not be realistic. there are other places we think 800 miles additional wall to include the 600 that are already in place, the fencing, would suffice. >> and mexico is not going to pay? >> we have some ideas how things like visa fees, renegotiation of nafta, what that would mean to our economy. so, in one way or another, it's possible that we could get the revenue from mexico, but not directly from their government. >> unfortunately for kelly, the president didn't appreciate those descriptions. "the new york times" writing, quote, mr. trump was livid when he learned that mr. kelly had

described him as evolving in his immigration position, according to a person familiar with his thinking. throughout the evening on wednesday, mr. trump fielded calls from allies who described mr. kelly's comments to congress as undermining the president, stoking mr. trump's fury. the president fired back on twitter today, quote, the wall is the wall. it has never changed or evolved from the first day i conceived of it. parts will be, of necessity, see through, and it was never intended to be built in areas where there is natural protection such as mountains, waste lands or tough rivers or water. the wall will be paid for directly or indirectly or through longer-term reimbursement by mexico, which has a ridiculous $71 billion trade surplus with the u.s.. the $20 billion wall is peanuts compared to what mexico makes from the u.s. nafta is a bad joke. axios, providing the day's kicker in a piece titled, quote, john kelly risks a steve bannon

moment. writing, quote, kelly is likely in for an awful day with the boss. let's get right to that day with our reporters and friends. nbc's peter alexander joins us from the white house. eli stokols, white house reporter for the "wall street journal" is here. catty kay washington correspondent for bbc world news america joins us. with us at the table bill crystal founder and writer of the weekly standard. the obama administration, now an msnbc analyst is also here. peter alexander, let me start with you and tell you what surprised me today in my conversations with folks in and around this white house. more people are mad at john kelly for describing donald trump as uninformed, and donald trump for being uninformed. >> i was hearing the idea they were surprised not just at this episode, but they were sort of surprised with john kelly himself who is sort of viewed as the discipline guy, the process, the procedure guy. i think one of the things we've learned about john kelly more broadly over the course of a

series of episodes now is that while the conventional wisdom is that he was the sort of more moderating calming force for this impulsive president, john kelly actually is heavily aligned with president trump on a lot of these positions. on national security, on immigration here, that he agrees with the president. but the president for whom the wall is bigger than just a physical structure, it's an ideology in a way that really connected him to his voters around the country, the fact that kelly would sort of soften that position i think was startling to a lot of people. it is worth noting that kelly formerly was a marine corps liaison. he has experience in politics speaking to lawmakers privately in the past. but back then when he did it he did it as a representative of the military. those conversations generally stayed secret. now he's doing it as a representative of donald trump. he was speaking to members of the congressional hispanic caucus and other democratic lawmakers, and that's why those conversations he thought would be private yesterday so quickly came out. >> eli, you are the author of the term presidential tells, at

least for the purposes of our viewers. i want to play you what donald trump said about his chief of staff today and ask you what it tells us about where john kelly stands right now. >> he's great. i think he's doing a great job. i think general kelly has done a really great job. he is a very special guy. >> [ inaudible ]. >> about what? >> [ inaudible ]. >> no, he didn't say that. well, i don't think -- he didn't say it the way you would like him to say it. he didn't say it. he's doing a terrific job. we have a big immigration problem. you see what's happening. >> eli, what is, i think he's doing a great job, he's special, what does that sometimes mean in terms of personnel? >> yeah, in this case i don't know if these platitudes tell us much. people like reince priebus, who was struggling, the president was disa int toed in. he would say things like that.

he's a good guy. he works very hard. that around the west wing would be, you know, interpreted to mean sort of a kiss of death type of thing. when he says oh, he's a good guy, everybody said that guy is not going to be around for much longer. i don't think that's the indication with john kelly. the president was angry last night when he saw this on television and he let kelly know about it. but i think every day is a new day in this white house. the president in many indications has sort of a short memory. and he knows he needs john kelly. the white house is running better under john kelly, even though the president continues to make things hard on himself sometimes with the early morning tweets and many other impulsive behaviors. but he knows that john kelly is doing about as good a job as anybody can do in that role in this administration, and i don't see that this is -- this is what we've seen before when he says, good guy, and it means that guy is on his way out. >> catty, let's pull the thread a little farther in terms of the underlying tensions between these two men.

maggie haberman reported in "the new york times," mr. kelly is trying to isolate him. his senior aides to the president are frustrated they cannot speak directly to mr. trump and must go through a filter. people have also warned the president that he faces a massive staff exodus among senior officials in part as a result of the working environment that kelly has created. so, eli is correct in that kelly's job is secure, in part, because there are not a lot of people in line to take that job. but the folks -- and i'm sure maggie's reporting here, i'm sure she's hearing what i picked up today as well, which is that the kelly regime has been accompanied by discontent that's just beneath the surface. and when he stumbles as he was thought to have done when he attacked frederica wilson out in that now infamous press briefing he did during the seven-day

debate about a gold star widow and on the hill yesterday when he described his boss as not well informed, it's not difficult to find people critical of his leadership style. >> the thing that the president i think is feeling very difficult about the kelly regime is the sense of isolation it's produced. here you have a president who has a constant need of affirmation for those around him. he needs people to tell him he's doing a good job to rebuff criticism about him. he needs friends and allies to be in that position to do that. the report we have about what kelly has done by making the white house less chaotic is monitoring the president's access to people. who is able to actually call him, can they get directly to him, even ivanka trump and jared kushner have been pud in a disciplined mode where they can't wander in and out of the white house without it being on a schedule. the reporting from "the new york times" today, the interesting thing was how many -- it pointed out that the president's friends were calling him, his

conservative allies were calling him and saying, look what kelly has done. so, they managed to reach the president, criticize kelly for these comments about the president being uninformed, some that he's bound to great with somebody who says that he's very smart and a genius. he doesn't like the idea of being called uninformed. and they got through the kelly net. you're right, the problem for kelly, this president is he's cut him off from people. those people got to him yesterday and there was some pay back. >> and, peter alexander, the question of kelly's management style is polarizing among the president's friends, as catty is saying, and also on the white house staff, and three different people close to this white house today pointed to this piece in politico as rubbing a lot of folks the wrong way. i don't know if the president saw it or reacted to it, but let me read a little bit to you. politico writing, john kelly is the man, fred trump always wanted donald trump to be. this is a quote from chris whipple who wrote the gate keepers, how chief of staff defines the presidency. the quote says, there's never

been anybody like donald trump in the oval office. from day one it's been a challenge for kelly. somebody said it's like fred trump reaching from beyond the grave. john kelly is the man fred trump always wanted donald trump to be. this was described to me as sort of feeding a caricature of john kelly acting like a pseudopresident in terms of the way that white house is run. >> you know what strikes me in the conversations i have privately is the way that john kelly sort of casts himself in these conversations at times. you hear from people familiar with the conversations that john kelly basically tells the president, so, here's what's going to happen, or here's how this is going to go in ways that it's hard to fathom anybody else speaking to this president. obviously there have been tension points like we're witnessing here. but what it also underscores is the way the president views a military man. obviously we know how he has surrounded himself by generals, general kelly now the closest to him, the one he sees each

morning when he comes into the white house right now and it's a person that he reveres in effect, whether the person or the military figure. that's why in the oval office now some of the changes we witnessed from past presidents like obama, many more military flags surround the president in the oval office and john kelly does represent as indicated by that politico reporting there, something that perhaps donald trump's own father hoped his son would represent. >> and i can't imagine anything annoying him more. eli, let me play lindsey graham talking about just how easy it is to play the president. this may explain some of john kelly's methods. >> you could be dark as charcoal and lili white, it doesn't matter as longs as you're nice to him. you could be the pope and criticize him, it doesn't matter, he'll go after the pope. you could be putin and say nice things and he'll like you. if he feels like you're off script, you don't like him, he punches back. >> i mean, to defend kelly for a

second, eli, maybe he's trying to protect the president from himself and from what lindsey graham accurately describes is almost a childlike capacity to sort of bend to the will of anybody who calls him smart and handsome. >> i think that is what he's doing, nicole. but the problem with that is that because of all the media focus on this white house and how things work, the fact that john kelly is now a household name, the president consumes so much media that that narrative gets out there. it sets in, and it gets played back to him. and that -- the idea that the president is some sort of childlike figure who needs constant supervision, that is something that obviously touches a nerve. you go back to the campaign when candidate trump exploded at paul manafort saying, you think i'm a baby, paul? inserting some profanity to that quote. but really getting mad at paul manafort when that insinuation when manafort was there to keep donald trump from going off the rails. he hates that perception. he really bristles at it.

john kelly has, if intended to or not, peter referred to the private conversations. i've heard the chief of staff say many times that you think this is chaotic, but you should see some of the tweets that weren't sent. you should know just how difficult this is. the more that narrative gets out there, you know, eventually that is going to come back in john kelly's face which i think is what we're seeing today. >> bill crystal? >> i have a high opinion of john kelly. the idea that the president's friends most of whom they are, hangers onto this wealthy man, made somebody feel they are, criticizing john kelly a pauls me given kelly's record of public service. i have a few issues he's done as chief of staff, particularly the conference you mentioned how long does john kelly put up with it. i've been told -- he said publicly i think yesterday on the fox interview it's the toughest job he's ever had, and he's had some tough jobs. he's been in combat obviously.

and i was struck at the very end of that, i looked at the transcript earlier and see he said something about how brett bayer asked him will you stay? i'm in it for a long time. he pushed him a little. it's very important, i'm serving the country, i feel like i'm doing the right thing for the country. he never mentioned donald trump's name. he didn't say, it's an honor to work for this man. not that he thinks the opposite either. the way he is thinking about his job is that he has served the country for more than three decades and this is his last sort of tour of duty. and i think we're still lucky to have him there even though a couple things he's done i wouldn't have done maybe, but i wonder, there is some tension there between trump who is surrounded by -- likes having people -- he thinks it's a personal -- this is a latitude towards the white house. it's his white house, his government, everyone works for him personally. they don't work for the people of the united states. kelly's attitude i think deep down is the opposite. >> we're not -- we're kind of

doing a disservice to him now. that old saying, there are three kinds of jobs in washington. hard jobs, impossible jobs, and the president's chief of staff. this is the hardest job you could ever possibly have and i think the way we look at all of these tea leaves, i went and watched the kelly interview on fox. i couldn't find anything that i would take out, that i would be offended about. i'm not as thin skinned -- >> you're not donald trump. >> he didn't attack him on twitter, rick, donald trump did. >> i wouldn't even call that an attack. >> trump made -- you know what? i love that you play -- representing -- we can send your resume around. i'm sure newspapers and magazines still hire people to do that job. let me push back on you. maggie haberman has relationships in this president's orbit. when she describes the president as being livid that kelly described him as uninformed, i believe maggie's reporting. let me just get a question out to you. i mean, i have heard that what

rubs people -- this mention between john kelly and donald trump isn't anything that folks around the president deny. i'm just trying to get to what under girds it. i heard something i haven't herd since the mooch era. i heard people think john kelly thinks it is part of his job, i would say rightfully, 35% of the country that voted for trump would say not necessary, to protect the country from donald trump. and that that is one of the structural tensions between those two men. so, are you saying you don't believe there is any tension between the two men? >> i'm saying something you may find even more offensive. >> i love being offended. >> there is a difference between gossip and real reporting about stuff that's gone on -- >> you don't think maggie has done real reporting? >> i'm just saying when we talk about the president's moods all the time and his phone calls and things, that's very, very high-level gossip. but i wouldn't -- >> maggie isn't here to defend herself, so -- go ahead, catty. >> yeah, one, i've been having

conversations recently with european diplomats and they point actually at a picture very similar to the picture maggie haberman is painting, of a white house whereon some levels things are normal. interactions are kind of normal with the national security advisor and with the secretary of defense and with some of the national security teams. but they have said to me that, you go into the white house and it's slightly like everybody is on tender hooks because you don't know what the president's mood is going to be that day. and they all kind of have to maneuver around this president who has been described to me as being very volatile, is he going to blow up at one of his top members of staff. they say it's not a normal way to interact with the white house and that it is actually affecting the way allies can do business with this administration. so, i think there is something really there in what maggie is reporting on this particular instance, but it's not just this particular instance. it's the way this white house runs, slightly on edge all the time. >> i didn't mean to pick on my

friend rick sting l. she talks to other people in the free world. nbc news is reporting hope hicks, the president's communications director who schedules a lot of those interviews with maggie haberman, she is scheduled testimony before the house tomorrow. it has been postponed. what are you hearing about that? >> four congressional sources are confirming that information to nbc news. we confirmed she was scheduled to testify tomorrow. as' not going to happen. she is about as close to the president as you get. she's been with him since the very beginning of this campaign. it comes at a significant time as house negotiators are trying to negotiate with steve bannon's team, his terms of the ability to detail his experiences at the white house after, you know, after the campaign season, through the transition, through the period of time that he was at the white house. the same questions are being raised about hope hicks. and the reason these are being raised right now is the white house, in fact, we believe is trying to get a better understanding of where they

might be able to invoke executive privilege, where they might be able to say, these conversations are privileged because they occurred with the president right now. so, this is a significant piece of new information as house investigators try to come to better terms with what they can get out of some of these people closest to the president of the united states. >> eli, i can see your shot and i saw you staring at your phone. are you getting anything from your sources on this story? >> i haven't got anything new than what peter said. hope hicks is so close to the president and has been since the inception of his campaign. it's possible also that things are happening with the government shutdown looming on the horizon sometime tomorrow and given how tenuous that situation is. she is the white house communications director. granted, this is a president doesn't really listen to or strategize much in terms of communications. he just sort of does what he does. but it's possible that's a factor as well. >> real quick, last word bill crystal. >> executive privilege is

plausibly invoked when you testify to congress. not so much when you're testifying before robert mueller. mueller is the investigation that matters for all the sort of drama we have each week of someone testifying or not testifying to the house and senate. >> you want to get a last word since i picked on you? >> executive privilege -- [ laughter ] >> executive privilege -- >> and you me. >> it's good to hear -- >> executive privilege doesn't apply even in the executive branch if they're investigating malfeasance by the chief executive. >> peter alexander, thank you so much for starting us off. when we come back, so, why can't donald trump's own chief of staff talk the president out of his big beautiful wall? lalso ahead, the gop blame game in the early stages. how do you convince americans the party in control of the white house, the senate and the house of representatives, is to blame for a government shutdown? and the democrats' biggest stars warming up to get back in the game for the 2018 midterm elections. [ click, keyboard clacking ]

[ click, keyboard clacking ] [ keyboard clacking ] [ click, keyboard clacking ] ♪ good questions lead to good answers. our advisors can help you find both. talk to one today and see why we're bullish on the future. yours.

talyou or joints. somethinghy wefor your heart...e future. 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.

and i say, i would build a wall bigger, better stronger, than any wall. >> there's been an evolutionary process this president has gone through. >> are you going to build a 1900 miles wall? >> very easy, i'm a builder. that's easy. >> they all say things during the course of campaigns that may or may not be fully informed. >> what's more complicated ask building a building that's 95 stories tall. >> he has changed the way he's looked at a number of things. >> the wall just got 10 feet higher. we love it. >> even the wall, once we briefed him -- >> and by the way, mexico can

pay for the wall just so you understand. >> and mexico is not going to pay. >> one of the groups are saying, you can't get mexico to pay. how foolish of mr. trump. >> we have some ideas on how things like visa fees -- >> of course they'll pay. you have the right guy negotiating that, they'll pay. >> it's possible that we could get the revenue from mexico, but not directly from their government. >> we're not going to be the stupids any more. we're the stupids. we're known as the stupids. >> someone is going to put that on a t-shirt. our good friends of morning joe put that together. it underscores the mixed messaging. the wall is a huge part of the negotiations in the house and senate today. they have less than 32 hours to come up with a short or long-term budget deal or the government will shut down. let's get right to nbc's garrett haake on capitol hill. garrett, i started my day watching you say the sound i heard in the background was paul ryan banging his head on the desk. and i leaned in and listened. what are you hearing now? >> well, i think paul ryan's

head is feeling a little bit better. right now it looks like most of the drama is probably over in the house. republican leadership that i've been talking to, republican rank and file members all seem relatively confident that they can pass this one-month cr, this short-term spending bill, they can get it out of the house tonight. probably with just republican votes. it will be close. it will be ugly. but they seem reasonably confident that they can do it. the problem they have is as of right now it's dead on arrival in the senate. there is a host of democrats who have come out against this. i count four republicans that we know about who have said they won't vote for it. we're staring in the face of a shutdown right now and it's really unclear to me where i stand how, how everyone backs away from that if they are so inclined. >> garrett, thank you. i'm going to keep my eyes glued every time i see you pop up, stop what i'm doing, turn up the volume. thank you so much for joining us. as the deal-making process is cautiously and carefully carried out as garrett described, it is likely

complicated by the president. he's got a reputation for going with the last thing he heard on any particular issue. sean sullivan and josh in the washington post today writing, quote, people in frequent contact with the president have honed their pitches, looking for creative ways to grab his attention, win support for their ideas or praise him. sensing that trump is not loyal to ideology or party the way his predecessors were, and that he can be in the minds of his critics manipulated. they have concluded that each high-stakes fight could easily go in a very different direction. trump is often swayed by the last person he speaks with or sees on television, particularly if a person praises him. juan has joined our conversation. he's an msnbc senior national security analyst and a former deputy national security advisor under george w. bush and a former federal prosecutor. let me start with you. the last time he did that, the last time he seemed to veer from the white house's stated position, it was on something that i e-mailed you about because i was dying to get kwyo

thoughts on it. last week, last month. the fisa vote and his homeland security advisor which was your position in the white house, right, tom boss ert had him in the right position. he was away from the white house, woke up in another time zone, the president tweeting a position totally opposite to the white house's position. it seems like the white house has dealt with a president who has jumped around so many times that his own -- mitch mcconnell said yesterday, once we understand the white house's position, we'll try to garner support for it. paul ryan saying similar things. >> i think it's a challenge with any negotiation you're talking about whether it's on the hill -- >> with donald trump. >> with donald trump, internationally. what is the position, and does the president undercut that position and complicate matters. i think the real challenge with this situation, a shutdown, is we're on the brink. the stakes are incredibly high. i think what people don't recognize is that not only do you have to have clarity of positions to negotiate around

and with, but there are also real costs to this. the federal government is now preparing for what a potential shutdown looks like. every time we're on the brink, we're expending resources in the bureaucracy itself to actually consider what this looks like. and it's not going to be cataclysmic, we're not a state authoritarian capitalist system. we're a federal system. state governments, local governments do a lot in terms of public services. it's not the end of the world if you have a shutdown, but it's incredibly damaging. if the president isn't facilitating the negotiation by being clear and if he's undercutting positions and if people are trying to negotiate in or through and around him, that's very difficult. and makes it more likely than not that you're going to reach a crisis point. you want to avoid that at all costs. if it's not necessary. >> it's also delusional, it seems to me, bill crystal, that they think the politics are in their favor. the last we looked, the last time there was a government shutdown with a one-party control of the white house, the senate and the house of

representatives, jimmy carter was president and we all know he was a one-term president. how wrong or do you think the white house has the politics of this wrong? >> yeah, i think so. i mean, i think if they could get a party line vote in both bodies, it was clear the democrats are shutting down the government by not giving the margin between 50 and 60. but they don't. that's where they can no longer say it's the democrats who are forcing a shutdown if they lose four republican votes in the senate on the continuing resolution. i think the big -- where the president can be held accountable, the tuesday meeting, televised meeting, i'll take any deal you want. called lindsey graham and dick durbin, the two architects of the bipartisan -- those two and a couple other senators, daca and border security basically, deal. and then between the time he summons them -- agrees to the meeting, steve miller and others get upset. they think this is, oh, my god, he's going down this path we don't want. >> stop the meeting. >> other senators come in, other people come in. he explicitly repudiates this

deal. if you said without daca, let's deal with it a from now, if the president supported it, in a way got the best of both worlds, forced the democrats politically not to keep the government going. we'll see what happens after the weekend. i think the democrats, after such a harsh repudiation by the president, to say nothing of the language, the notion of taking care of the dreamers which seemed to be very much on the table, they almost have to -- they can't just kind of -- they think politically they can't just rollover. i think the politics are better. the short term for the democrats, just because, again, donald trump was sent to washington to drain the swamp. what is one piece of evidence of the swampiness of government having shutdowns? stupid shutdowns. his party controls congress and now we're having a shutdown. the one thing i would just mention, this trump -- i would not be surprised to see donald trump on saturday morning after a shutdown attack democrats and leaders of congress.

he unleashes his independence -- >> he campaigned to be the manager. this is the swampy est. >> don't you think he'll try to turn it into a sflus they're as bad as i said. mitch mcconnell can't do it, he can't deliver the republicans. the democrats are horribly irresponsible. this could be the beginning of a moment where trump starts to -- >> you want somebody to manage it? >> i would. >> why haven't you managed this thing? >> catty, the irony to me of sortd of rounding the corner on the one year anniversary of the inauguration, he's about to shutdown the government that he promised to transform is just stunning. and i wonder if you can sort of speak to where we started, sort of the isolation of donald trump and take us through sort of the political delusion of thinking the american people are going to look at their tv, see

republicans in control of literally everything and say, oh, yeah, the democrats did it? >> i'm kind of with bill here. i think you're right, that there is a chance here that the president likes this kind of chaos theory of government, then he wakes up on saturday morning and the government is shut down and he has a fight. what do we know, donald trump has always said, he likes a fight. and he can dismiss all of them as part of the swamp and not being able to get things done and it protects brand trump, right? his whole message is he wanted to come in and work without politician ands do things his way. now the politicians have defied him and they will suffer for it. he will say this is democrats and republicans. they didn't get things -- the irony here is i think the republicans had a chance of blaming this on the democrats, but the president kind of took it away from them. >> eli, do you want to make a quick prediction about whether there is a shutdown or not, real quick? >> no, i stopped making predictions a year ago, nicole. you know, the conversation is really interesting. the president's motivations, on

tax reform, the government complimented the president. he laid down key markers and got out of the way. everyone's motivations were aligned. republicans and white house were all desperate to get a big achievement done before the end of the year. on this, the president has not behaved the same way. he sent mixed signals and it does make you wonder whether or not he's adds committed to avoiding a shut down as the leadership on capitol hill. >> eli and catty, i love having you both. it's like describing my son on holiday travel. on the way he was great. coming back not so great. calling the shots, was the president personally directing steve bannon to clam up at his house intel hearing yesterday? rheumatiod arthritis. before you and your rheumatologist move to another treatment, ask if xeljanz xr is right for you. xeljanz xr is a once-daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well. it can reduce pain, swelling and further joint damage,

even without methotrexate. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts and higher liver tests and cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. xeljanz xr can reduce the symptoms of ra, even without methotrexate. ask your rheumatologist about xeljanz xr.

stay at la quinta. where we're changing with stylish make-overs. then at your next meeting, set your seat height to its maximum level. bravo, tall meeting man. start winning today. book now at lq.com

did the white house tell him to invoke executive privilege? >> no. >> no? >> steve has had very, very little contact with the white house since he left.

i know steve a little bit, not very well. he was -- he left the white house in his head. he certainly never returned with the white house, with the exception of a few phone calls here and there, very little contact with the white house. and i certainly have never spoke to him since he left. >> the president's chief of staff john kelly says steve bannon has had very little contact with the white house since he departed in august, but a new report from foreign policy says it was trump who personally ordered steve bannon to limit his testimony in yesterday's hearing before the house intel committee. that's according to two sources with firsthand knowledge of the situation. if true, that would mean it was trump behind bannon's silence on his conversations with the president during the transition while he worked in the white house and afterward. and even after he was fired and, of course, the breaking news we told you about earlier in the show, hope hicks' testimony before the house intel committee has been postponed as the white house negotiates the limits of executive privilege.

she was supposed to testify tomorrow. joining our conversation now is tom lobianco. he covers the trump white house and the russia investigation for the associated press. and joining us at the table lydia, editor in chief at the huffington post. lydia, let me start with you. i have to just say my own reporting suggests that the contact was never with the president personally and it was largely around the parameters of what steve bannon was supposed to testify to, that would have been negotiated and what he had legal representation for was to field questions about his time on the campaign. now, obviously either that's incorrect or something got lost in translations in the negotiation leading up to the actual appearance before house intel, because in one of the first bipartisan actions democrats and republicans joined to subpoena bannon and sought to compel him to testify today. >> well, it's clear that there is a tremendous amount of

confusion about what these parameters were and who was going to say what. anybody who read michael wolff's book "fire and fury" knows there is a tremendous amount of chaos in this white house. and it appears that that chaos continues even post bannon's departure. what he was supposed to talk about, from what we were briefed on earlier, was the initial -- the initial campaign time. but it does seem that this new reporting casts some confusion over what the substance is of what he was going to talk about. >> if i can just -- >> go ahead. >> the white house has to invoke executive privilege. the fact that you worked there, you don't get to invoke it. the president, no, usually when someone worked at the white house is called or works at the white house is called, there is a negotiation ahead of time between the white house and the committee and the white house says on these kinds of matters we're going to invoke executive privilege or we want to hear about the questions. so, i think some of this is being presented as more mysterious or more -- what's the word -- suspicious -- >> nefarious. >> the white house is entitled

to claim it. they're not entitled to necessarily -- congress doesn't have to say, okay, we're not going to ask. but the white house has at least a first cut at claiming it. but it does raise the question someone was in touch with someone at the white house, right? and john kelly's comment, we don't talk to the guy any more. >> it certainly affirms what we've been talking about all hour, that everyone is sort of in their own silos. tom, you cover this. let me ask you if you can bring some clarity. the white house not denying they were in contact with steve bannon's lawyer who we all know he's a former colleague of mine and his name is bill burke. and sources close to bannon and burke not denying that they were in contact with the counsel's office. what seems to be in dispute is what was lost in translation, i mean, who thought that bannon was going to appear yesterday and testify -- i guess it was bannon himself. we know that bannon slipped up and started talking about the don junior meeting in trump tower. is that how things went off the

rails? >> what bill was talking about there, too, there's been a lot of questions of what is executive privilege invoked, was it not invoked. i mean, this is something we've been talking about up here on the hill with the house intel members for the last two days trying to get some clarity on. i was talking yesterday with the white house official who i think explains this, and it comes down to their perception of executive privilege. they basically see it, according to this official, they see it as in place already until it is waived by the president. that is their view of how executive privilege is. i don't know if that's a sustainable view. i don't know if that would ever be sustained in court. but that's how they see it. if you take that, and you apply it to bannon, then that makes sense. but now here's the big question which we're all trying to parse right now. that did not happen with rick dear born, the deputy chief of staff who testified yesterday. so, for bannon there is apparently some sort of idea

that there is implicit executive privilege that's not waveived, t for dearborne there's no problem. there is no expectation of executive privilege. so, i guess again to the chaos of the white house -- >> let me stop there, though. this is a really important point. one, you and i worked in the white house. my understanding is rick dearborne's job was -- wasn't he the staff secretary? he would have seen literally every piece of paper that went in front of the president. >> right. >> if there is ever the kind of job around which you'd invoke executive privilege, it would be someone with rick dearborne's job. i have a quote from adam schiff, as tom said, executive branch official claimed no privilege. quote, executive branch official we had today answered every question we asked and there was no claim of privilege, no claim these periods were off limits and no effort to hide behind a later invocation of privilege by the executive. the distinction is steve bannon said all the things you

just said he said in "fire and fury" and steve bannon was around on a campaign that's being investigated for potential collusion with russia. >> yeah. >> what are the other variables i'm missing? >> it's also the form of the communications happening. look, i'm not a constitutional scholar on privilege -- >> you're not? you're fired. >> i wish we had an hour on privilege. executive privilege. there are different kinds of communication, right, so there may be oral communications that are invoked for purposes of privilege that may not have to do with anything that goes through the staff secretary's office. as we know, staff secretary's office is kind of the center piece of the paperwork for the white house. and so maybe the white house didn't see a problem with answering questions around what was formally happening. >> you're saying they didn't put trailing things in writing? >> dearborne was deputy chief of staff, he was high up and on the campaign. >> it raises the question -- >> the question is, is hope hicks going to claim executive privilege, to what extent.

i think there's no question that she will. but this gets back to your question, which is she knows everything and presumably dearborne -- >> finish your point. >> i do think, then, the environment matters because if you have multiple people in the same conversation, you have rick dearborne testifying to what happened and you have bannon there as well, then you have a really hard time claiming executive privilege over the communications if you've already waived it or it's already been testified to. that's where the white house counsel's job becomes very tricky a rourround the paramete where you actually claim the privilege. >> and the white house counsel himself a witness. >> here's the constitutional issue. executive privilege is about separation of powers, right. it's about congress or the judiciary trying to penetrate into the executive branch. >> right. >> mueller is not -- he is in the executive branch. you can't invoke executive privilege against someone who is also in the executive branch. and by the way, the other -- never mention the constitution, the way it was raised before was

about national security issues. there are no national security issues here. this will be adjudicated and it will go against the white house. >> in the mueller probe? >> yeah, the mueller probe and maybe even in the house and the in senate in the sense that you can't claim executive privilege if you're trying to hide a crime in the executive branch. >> i think that's why you're seeing this really, really aggressive effort to discredit mueller because i think everybody knows that the congressional inquiries are going to run up against this executive privilege problem. >> and partisan ship. >> and partisanship, right. and all eyes are on mueller and all of the effort is to undercut mueller whether it's the text messages between the fbi agents that supposedly approved treason, or articles that are going through, you know, the hill and then sean hannity. there are a number of different efforts that are underway to discredit mueller and i think that's what we're really seeing here, is that that's where the buck stops. >> tom, let me let you get the last word.

do you agree with this analysis at the table that while we're paying a lot of attention, there's a lot of smoke around these conversations, the white house has had to field questions from the podium, kelly seemed a little out of the loop, is the most generous way to put it. but do you agree that at the end of the day as rick stengle says, none of these issues pertain to the mueller criminal probe and he'll talk to whoever he needs to talk to, and if they lie they'll be guilty of perjury? >> mueller is the hammer, mueller has the power. i don't think there is any question of that right now. you know, to the question of what happens with congress and these probes, whatnot, you can move through a contempt resolution theoretically that would have to go through the chamber. that could compel testimony. there's all sorts of measures, tools, hammers out there they can use. but they all pale in comparison to mueller. at the end of the day mueller is the premiere forum for this. >> all right, tom, thank you so much for making us just a little bit smarter. we're going to have to recruit or turn you into a constitutional scholar by the

end of this. all right. so next coming soon to an arena near you, the former president of the united states who plans to hit the trail for democrats in 2018.

what i serve my family really matters. so do i want to give them ordinary eggs... or the best? there's one egg that gives them more of the fresh-from-the-farm flavor they love. only eggland's best. one egg with more vitamins d and e and 25% less saturated fat. only eggland's best.

one egg that makes choosing the best easy. only eggland's best. better taste, better nutrition, better eggs. . you notice i haven't been commenting a lot of politics lately. but here is one thing i know. if you have to win a campaign by dividing people, you're not going to be able to govern them. >> on the campaign trail, he is a force to be reckoned with. i know, i worked on the campaign against him and according to a report in politico, former president obama will shift into higher gear, campaigning and focusing his endorsement on down ballot candidates and headlining fundraisers. and never before has a former president been as opposed to his

successor than right another and left office with his party so eager to see him out on the trail. the panel is back. lydia, i have heard among former president's expression when people don't ask for their political assistance, who am i, just the guy who won twice. this is a small club. but people that won twice are eager to help their party again. >> they are. and obama is a mixed blessing for the democrats. he's going to only go so far in criticizing donald trump and you have a base right now that is eager for red meat. really, really strong red meat against trump. and obama, because of his position and because of his inner conflict that all ex president's have isn't going to go there and he will drown out other voices that need to emerge in the democratic primaries and the midterms and so i think there is a lot riding on the idea that obama will get out

there and rally the troops but we forget that he's ham strung by tradition and also could swamp the whole campaign and keep others from emerging. >>s it is interesting, i here this more from democrats than republicans. republicans largely fearful of obama being out there but democrats fearful that he's sort of an eclipse. and cory booker had a stunning week in terms of finding his voice in terms of being a really sharp pointed critic of the president and his bleep hole remarks about africa. what do you think the calculus is for democrats in terms of a popular president. >> in virginia, [ inaudible ] and then doug jones in alabama, that was a little generous but in both cases they went out of the way to say we are just -- not just, but we are local officials and statewide races, we care about this state and we stand opposed to donald trump, i'm going to attack my

republican for being a patsy for donald trump but that is more effective than setting up another clinton and trump or obama-trump match. right now the democratic enthusiasm is so much greater, the last thing you need to do is have swing republicans thinking of seeing home to see president obama and say, those democrats are our problem. i didn't like things about obama. >> and you have a generation democrat appeal. doug jones with a generic democrat and that is a big part of his victory. he doesn't have extreme views one way or the other and didn't pivot on abortion rights or immigration, he just stayed a mainstream democrat. and if that is a formula for success in states that are less hard to win than alabama, then i think democrats will go for it. >> and i wouldn't dare-get his popularity. it is 60%. even if i'm running in a red district, i want a guy with 60% popularity coming in there and i think people can read between the lines of barack obama.

he's the most disciplined candidate there ever was. people know how much he loathed donald trump. >> and it allows president trump to juxtapose his point of view and his policy and administration against the foibles as seen by trump and his supporters of the prior administration. and -- frankly, i don't think the obama team has done a good job of defending themself. they have the pulley pit and president obama is president obama but president trump could punch hard and distinguish his administration from the past. >> you were part of it, do you want to defend it? >> that is a good point. but notice that hillary clinton is not saying she's going out there to campaign in 2018. >> all right. final thoughts? >> i think that that is a very fair point but i also think that what we really need to see for the democrats to win is fresh faces, fresh voices and -- >> do you see any?

>> sure. absolutely. >> where in. >> cory bookers. >> look at the special election in pennsylvania, a republican state senator against a 33-year-old marine running for the democrats who is a local prosecutor. that is what the democrat want. i don't think they -- that district, i do not believe -- >> but they have a lot of veterans running for the first time as democrats and not republicans. ominous sign for the party i once was a part of it. right? >> yeah, that is right. i think that is right. >> we have to sneak in one break. don't go anywhere. we'll be right back.

and sometimes, i don't eat the way i should. so, i drink boost. boost high protein nutritional drink has 15 grams of protein to help maintain muscle and 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d. boost high protein be up for it

we ran out of time. this is my favorite story of the

day so i'll give rick 20 seconds to answer it. according to a gallop pole under trump, global approval of america hits an all-time low. this wasn't this low at the height of the iraq war. how do we deal with this. >> before he was inaugurated it confirms every prejudice people around the world have about america. trump in his person does. >> you think that is a campaign issue, just to tie it altogether. >> i don't think it is a campaign issue but it is an issue for the next ten years. >> it is an america issue. my thanks to you for taking my abuse. that does it for the hour. "mtp daily" starts right now. >> hi, nicolle. >> i'm sorry i'm late. i'm always late. >> i had to -- i read more glenn simpson testimony. that reads like a spy novel. >> go do it now. >> if it is thursday, the art of the deal president is making deal-making look very,