this sunday, the president, the special counsel and the russia investigation. president trump tries to fire bob mueller, but his white house counsel refuses. democrats react. >> we've seen these persistent attacks to try to undermine the credibility and that, to me, is unacceptable. >> what it does do is show intent, and it's not surprising. >> this is how republicans sounded last year. >> that would be a major mistake. >> but this week. >> i'm here for a hearing and i don't have anything to comment on. >> and president trump denies all of it. >> fake news, folks. fake news. >> at issue now, will republicans move to protect mueller or the president? plus, immigration fight. president trump offers a path to citizenship for so-called

d.r.e.a.m.ers, but at a steep price. are we headed for a deal or another shutdown. my guest this morning, republican house leader kevin mccarthy and democratic senator joe manchin of west virginia. and under attack. >> there is deep concern that the fbi may have been used in a political way. >> i'll talk to former cia director robert gates about republican efforts to delegitimize law enforcement institutions they once reveered. joining me for insight and analysis are nbc news special correspondent tom brokaw, nbc news capitol hill correspondent kasie hunt, rich lowrie and heather mcghee. president of the liberal group demos. welcome to sunday, it's "meet the press." >> announcer: from nbc news in washington, the longest running show in television history. this is "meet the press" with chuck todd.

good sunday morning. if this were a normal presidency with a state of the union message coming up in two days, we'd likely be focusing on how the president plans to sell his agenda to the public in a critical mid-term election year. this has not been a normal presidency. it was almost predictable that the president's trip to davos was going to be over shadowed by the story that president trump tried to fire special counsel mueller last fall. also predictable was president trump's response that it was all just fake news. what's not so predictable is what happens next. the attempted firing has prompted many questions. who leaked the story about president trump's intentions and why? why was it so easy for news organizations to match the times scoop unless someone wanted this story out? was it a sign that president trump is again considering the dismissal of mueller? is it a warning to him to not do it or was this a trial balloon to see if he can? and most important, will republicans in congress who once urged mr. trump to not do this continue to hold firm on this issue?

in other words, are the president's allies in congress more eager to protect robert mueller or president trump? >> fake news, folks. fake news. >> reporter: president trump with a predictable defense of yet another russia related allegation. mr. trump reportedly backed down only when white house counsel don mcgahn threatened to quit saying the move would be catastrophic. they want to include legislation protecting mueller in budget negotiations. >> this president has continued to say there's no there there. well, he is acting in absolutely the opposite way of someone who had nothing to hide. >> reporter: publicly mr. trump has repeatedly denied that he has considered firing mr. mueller. >> i haven't been giving it any thought. i've been reading about it from you people. you say i'm going to dismiss him. no, i'm not dismissing anybody. >> are you considering firing robert mueller? >> no, not at all. >> reporter: but friends have acknowledged that he has.

>> i think he's considering perhaps preventing the special counsel. >> reporter: in july the president told "the new york times" that mueller would cross a red line if he looked to mr. trump's family finances. mr. trump told reporters on wednesday that he looks forward to sitting down for an interview with special counsel. >> i would do it under oath. >> reporter: but worried mueller could be zeroing in on an obstruction of justice case, mr. trump's allies are warning him, if he testifies, mueller could catch him in a lie. >> it's a very clear perjury trap. >> perjury trap. >> do you have any fear of a perjury trap? >> no, but i think it would be -- i think it would be foolish to, you know, not proceed without considering that possibility. >> reporter: and ahead of the president's potential testimony, mr. trump's defenders on capitol hill and in the media have stepped up a month's long campaign to discredit the fbi and the department of justice. >> it is abundantly clear that the entire mueller investigation

is a lie built on a foundation of corruption. >> it's actually the fbi that's colluded with dnc. >> it's been a huge week of revelations about corruptions at the highest levels of the fbi and doj. >> reporter: last summer republican leaders warned that if the president threatened bob mueller's job, they would move to protect mueller. >> that would be a major mistake. >> there will be holy hell to pay. >> i have a lot of confidence in bob mueller. >> reporter: fast forward six months and republicans have greeted these new reports with relative silence. >> i'm here for a hearing. i don't have anything to comment on any other issues like that. >> there are half a million people obsessing over these investigations and i'm not one of them. >> joining me now is house majority leader republican kevin mccarthy. welcome back. >> thanks for having me back. >> let's start with the issue of the president and robert mueller. does it concern you that the president ordered his firing? >> look. the president and the staff has fully cooperated.

that's why they're moving forward. i think we'll continue the investigation and see where it goes. >> do you have confidence in bob mueller? >> yes. >> 100%? >> i have confidence in mueller. i have questions about others within the fbi and the doj, especially what's come out in the texts, especially what it's been based on. i think it's the responsibility -- we have an intel committee. that's raced a great deal of question. >> is there a red line the president could cross with you in his treatment of bob mueller? >> the president and his team have fully cooperated. you're making hypotheticals. right now -- >> it's not a hypothetical. we have records that he ordered to do it and don mcgann threatened to quit if asked to carry out the order. >> this is a place i have not been a part of. i have not heard that. the only thing i have seen is cooperation is where we intend to end up. >> would you open if there's bill that protects -- you know, there's a couple of bills in the senate, one would be having a

three-judge panel review a decision if the president did fire mueller to see if it was done on fairgrounds. would you be open if that bill is attached to the budget bill, would you support that? would you let that go through versus -- >> look. i think we should focus on the budget because the military needs funding. why are we playing other games with something else? let's take the issue before us. he's cooperating right now. >> would you support legislation to protect mueller? >> i don't think there's a need for legislation to protect mueller. we're raising an issue that's not. at the same time, we have an issue about funding for the military. chuck, remember this. one week ago when you were sitting here, government was shut down. democrats believed government should be shut down. trying to hold it hostage. the children's health insurance and others were held hostage. i think what's responsible is do the job that's before us. if there's an issue that arises, we'll take it up at that time. right now there is not an issue. why create one if there isn't a place for it? >> do you believe there are deep state that's autoto -- out to get the president? >> i have never believed that. i have people who have been u.s. attorneys and others, but it is

a real question when somebody work the high end of the doj, wife is hired just to do research when it comes to do fusion, when somebody at the fbi looking at the texts, talking to a person they're having an affair, putting their politics but but it's not just somebody in the fbi, it's somebody that was responsible in looking at the investigation when it came to hillary clinton, it's somebody that was in this investigation that was with mueller. he didn't find it. it was the independent investigator that found it, and then when they have these questions about it, when you look at these entire texts and then why they were all lost right after the election, i think that gives anybody doubt. i have to people and now they have serious doubts. >> let me ask you this in the reverse. >> sure. >> if this were a democrat being investigated, why do i have a feeling you would be sitting here saying they seem to be so concerned about the investigators. it's almost that they're afraid of the facts. >> no. >> the disputes seem to be about the fact finders, not the facts.

it's sort of like you don't like where the facts are going so let's question -- it's basically johnnie cochran's o.j. simpson defense. >> no. i think it's the complete opposite. you have never heard me have any problems with the investigation. you just asked me the question by saying, mueller, yes. what happens is the facts that came forward that an individual at the doj, his wife was hired by fusion only to work on the russian portion. lo and behold -- >> you believe this is in a giant -- you're painting a conspiracy. you think that's the most plausible -- >> no, i don't. >> do you want people to draw conclusion that is way? it does feel that way. >> i have given you no conclusion except the facts that are out there. as i said prior, i had no problems. but when these facts arise, remember, we're separate entities here and you have an ability and a responsibility for oversight, and i think the public has the right to know. why was somebody that was in the middle of the investigation in this investigation, concerned about what happened after the

election and that high up. i think that is a problem and we should look at it. >> right. there is an investigation and it's called the inspector general. why is that not enough for you right now? let the inspector general do their job at doj. it seems as if you guys want to supersede that investigation. >> we weren't the one that started this. you have different investigations going on. they all have their own part of going forward. we are separate but co-equal. we have a responsibility for oversight of doj and others. i don't care who was president at this time, but i want my government to be fair and open and what i'm seeing raises questions. we should look into the questions. it's just driven by the facts. let the facts take them where they may and that's the responsibility that we have. >> this memo that now the president apparently wants released which he can do on his own. he can declassify anything he wants. do you want him to declassify this? >> look, they have been doing their investigation. they found something out. i've gone down. i've read it. the committee voted this is the process.

they voted to allow members to read it. they have the ability to vote to move it forward. >> why are they afraid to send this to the justice department for review? >> well, aren't we separate but co-equal? don't we have the responsibility for oversight? the justice department will be able to see it because you have the executive branch and as they look at it they will send to the executive branch and they have the approval to declassify. >> having read this memo, i think it would be appropriate that the public has full view of it. >> you don't believe this is somehow the president tampering with the investigation? how does this not look like this if he does? >> because it has nothing to do with the president. it is the committee doing their work who have found something, voted as a committee of the whole. remember why the intel committee was created. based upon what was happening in the executive branch of the cia and others. they had oversight of it. they have the vote for the members of congress to look at

it. now they can vote to have it released. >> why don't you want senator burr to look at it? >> the intel committee is doing their investigation, not ours. >> that's a question for devin nunez. the chair. >> all right. i have to ask you on immigration here. is the idea of wall for pathway to citizenship for d.r.e.a.m.ers basically a one for one, is that idea off the table now that that deal can't be struck anymore? >> that deal was never on the table because when we had the meeting where we had bicameral senators, members of congress, you had the media there for an hour, we all agreed, every single person in that room, that we would focus on four items. we'd focus on daca, we'd focus on merit and the president just put out a compromise -- >> by the way, do you view that

as an opening bid, a start of negotiations by the white house? >> i view that as an opportunity to really show who's willing to solve this problem. >> that's a -- that's up for notion still in your mind? >> well, that is -- talking with the president just put out there, i think it's a sign that shows he's serious about solving this problem. >> could that bill if you brought it on just pass the house with the republican votes? the president's plan. >> i think whatever we do is not going to pass with one party or another. the responsibility -- if you want to do it, that bill has a lot of merit to solving the problem, you have to do it correctly. >> finally, do you think this has to be done by march? or you have until the summer to deal with the daca problem? >> i'd like to get it done as soon as possible. >> is there urgency to do it before march or do you think this can slide? >> i think there's urgency to get this done. unfortunately, the government was shut down by schumer. they thought they wanted to take it hostage. that stopped the meetings we

were having every day and so let's just back to the table and solve it. but think for one moment. you're asking what the president has done. the president showed leadership in this. he's pushed himself. remember, to solve this problem, we're going to have to have compromise. no one will get 100% of what they want, but this solves it long term. the president went there and schumer is trying to back away. >> i'll have to leave it there. thanks for coming on. >> thank you for having me. >> good to see you. thanks for coming on. now democratic senator joe manchin joins me now from west virginia. senator manchin, welcome back to "meet the press." >> good to be with you, chuck. >> i ended with immigration with leader mccarthy so let me start on that topic so we don't have whiplash here for viewers. >> sure. >> just simply the president's proposal, if that was legislation on the floor of the senate, would you vote for it? >> well, chuck, it's not legislation. hypothetically saying that, we haven't seen it. ly say this. i think the president did the

right thing laying out where he wants to be, where he thinks the starting point is. we've got to decide, do we go large, medium or small? 2013 we went large. the senate passed comprehensive immigration. it was a pathway forward. we spent -- committed $42 billion to secure the border with walls and with all other technology that was needed to truly secure america, so we've been down that road. that was large. so we have to decide what venue and what avenue that we take here, chuck. but i think it's a good starting point. we've got susan collins and myself as working with a common sense coalition of senators equally divided. we're going to meet monday night and look at the proposal. i think more details will come out tomorrow as i'm understanding so it gives us something to work with. we have people with expertise. tom tillis and james langford. a lot of people with knowledge are in this group so i think we can find a pathway forward. i really do.

>> are you comfortable supporting a deal on this that would include permanent changes in the immigration system when only dealing with the daca population? for instance, i know some democrats say, look, you want to talk about the family migration issue and what those rules are, that's fine. let's just do it for the daca population. don't make changes for the entire system. where are you on that issue? >> well, that's -- first of all, i said this before, chuck. the immigration issue has not been a hot topic in the state of west virginia. people are concerned and people want security and have good opportunities in jobs and on and on and on like everybody else but it has not been of high concern. i haven't been on the front end of this issue. i do understand where everybody's coming from. i understand the issue. >> right. >> and also the urgency of this. i'm comfortable working with any type of proposal they put in either a large package or a scaled down package, chuck, but

saying that, yeah, i think that we need to have an overhaul. we had an overhaul with the large immigration bill we did in 2013. i'd like to see that piece of legislation taken up and voted on again. the house never would vote on it. >> let me ask you this about this report that you pondered not running for re-election and you were -- and i'm just curious. did your threat of not running for re-election convince chuck schumer to back down on the government shutdown? >> i don't think so, no. chuck, i've said this. this whole bantering back. that's new yorkers talking to each other. i don't understand that language but that's how they talk. when chuck and i talk, we talk west virginia to new york. that's a little different. i said, chuck, this place sucks. i said it. >> if it sucks, why are you running for re-election? >> because i think i can make it better. i think i can contribute to bringing people together. i'm not giving up on it.

i mean, this is a small price to pay for the great country i've had the privilege of living in and being an american so i'm not going to give up on it. i don't have one republican that i consider not my friend. i want to work with them. >> if the shutdown had continued, would you have not filed for re-election? >> i would have been hollering. a lot louder, probably. i don't think chuck had the stomach to go on. he plays a part differently and i don't understand where -- i understand the dynamics. of our caucus, much different. the democratic caucus, that's a big tent, chuck. that is a big tent and i just said, i come from west virginia. i'm representing my state. i'm not a washington democrat, i'm a west virginia democrat. that's a little different. >> what is your reaction to the president's reported order to fire bob mueller? how much does that concern you? >> again, that's new york talk.

i look at it strictly as the new york language that they have which is different than most other people. >> how's it here? how is that new york talk? i'm curious. i get what you're trying there. i guess what you're trying to do there, but it's a re-election year, i get that, you have to be anti-new york and west virginia, explain that to me. >> chuck, here's the thing. you have a person who's the president of the united states that's been totally in control of his life, personally and professionally. been very successful. he's been able to basically do things incentive-wise by checks, bonuses, money, organization or organization changes, things of this sort. he's had total control. now all of a sudden he understands there's equal checks and balances. he's having a hard time with that. hopefully that will come. right now what you hear him saying and what he's going to do, let's see if he moves on rosenstein. if he moves -- >> if he did that, you would say time to pass legislation to protect mueller? >> i think at that time there

will be democrats and republicans saying time to protect the judicial system and the three branches of government having equal power, absolutely. >> what is your level of concern by what appears to be a campaign by some supporters of the president to undermine the investigators, to go after the department of justice and the fbi so aggressively? >> chuck, i -- i cannot believe and when i say this, no pun intended, but what congressman nunez has done to the intelligence community, he has neutered it from having any confidence of the american people, any confidence in the house intelligence to come out with something in a professional manner. i think it's eroded. >> you think anything that comes out of that house committee is not credible? >> well, when you look at what they have done and the actions he's taken, he had to remove himself and now coming back and

making the accusations saying without any vetting, on the intelligence committee, we learned to keep your mouth shut. you don't throw it out to the press and say let's let it fly and see what happens. that's not how we work. and if you take the seriousness of that committee, i do on the intelligence senate committee, and i have -- i have my chairman and i have my co-chairman. democrat and republican. >> right. >> democrat and republican, and i respect them. and we're going to come out at the end of the day and have the findings and the facts will take you where they are. i think the house has eroded that and congressman nunez has made that happen. >> i'm going to leave it there. sorry about your mountaineers against kentucky. you know? they're kentucky first for a reason. >> first half -- >> they're kentucky for a reason, senator. >> oh, boy. all right. >> appreciate it. quick programming note. i'll join a number of my colleagues tuesday night as nbc news provides complete coverage of the president's state of the union address, coveraging begins at 9:00 eastern.

whether we come back, much more on the president and where the mueller investigation goes from here. ... (engine starting up) ...when it can get by on looks alone? why create something that stands out, when everyone expects you to fit in? it's simple. you can build a car, or you can build a cadillac. come in now for this exceptional offer on the cadillac cts. get this low-mileage lease on this 2018 cadillac cts from around $469 per month. visit your local cadillac dealer.

we are the tv doctors of america, and we may not know much about medicine, but we know a lot about drama. we also know that you can avoid drama by getting an annual check-up. so go, know, and take control of your health. it could save your life.

cigna. together, all the way.

back now with the panel. nbc news senior correspondent tom brokaw, heather mcghee and nbc new correspondent kasie hunt and rich laughrey, editor of national review. all right. i'm going to start mueller first. tom, six months ago when the president was supposedly thinking about firing mueller, here was the reaction from some republican senators. >> any effort to go after mueller could be the beginning of the end of the trump presidency. >> i think it would be as explosive as anything i can think single act that the president might take. >> we would certainly advise that step not to be taken. i think this is a man who many believe on both sides of the aisle has tremendous integrity and will do his work in a very diligent way. >> we have not had the same sort

of reaction from republican side of the aisle. it's been much more muted saying, well, look, it didn't happen and we'll worry about it if it does. you heard leader mccarthy there claiming he has confidence in mueller but -- >> well, i think two things. one was, i was here for the saturday night massacre and the nixon white house thought that was going to unleash their ability to deal with what was going on and it was another nail in the coffin. there ought to be a lesson in all of that. >> did they really think at the time -- we look back and realize what a catastrophic error that was. >> they thought that was the right thing to do, that their base would support them and that the president had a legal grounds for doing what he did. in this case and the climate in which we now live, people move on in a hurry. he didn't fire him. he didn't get close to firing him because the white house was pushing back and he knew what the response was going to be on the hill. i think for the country, chuck, it's a non-issue. i think that they moved on.

i honestly think in the next year there will be three big factors. one is the economy. if it continues to go, roar on, people will put aside the other concerns they have and say, enjoy the prosperity. the other one is, what does mueller find? do we hear from him this year? just down from that is what happens from immigration. i think those are the three big factors that are in play out there for the country. that's they're paying attention to. >> rich, there was part of me that thinks could be this be a trial balloon to see if he gets away from it? last time republican reaction was, whoa, don't do it. this time considering they've softened the ground on mueller, you heard leader mccarthy, it's possible this was a trial balloon. >> i think if you're going to fire mueller you should have done it at the beginning because he has an extensive factual record now. that's going to get out one way or the other. i'm with tom. is it the most salient fact that he was thinking of firing mueller or he didn't fire mueller? he didn't actually fire mueller. the investigation's continuing and i don't think you get him on

obstruction based on impure thoughts of robert mueller. >> but you can get him on that fact that we already know. if he was going to fire mueller, he should have done it at the beginning. why should he have fired mueller except to stop this investigation, to fine out if there have been -- if there's been criminal wrongdoing. i mean, it's kind of shocking to me that we continue to play this partisan game when there are real questions of national sovereignty, real questions of who meddled into our election and what they were driven by and what they have on members of the trump family. this -- i feel like we are going to look back in 10, 20 years and be really disgusted by the way in which all of this was made hyper partisan and the way in which the republican party put party over country. >> chuck, what is the -- memo. we talk about this memo written in the house intelligence committee. why is that important?

because it potentially undermines the credibility of bob mueller. i think that it does speak to this. he is still in his job and clearly republicans feel as though the best way to potentially mitigate the effects of whatever it is he finds is not necessarily to fire the special counsel because that would blow up but to very carefully convince the people that voted for president trump that this entire thing is a charade and that's dangerous. >> we should focus on what we know and what we don't know. the president hates this investigation, he hates everyone involved in it and who enabled it. what we don't know is why. maybe he is covering up some terrible collusion. with the russians. but it may be just that he considers it a personal affront and a way to undermine his legitimacy. >> i think we do to a certain extent know why. this is somebody who has been obsessed since day one about this idea that he didn't actually beat hillary clinton. every single -- anything that contributes to perception that he did not win the election, that he did not win it in an electoral college landslide, how many times have we heard that from this president?

every day that's what this investigation represents. >> let's remember the things we've seen him in plain site. him going on a press conference saying russia, look into hillary's e-mails. the fact that we know that members of the family worked in the campaign to set up meetings with russian contacts about hillary's e-mails. at minimum that's a violation of campaign finance law. trying to seek out something of value to a foreign entity. >> in the final analysis we have to wait and hear what mr. mueller has to say. i mean, that's really what it's all about. what are the bill of particulars that he's going to bring to the american people about obstruction of justice? you have to remember he's already turned several people who are right now singing their heart out before juries of all kinds. i think what we have to keep in mind is exactly that. let's deal with the facts as they come before us and what we're able to find out from mr. mueller and all this other speculation, we can do that until the cows come home as they

say in the rural part of america, but the fact is let us hear what, in fact, the special prosecutor has to say about what he's found. >> that was west virginia talk there. >> west virginia talk. very quickly, i have to get your reaction to this to the joe manchin interview. you had a very stinging reaction. >> it was a very strange moment where you were asking pretty basic questions about his opinions and he was being elusive saying it was new york talk. the fundamental question about the issues around the presidency. i think that democrats particularly but all members of congress and the elected leaders in this country need to have some coverage and some backbone and it felt to me that was a typical moment of -- >> you cover a lot of joe manchin. >> i did, yeah. i do. i talk to him regularly and know him fairly well. do you want a democrat to hold a seat in west virginia or not? joe manchin is the only one in town. he knows that. his state voted for president trump more than any other state in this country. what else will he say to you?

>> i'm going to pause it there. we have some immigration issues. i promise we'll come to that. president trump and his allies launched an assault on the integrity of federal law enforcement agencies in the united states. i'll talk to robert gates about that when we come back. >> "meet the press" is brought to you by -- (vo) i was born during the winter of '77. i first met james in 5th grade. we got married after college. and had twin boys. but then one night, a truck didn't stop. but thanks to our forester, neither did our story. and that's why we'll always drive a subaru.

the great emperor trekking a hundred miles inland to their breeding grounds. except for these two fellows. this time next year, we're gonna be sitting on an egg. i think we're getting close! make a u-turn... u-turn? recalculating... man, we are never gonna breed. just give it a second. you will arrive in 92 days. nah, nuh-uh. nope, nope, nope. you know who i'm gonna follow? my instincts. as long as gps can still get you lost, you can count on geico saving folks money. i'm breeding, man. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. the energy conscious whopeople among usle? say small actions can add up to something... humongous.

a little thing here. a little thing there. starts to feel like a badge maybe millions can wear. who are all these caretakers, advocates too? turns out, it's californians it's me and it's you. don't stop now, it's easy to add to the routine. join energy upgrade california and do your thing.

welcome back. there was a time when institutions like the justice department, the fbi and the cia were defended by conservatives and distrusted by liberals. well, not so much right now. among the themes of the trump administration and its allies on capitol hill, the conservative media echo chamber has been the relentless criticism of federal law enforcement. >> we have an informant who's talking about a group that were holding secret meetings off site. there is so much smoke here. there is so much suspicion. >> i think it was disgraceful. disgraceful. that the intelligence agencies allowed any information that turned out to be so false and fake. that's something that nazi germany would have done and did do. >> our republic is in jeopardy if we allow this type of palace coup environment to continue to persist. >> yesterday i had the chance to talk to a member in good standing of the so-called deep state. robert gates has been head of the cia and secretary of

defense. you don't get better deep state credentials than that, i guess. anyway, i began by asking him about his reaction to what has been increasingly harsh tone republicans have taken. >> i obviously have a bias having spent my life in these institutions, and i would say that i think it's disappointing. i think that they're very important for american national security. we have oversight committees in the congress in both houses that are -- were created specifically to maintain oversight of the intelligence agencies and the fbi, and if people think that there is something wrong going on, those are the proper vehicles to investigate and to come to conclusions that reassure the american people. one of the reasons i was always an advocate for congressional oversight was that is how we can ensure american citizens that we are obeying the law.

>> how difficult is it to make agents mess up? >> if you have a rotten apple, you have somebody go rogue on you, it can obviously do real damage. it takes a long time to repair that so that's why internal discipline is so important inside these agencies. >> i want to put up something that chuck schumer tweeted, the senate democratic leader. he said this of these republican attacks. the republican attacks on the credibility of the fbi and doj are playing right into putin's hands. they constitute an attack on democracy itself. i urge the gop and the press to stop peddling delusions of secret societies and deep states andcoup d' etats. is the minority leader being hyperbolic or do you agree with his assessment? >> let's just say, i've had the experience of these kinds of attacks coming from both sides of the aisle. >> yes, you have. >> this is not particularly to

that. if they go rogue themselves outside of the discipline and the order of the committee, then that creates a problem both for the agencies but also in terms of the credibility of the congress. >> when you hear the words deep state, does it exist? i mean, there's a sense there's these kabal of democrats that have been there forever, unelected people, you would say you've been unelected and you must be the chief. >> so i -- as the director and deputy director of cia let's just say i was exposed to more than a few conspiracy theories over the years and the one i always told people conspiracies would never -- could never succeed in washington is because everybody in this town leaks. i mean, the idea that you could have some kind of a kabal to organize or control the government in some way and have it not leak or somebody go sell

the story to a magazine or book publisher doesn't comport with reality. >> but it really does seem to be seeping in the mainstream. this was rush limbaugh this week. listen to this. >> what if the quote/unquote, intelligence community misrepresented on purpose the degree to which hussein had wmds because, i'll tell you, it was a very, very embarrassing moment. >> so if i get this right, the conspiracy now, it's not just to up-end president trump but it goes all the way back to wmds. rush limbaugh has a lot of pull. influence over a lot of conservative who is are both elected or activists. >> the reality is, intelligence folks do get it wrong sometimes and they did get it wrong with weapons of mass destruction in iraq. the interesting thing that people don't pay much attention to is every other service in the world got it wrong, as well.

>> a former acting cia director and then he said bipartisan veterans or nonpartisan veterans, for most of us throughout our careers we maintained a neutrality. but if you have a genuine conviction that the country is endangered, you can't help but speak out about it. no one from the intelligence community who speaks out about trump does it with joy or with satisfaction. it is against the grain of the culture we have grown up with. do you feel that dilemma? >> i think that people who have been in these positions, and i would include retired military, need to be very careful in terms of political commentary because you can be looked upon as representing that institution, not just yourself. so i think -- i think people who have occupied senior positions in the intelligence community, in the military and others, need to be very cautious about getting involved in the political process. >> bob mueller, you worked with

him when he was head of the fbi. what do you make of the president's attacks on him? do you have confidence in bob mueller? and if he were fired, how would you react to something like that? >> bob mueller i know is a man of extraordinary integrity and character. i can't think of anybody who would do a more honest and stand-up job of conducting an investigation. and, you know, people need to be prepared -- people are assuming he will come to one conclusion but people need to be prepared a guy like bob mueller may come to a different conclusion that will elate some people and anger some people but i think he's -- i think -- i have total confidence in him. >> do you think congress should do whatever it took to protect him if the president decided to fire him? >> well, this is tough because it's an executive branch appointment and i don't know how

you -- how the congress extends a umbrella of protection legally through legislation over what is an executive branch nomination. or an appointment. i would say this. i think that the one thing that can be done is to try and figure out how to make it clear the magnitude of the political costs that would be incurred should he be fired. >> if you want to hear more of my interview with secretary gates including his thoughts on russia, china, the cia and spies in america, that was a little bit of the college sports scene, you can hear it all at 1947 on apple podcast. or wherever you get your podcasts. when we come back, president trump is changing the way we think of government. just not in the way you might have imagined. government, just not i ♪ ♪

hi. i'm the one clocking in when you're clocking out. sensing your every move and automatically adjusting to help you stay effortlessly comfortable. i can also help with this. does your bed do that? oh. i don't actually talk.

though i'm smart enough to. i'm the new sleep number 360 smart bed. let's meet at a sleep number store. we packed new banquet mega bowls full of majestic piles of cheddar mac n cheese, smothered in mozzarella. but it wasn't mega. so we topped it with protein packed chunks of buffalo-style chicken. now that's mega. are you reluctant to eat in public because of your denture? try super poligrip® not only does it hold for 12 hours to reduce denture movement, it also helps provide better bite, seals out 74% more food particles, and enhances your denture fit. in fact, 95% of super poligrip® users surveyed believe it makes them feel more confident eating in public. eat, speak, and smile with confidence. try super poligrip® today.

welcome back. data download time. a week after washington brinksmanship shut the government down, here's a bit of surprising news from our latest nbc news/"the wall street journal" poll. after one year of trump, people say they want more government. 58% said the government should do more to solve problems and meet the needs of people. that's the highest number we have ever recorded on this question. only 38% said the government is doing too many things that are left to businesses and individuals. now let's compare that to this

point in the obama presidency. after a year of obama only 43% said government should do more, while 48% said government does too much. so who right now thinks government should do more? well, in this case it's almost everyone. majorities of every single age group we measured. majority of women, whites, african-americans, and latin americans. should government should do more. plus democrats and republicans. it cuts across all education levels. so who's opposed? republicans. trump voters and white men without a college degree all say government does too much. it may not be surprising advocating for smaller government has been a cornerstone of republican politics. this is the base of the gop these days. as mid terms approach, we live in diverse places that aren't just democratic or republican, they're a mix. guess what, 51% of respondents that live in republican held districts say governments should do more to solve problems. and help people. that may be a concern for

republicans this november. so while it's easy to dismiss the number of people who want government to do more as a result of having a republican in office for a year, just like when a democrat was in office far year people suddenly moved to the less government category, but the fact it's at an all-time high tell us something different particularly i think with the younger generation. when we come back, end game and growing accountability for sexual misconduct through the years. to take care of you. ♪ taking care of business with print services done right. on time. guaranteed! expert tech support. and this week all dell pcs are up to twenty five percent off! save even more when you purchase a dell monitor. and make sure you protect your investment. office depot® officemax. officedepot.com ♪ taking care of business why make something

this intelligent... (engine starting up) ...when it can get by on looks alone? why create something that stands out, when everyone expects you to fit in? it's simple. you can build a car, or you can build a cadillac. come in now for this exceptional offer on the cadillac cts. get this low-mileage lease on this 2018 cadillac cts from around $469 per month. visit your local cadillac dealer. cedric, i couldn't even bowl with my grandkids 'cause of the burning, shooting pain in my feet. i hear you, sam. cedric, i couldn't sleep at night because of my diabetic nerve pain. i hear you, claire, because my dad struggled with this pain. folks, don't wait. step on up and talk to your doctor. because the one thing i keep hearing is... i'm glad i stepped on up. me too, buddy. if you have diabetes and burning, shooting pain in your feet or hands, step on up and talk to your doctor today.

step on up i don't want to lie down. i refuse to lie down. why suffer? stand up to chronic migraine with botox®. botox® is the only treatment for chronic migraine shown to actually prevent headaches and migraines before they even start. botox® is for adults with chronic migraine, 15 or more headache days a month each lasting 4 hours or more. it's injected by a doctor once every 12 weeks. and is covered by most insurance. effects of botox® may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of a life -threatening condition. side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. don't take botox® if there's a skin infection. tell your doctor your medical history,

muscle or nerve conditions, and medications, including botulinum toxins, as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. with the botox® savings program, most people with commercial insurance pay nothing out-of-pocket. talk to your doctor and visit botox®cmsavings.com to enroll. back now with end game . back now with end game. the immigration deal, is this harder for conservatives to swallow or liberals to swallow. let me ask you about the right. here's what top senate candidates said about the president's proposal that would give citizenship for daca recipients. chris mcdaniel, a potential mississippi senate candidate, amnesty would apractice more illegals. and danny tarkanian, i don't

believe we should grant citizenship to people who have come illegally. if you're a conservative, you're criticizing the president's deal does that doom the deal? >> i don't know. it does go a genuine effort to find something that could get 60 votes in the senate. the concession on the dreamer's side is significant, going from 700,000 daca recipients to almost 2 million so-called dreamers. there's been a lot of squawking on the right. my view, if you look at the other side of the ledger and the stuff at the border and legal immigration system, if this passed, it would be the most significant for immigration hawks in at least a generation. >> from the other side, a lot of immigration advocates believe the permanent changes are too much of a price to pay. >> a huge price to pay and would affect legal immigration, no consensus that needs to be changed. the principle of family

eunification is enormously popular. i have to wonder how many people on this set would be here if it wasn't for that principle of families to remain together. >> is there a definition of family unification that says children under 18 and parents that's it, something democrats can support? >> if i'm here working and i'm a legal immigrant and my mother is sick at home in my home country i want to bring her here. this is the kind of values that the republicans don't want to be having, trying to pit struggling white families against struggling families of color and ultimately i think it's a short-time gain. >> will democrats support this compromise? >> i don't think so. >> the other half of it is you have to build the wall, i'll make the deal with you and you have to build a $45 billion wall on the border. i don't know anyone who believes that's viable or exercisable that can get it done to have a

big impact. they ought to be looking at other ways to stop illegal immigration. there are parts of it you can't build a wall. i was down there recently close to the mexican border and we found all kinds of campsites people are running across. they're coming here because jobs are here, not to create mayhem. there's a criminal component and they come here because there's market for drugs. one other thing if i can, i think the people here already showing up and demonstrating should change their tactics a little bit. they're saying in effect we're here, we're going to stay and you have to take us on our terms. that's what their signs are saying. out there is a lot of unspoken concern about the browning of america. race is a big big part of this. >> yes, it is. what's real on the hill? this president's proposal, is it dead on arrival or not? >> i'm not sure it's dead, i

don't think the wall is the issue. i think what heather was talking about is the potential problem. can they make enough adjustments here to get to a pointer you can bring nine or 10 democrats on board. i don't have a question. i think joe manchin in his interview suggested they want a chance to come up with their own plan to give to mitch mcconnell to convince him. >> i feel this smells like it could get punted. do you buy that? >> probably the likeliest outcome. joe manchin mentioned going medium. >> not a path to citizenship and smaller population -- a path to citizenship and smaller population and the border. >> the reckoning at the usa gymnastics and usa olympic committee and then more reckoning with hillary clinton a little bit of a story in the "times" in 2008 her campaign

somebody was accused of sexual harlot. the campaign manager wanted to fire this person and hillary clinton stepped in and said, no. ruth marcus today eviscerates her on this. and says why can't she admit that was a mistake? >> i think you're right. ruth marcus is right she should have admitted it was mistake. hillary clinton has a very difficult history with men in power abusing their position in terms of sexual abuse and harassment. i think that the hillary -- our desire to bring hillary clinton continually into the story is understandable. the bigger story right now is obviously what's going on with the u.s. olympic committee. the steve wynn story is a huge one, finance chair of the rnc. some of those stories are terrifying. >> steve wynn is the closest thing to harvey weinstein.

harvey is in a class by himself, i think, but steve wynn was pretty close. >> you're talking steve wynn owns a casino, people work inside and rely on him for their paychecks and facing assault, i sea to very straightforward parallels with harvey weinstein. >> and those in the service sector. >> yes, it's about hillary clinton, also about partisan politics, some men in democratic circles trying actively to find examples of harassment for republicans and exploit those for their own political gain. i have talked to a lot of women who work inside democratic politics and their message to those who do that say don't you dare. this is a problem that spans both parties. this is a pox on everybody's house and needs to be cleaned out. >> my big issue well overdue frankly to have the kind of disclosure we're seeing but there has to be a codification,

the difference between harvey weinstein and steve wynn and other people at the other end getting the same front page treatment for example, don't have a chance to speak out, don't get to confront the people accusing them. we need a system to deal with this beyond what we're dealing with now, it's all tabloid fodder and not good for the country. >> it is. unfortunately i'm out of time and all we have this week. thank you as always for taking the time to tune in with us on sunday morning. we'll be back next sunday because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." for your heart... your joints... or your digestion... so why wouldn't you take something for the most important part of you... your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is now the number one selling brain health supplement

in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember. woman: where are we taking him? i have no clue. we're just tv doctors. if this was a real emergency, i'd be freaking out. we are the tv doctors of america. together with cigna reminding you to go, know, and take control of your health. schedule your annual check-up today. you can now join angie's list for free. that means everyone has access to our real reviews that we actually verify. and we can also verify that what goes down doesn't always come back up. ♪ [ splash ] [ toilet flushes ] so if you need a great plumber, find one at angie's list. join today for free. because your home is where our heart is.

join today for free. the mountain like i used to. i even accept i have a higher risk of stroke due to afib, a type of irregular heartbeat not caused by a heart valve problem. but whatever trail i take, i go for my best. so if there's something better than warfarin, i'll go for that too. eliquis. eliquis reduced the risk of stroke better than warfarin, plus had less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis had both. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... ...and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines.

tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. i'm still going for my best. and for eliquis ask your doctor about eliquis. ♪ due to mature subject matter, viewer discretion is advised. the sewer rats will get drunk. >> inmate-made alcohol leads to a disruption. a crackdown on illegal cell phones could interfere with one inmate's plans to be married. >> don't cry. >> correctional officers go in hot pursuit of other forms of contraband. and with personal cameras provided by our producers, inmates show private moments. >> this is my girlfriend, jodie.