we are out of time. my thanks to rick and james and that does it for our hour. i'm nicolle wallace. and katie is in for chuck. >> i feel like you are so far away. we'll be back together tomorrow. >> thanks. >> and if it is monday, the secret memo may not be a secret for much longer. >> tonight font lines deepen between the white house and the justice department as fbi deputy director andrew mccabe calls it quits. >> i can tell you none of this decision was made by that of the white house. >> plus tracking the narrow path to a bipartisan deal on immigration. >> because the republicans don't have the votes to get it done -- >> and the president's state of mind ahead of his first state of the union address. >> it is going to be good. >> this is "mtp daily" and it starts right now.

good evening. i'm katy tur in washington in for chuck todd and welcome to "mtp daily." no one is safe in president trump's justice department. the president gave the order to fire special counsel robert mueller. he fired fbi director james comey. he he pressured deputy fbi director andrew mccabe to quit. he stepped down today. earlier than expected and we've just learned the president insulted his wife in a phone call last year. the president pressured the attorney general jeff sessions to step down. and he reportedly talked about firing the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. and it looks like the president also wants a secret republican memo released. why? his republican allies say it further undermines mueller's investigation. the fbi and the justice. the house intelligence committee has a meeting scheduled right

now where they could vote to release that secret memo compiled by republican chairman devin nunez. this is a secret memo. but it is ignited a very public fire storm on the right. >> i'm here to tell all of america tonight that i am shocked to read exactly what has taken place. i would think that it would never happen in a country that loves freedom and democracy like this country. >> what i read today in that classified briefing room is as bad as i thought it was. >> you are describing the very elements of a palace coup and after jim and mark meadows reviewed the intelligence information today, it is abundantly clear that the entire mueller investigation is a lie, built on a foundation of corruption. >> so what is in the memo? nbc news has confirmed that it includes details about the fbi surveillance of carter page, a

trump campaign adviser. according to the new york times, the memo alleged the application to spy on page was approved by the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein who used information from the steele dossier. there are ample reasons to clout the conclusions of this memo. but if you do believe what is being reported about it, the bombshell here is arguably that a trump appointee approved an application to spy on a former member of the trump campaign and a trump appointee seemingly thought that some of the information in this steele dossier was credible. but the president and some republicans are seemingly going to use that information as proof that rosen stein is corrupt. and the investigation is a sham. because i -- because as i mentioned, no one is safe in president trump's justice department. case in point. the fbi's acting director andrew mccabe stepped down today. earlier than expected.

the president has publicly attacked mccabe and nbc news learned that trump told mccabe his wife as a loser. he called mccabe to vent about james comey who he just fired. the loser remark was in apparent reference to his wife's unsuccessful campaign for state office in virginia. so the number two of the fbi is out and the number two at justice department is in the cross hairs. joining me now is mark walker of north carolina, a member of the house over sight committee and congressman thank you for joining us. >> sure, thank you. >> so you have seen the nunez memo and you want to t released. does it show rod rosenstein approves an application to spy on carter page. >> as you would imagine as well as you and your audience, i can't get into the specifics as far as names that have been named until the vote has been

released and it is released to the public. i think the overview and i heard three different members in the lead-in there talking about it. if your audience or somebody is believing this is the end all smoking gun, it isn't. it doesn't name names, presenting some intriguing facts as i would share it, that makes you ask even more questions. to the place, is it a dislike or a buy as or do we get to the place where there was intentional wrongdoing by some of the players that have been involved in this investigation. but to make the case that this is the most shocking document in the history of mankind, i believe that is hyperbole. >> so then why do you want it released? >> well i believe it is important. if you look back throughout our history, any time that the government could be more transparent, i think it is best for the american people. we've lost some trust in government. unfortunately -- and i hope this isn't long-term -- even our highest level of law enforcement when you have the behavior and the things that have transpired

recently, that is not a good thing. you mentioned that i was on the house oversight committee. i think back to the lowest e-mails and they said they were lost and the inspector general found them within an hour and the missing texts, those have been found by the inspector general. we need to restore the credibility to the american people and to me if there is nothing -- no national security being breached, i think the american people should have access to this information. >> it devin nunez credible here? he was a member of the donald trump transition. that seems like a pretty major conflict of interest. >> well-if you hold that standard, you could look back at not just republicans and democrats who went out and worked very hard for whatever presidential campaign, whether it was hillary clinton or bernie sanders or even throughout our history, i don't think that precludes or disqualifies for someone being straightforward and honest. >> devin nunez was part of the transition, he's been working to discredit much of the fbi.

do you expect the american public to see this as not just a partisan issue, when this has not been shared with democrats in the committee and especially when he wouldn't even share it with his own counterpart in senate intel. it seems suspicious. >> it is my understanding that the democrats have had a chance to look at it and on top of that, i believe they're releasing their own version of what the memo -- the conclusion might be able to say. so we'll see what happens or what they share on it. but i do not think to the largest point that it discredited devin nunez with his relationship of being forth right to the american people. that is the whole crux of why we want this delivered, that it no longer becomed a subjective opinion. >> but this is investigating the donald trump campaign and a transition and this is a member of the transition putting together a memo. this is not just somebody who supported a president working on something that has nothing to do with it. this investigation is looking into the campaign and the transition and this is a member

of the transition. >> sure. and you would hope that you would have the confidence for somebody to do the right thing. but that is to your point. that is why it is so important that when you release said memo that you could actually have some of the data. some of this isn't congesture and some of the data information is evidence and facts of exchanges and that is why the american people would have the opportunity to judge for themself, is it something exaggerated or something that we create a concern for the major people who were investigating into this, was there wrongdoing here. >> there is classifying information in this memo. the d.o.j. has said it would be extraordinarily reckless to release this. do you think it is a good idea to go around the d.o.j. and release something that they've said is extraordinarily reckless, that talks about one of the most secret practices in our government. one of the most sensitive ways that we gather intelligence using fisa warrants. >> there is a precedent in many

cases, both from the judiciary as well as the house oversight which has full subpoena powers to access and get information for the department of justice even top secret and even cla class -- classified information and it is some redacted and the judiciary committee and believe there is no national security information that could be damaged. this is about people's past actions, looking at it and then making the judgment allowing the american people to answer the question when you look at this specific information, did the government overstep their boundaries connected with the dossier, connected with the hillary clinton foundation, does this put more of the hillary clinton campaign -- does this put the pieces together and that is one of the things deducted from this information. >> the d.o.j. said it would be extraordinarily reckless. let's get on to another point. republicans cried foul when a dossier came out and criticized or -- potentially could have

hurt donald trump. the steele dossier. and now they're putting forward another unverified memo, this one from devin nunez that is going to help donald trump. i don't understand how you square that circle. one unverified dossier is not okay but this unverified dossier is okay. one hurts the president and one helps the president and that makes this okay. >> i appreciate your assessment, but i think the difference is when you look at christopher steele, who was employed and paidly the hillary clinton campaign to come up with information, there is a certain bias. >> christopher steele was first employed by republicans, we should make it clear, first paid by republicans. >> sure. and sometimes me point is are you not beholden to the people employing you to dig up dirt on a spesive individual. when you have the connections, was the fbi connected and that is what the american people want

to know. not just your viewers but across the board, could you draw a direct connection about releasing the information it allows the american people more access to draw their on conclusions. >> one last point. you are talking about somebody working for somebody and trying to find things that person wants. devin nunez worked for the transition. how does it not apply to them of them in the same way. >> as i've said earlier, there is a precedent being established that if you feel like or you are making the case that anybody who ever works with a potential candidate can no longer be unbiassed in their duties, their congressional duties, i think that puts us in a very bad situation because throughout history members of congress and elected officials have partnered and worked with and have campaigned for said candidates to be able to get out there. once the election is over, i hope that you could go and continue to do your duties and do them honorably. >> but if your criticism of steele is if he was working for somebody makes it so he could not be fair, the same criticism

would have to apply to devin nunez. unfortunately that is all of the time we have for now. thank you, congressman walker. we appreciate it. >> thank you. joining me now is chris coons of delaware. he wrote one of the bipartisan procedures around the firing of the special counsel. senator, thank you very much for joining us. this bipartisan legislation that you want to protect robert mueller, is it getting new life now that we've seen the developments in the past week? >> well i'm looking forward to conversations on the floor of the senate in just a few minutes. i'm going to be talking with both thom tillis and with chairman of the judiciary committee, senator chuck grassley of iowa. it is my insistence to them that given the revelations by the new york times that president trump months ago attempted to fire bob puler resolved to do it and ordered his counsel to do so and was only blocked by a threat to

resign from don mcgahn that it is more urgent than ever that we take this modest reasonable bipartisan step and we do so as quickly as possible. we introduced this bill months ago. it had a hearing before the judishir judicia judiciary meeting and i think it is important that we put in place a speed bump that would make it significantly harder for the president to fire special counsel robert mueller. >> do you want to attach it to budget negotiations? >> i'm still hopeful that we could get this done in an appropriate bipartisan way through the committee. but it is urgent. and if that ends up being the only pathway in front of us, i would support that as well. >> is your legislation legal? does congress have the authority to override the executive branch when the executive branch decides to fire somebody? >> i'm confident that it is constitutional. i'll remind you that it is a

decent in a majority opinion that those who raised questions at the one hearing are relying upon. i won't get into the legal weeds here. i do think there is reason to concern ourselves with whether we can stop the president from firing someone, my bill instead said if he fires the special counsel, that special counsel could go to a three-judge panel and seek reinstatement. that is a legal nice-ity but it matters in terms of the constitution. >> you don't think this conflicts with separations of power. >> no. there is a lot of ways in which each branch constrains the others. checks and balances is one of the ways in which our constitutional order makes sure no one branch is completely unrestrained in the exercise of the constitutional duties. >> let's talk about where donald trump stands right now on the special counsel. are you confident that the republicans in the senate, the republicans in the house, will act if he tries to do something

like that again? >> well, katy, i've had a number of individual private conversations with my republican colleagues over the last few months. every single republican, senator and congressman i've spoken to about this agrees that robert mueller must be allowed to continue his investigation unimpeded by the president and that it would be a significant blow to rule of law in this country if the president fired bob mueller. when i press them and say what would you do, they don't have a good answer. they all say well it won't happen or it would be terrible or something would have to be done. but i'm not confident that they have a plan b. and it is just wreckless and irresponsible for uses legislators to have this glaring threat to our republic and our constitutional order right in front of us and an easy solution to make it less likely and to fail to act. >> well given that, are you going to try and force your legislation or force some legislation to make sure that he

is protected? are you going to -- if there is not an appetite to do anything with it or a real appetite to move quickly, shouldn't it be attached to budget negotiations? >> katy, the way things get done here is with consent and partnership between the majority and minority. i can't on my own as one senator run into a budget negotiation and demand that this be included. but i am raising this as an issue with the chairman of the committee with my republican co-sponsor and with lots of my colleagues. i think the facts have changed in the last few days. given "the new york times" report, and i think there is reason for all of us to be more concerned. >> would you -- >> i appreciate you giving this coverage and i'm hopeful in the next few days republicans and democrats alike will agree this is a small step to secure more confidence that the president won't take this misguided action. >> there is also the booker graham legislation. if you can't come to an agreement on one of those -- one

of those pieces of legislation before the government shutdown, before february -- i believing it 7th or 8th. >> 8th. >> 8th. excuse me. would you consider shutting down the government over this? >> look, katy, that is a hypothetical. i'm going to have some conversations on the floor today and have a much better sense of where my colleagues are. i think this is an important thing for us to take responsible for. as a body on a bipartisan basis. >> senator chris coons. thank you very much. >> thank you. and ahead, the number two at the fbi stepped down today as tensions between the white house and the justice department reached a new high. that's next. ♪ ♪

♪ there'swhatever type ofhe end of eweekender you are,ton. don't let another weekend pass you by. get the lowest price when you book at hilton.com your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance.

call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance. welcome back. another house republican is opting out of a tough re-election fight this november. this time it is new jersey rodney free ling heisen taken cover from the forecast big blue

wave. the house appropriations committee chair is the 31st republican member of congress to retire or seek another office instead of running again. here is why. while free ling heisen won by double-digits in 2016, his district became one of the most competitive in the country. donald trump carried his new jersey district by one point. and new jersey's new democratic governor phil murphy won the district by eight points in november. this district is one of the most highly educated and wealthy districts in republican hands. meaning it is likely to be a tough one for republicans in the age of trump. our friends at the cook political report to rate this race as a toss up and democrats have several well-funded candidates jockeying for the nomination. we'll keep our eyes on it as the mid-term elections near. we'll be back with more "mtp daily" and the big breaking news of the day, the fbi deputy director stepping down. luckily, office depot® officemax® is here

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

welcome back. let's bring in tonight's panel. matthew cont netty from the washington free beacon and susan page from usa today and jason johnson, politics editor at the root.com and an msnbc contributor. welcome. lots of breaking news today. let's start with andrew mccabe. the white house said they didn't get involved in this in any way. this was all andrew mccabe's decision and you would have to ask the fbi. they may say that, but the reality is donald trump was putting a lot of political pressure on him on twitter and interviews, was not happy. so how much do you chalk up his stepping down to the current environment, matthew? >> well i think we have to zi distinguish between the trump white house and the president himself. and it may be true that trump white house didn't have much interaction or involvement with the decision to step down about a month early before he was planning to. on the other hand as we've known for years now, donald trump has made a big issue out of not only

mccabe but also his wife's attempt to run for the state senate seat and having donations from terry mcauliffe. >> and talking about donald trump and andrew mccabe and a conversation when he fired james comey. he was taking the fbi plane back from los angeles to fbi headquarters. remember he fired him while he was on a trip to l.a. donald trump was furious that he was using an fbi plane to get back and he said and rue mccabe, why did you authorize this and he said i wasn't asked but if i had i would have approved it. and donald trump said something like, well you should ask -- he paused and he said you should ask what your wife feels like to be a loser. >> and every time you hear a quote, what always dawns on me is sometimes confirmed or unconfirmed sources but you hear so much it sounds like donald trump's voice. if you are in that work

environment, i could understand why mccabe would say i don't want to be here. and isn't this that did the same thing to sean spicer and to chastise, that is something that would make one civil service want to go. >> and he would leave marla maples at the airport when she wasn't on time. and the politics, is anybody safe in the justice department, anybody who donald trump doesn't like or runs afoul of him or isn't loyal enough, is anybody safe. >> well i think it is clear that no one is safe from criticism and that some people have chose tone leave in the face of that kind of criticism like mccabe but jeff sessions came in with fierce criticism from the president and chose to stay on. i think we're seeing a concerted attempt by republicans to discredit the institutions that

may come out with a very serious report about donald trump's engaged in russian meddling or an obstruction of justice. this is a preemptive effort to make some americans question whether they could trust the report we think we'll see relatively soon from the special counsel. >> so we have this new york times report that andrew mccabe steps down under pressure, and the nbc report that donald trump called andrew mccabe's wife a loser because comey took the plane home. there is also a bloomberg report that he erupted over a d.o.j. official saying it would be -- a very bad idea essentially, reckless -- >> extremely reckless. >> extremely reckless to release the memos. when you take all of these together, doesn't it point you in a direction. >> it points me to the direction that trump doesn't like the investigation. he didn't like it from the grinning and when james comey

r -- ryu fused to say he was under investigation and he fired comey which led to mueller which led to trump with obstruction of justice and he doesn't like that part. an the frustration that -- and the frustration that trump continually runs into, luck ill i lrks -- luckily we have buttresses from getting him -- >> do you think so. >> with the mcgahn story, "the new york times" blockbuster is, no matter what details, trump backs off. >> because one person stood up. >> one person we know about. >> and that is not really -- an institution or protection that the white house counsel would say. >> and you have chris coons debating legislation and you mentioned the graham-booker legislation. >> but we haven't moved forward. >> and others that courts have stood up to donald trump multiple times. >> but if he tries to fire bob

mueller, are you confident that the republicans standing firm today are going to stand firm when that happens? is lindsey graham going to be as tough as he sounds today in a week or two weeks or three months if it does happen, or already we've seen other republicans waiver in their dedication to protecting robert mueller. it is not -- now it is -- i'm not going to talk about hypotheticals when before it was an -- absolutely that is a red line if he crosses it, it is over. >> one thing i -- >> maybe lindsey graham. >> but other republicans -- >> i have no confidence in any of them. they've capitulated on every turn. and even jeff flake. he has all of the mean things to say and neverin ganled in policy activity. no votes to stop some of the behavior that donald trump engages in and ultimately this investigation about collusion is going to fall down to whether or not members of congress thinks it is impeachable. i don't have any faith in any of them to do the right thing. >> if the president fires the special counsel, democrats will win the house of representatives

in november and they will vote to impeach the president next year i think on the grounds that this is a really serious obstruction of justice. >> which is one thing of the all of the names you mentioned, robert mueller may have the safest position in the trump justice department. >> but look at what kevin mccarthy told -- told chuck todd -- not donald trump. chuck todd yesterday on "meet the press." he asked him if -- if mccarthy would support legislation to protect mueller and maybe you get this in the senate but here is the house. would he protect mueller and he said, i don't think there is a need for legislation to protect mueller if there an issue and we'll take it up at this time and why create one when there isn't a place for it. how could you say it is not an issue when the new york times report the he tried to do so. what is the harm, i guess, in republicans just coming out and saying, we're going to make sure everything stays aboveboard, let's pass this legislation, so all of the people of this country know that we are trying to protect the integrity of an

investigation by a special counsel, somebody robert mueller who had the broad support of everybody in congress, the day he got appointed and even before that while he was fbi director. >> because none of them are interested in seeing this investigation -- through. we got the special prosecutor because there was a lot of republicans who with like, if this ends up blowing up in our faces we could put it on mueller. the way they've allowed this president and never stepped up against him to insult the process and demean one of the most important institutions in this government, which is the department of justice and the fbi, i don't have any confidence. and this idea of we don't need to protect mueller yet. well there are some robberies in the neighborhood but i don't need to lock my door. the president made it clear the moment he gets a window he will fire this guy and mccarthy and the republican leadership are not interesting in seeing this investigation go through. >> what do you think of the memo? the nunez momento. i was talking to a congressman a

moment ago, and he was saying you can't trust christopher steele because he was paid by somebody. devin nunez was on the transition so how do you trust devin nunez. >> this is quite the test and perhaps pretty soon with the president. and some republicans are characterizing this as a case of transparency. let the american people know. but you have the republican -- the trump justice department saying it would be extraordinarily reckless to release this and by republicans who have -- like most americans and officials concerns about revealing information that really ought to be kept secret. this is become a very leaky town. so i think this is a big fight and the president has signaled he will probably -- we should not expect the president to act against you the house decision to release the memo if that is what they choose to do. >> hold that thought. taye with us. we'll be back in a little bit. ahead, the daca deal dilemma. are lawmakers getting any closer to an immigration plan that could actually pass?

david. what's going on? oh hey! ♪ that's it? yeah. ♪ everybody two seconds! ♪ "dear sebastian, after careful consideration of your application, it is with great pleasure that we offer our congratulations on your acceptance..." through the tuition assistance program, every day mcdonald's helps more people go to college. it's part of our commitment to being america's best first job. ♪ with a $500,000 life insurance policy. how much do you think it cost him? $100 a month? $75? $50? actually,duncan got his $500,000 for under $28 a month. less than a dollar a day. his secret? selectquote. in just minutes, a selectquote agent will comparison shop nearly a dozen highly-rated life insurance companies, and give you a choice of your five best rates.

duncans wife cassie got a $750,000 policy for under $22 a month. give your family the security it needs at a price you can afford. i'm trying to manage my a1c, and then i learn type 2 diabetes puts me at greater risk for heart attack or stroke. can one medicine help treat both blood sugar and cardiovascular risk? i asked my doctor. he told me about non-insulin victoza®. victoza® is not only proven to lower a1c and blood sugar, but for people with type 2 diabetes treating their cardiovascular disease, victoza® is also approved to lower the risk of major cv events

such as heart attack, stroke, or death. and while not for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (announcer) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing, or swallowing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. gallbladder problems have happened in some people. tell your doctor right away if you get symptoms. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, indigestion, and constipation. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. change the course of your treatment. ask your doctor about victoza®.

don't forget people, spell check is your friend. this right here is the ticket guests received for the tomorrow's state of the union address. notice any problems? it says state of the uniom. the sergeant-at-arms office admits the mistake and saying it is redistributing the tickets. if you are hosting a dinner watch party, staty of the uniom

is still a good name. join nbc for the complete state of the union coverage tomorrow. brian williams and rachel maddow and chris matthews lead the coverage and since we know everybody has two screens you could join steve kornacki and me -- me online streaming live tomorrow night starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> steve you know i can hear you. and it is katy. you know it's katy. >> gotta go. ver almost anything. even a "red-hot mascot." [mascot] hey-oooo! whoop, whoop! [crowd 1] hey, you're on fire! [mascot] you bet i am! [crowd 2] dude, you're on fire!

[mascot] oh, yeah! [crowd 3] no, you're on fire! look behind you. [mascot] i'm cool. i'm cool. [burke] that's one way to fire up the crowd. but we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

let office depot® officemax take care of you. 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

welcome back. let's turn to the other big story on capitol hill these

days. the immigration fight. a senior administration official said that in tomorrow's state of the union, the president will call on congress to pass immigration reform. but right now that seems like a pipe dream. just last week the white house offered up an immigration deal that includes a path to citizenship for so-called d.r.e.a.m.ers and cuts to immigration. that is panned by some lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. many leaders in congress feel if -- and that is a big if -- if there is an immigration deal it will come from the number twos. congress mccarthy and hoyer and corbett and durbin has been meeting to discuss a compromise. they just wrapped up a meeting moments ago with top trump officials but if they can't get it done, are we headed for another shutdown? let's bring in democratic congresswoman judy chu of california. thank you very much for joining us. >> thank you. >> what are the chances that the

government is going to shut down over an immigration deal again? >> i hope that we continue the conversations. there has been bipartisan efforts to reach a conclusion and to, in fact, we have republicans on the house side that have wanted a solution. so it is my hope we can get together and finally provide a permanent solution to the d.r.e.a.m.ers status. >> are you willing to vote on another short-term spending bill after all daca protections run out in march. >> i'm definitely not voting yes on another short-term c.r. without a daca solution and that is my stance and i think that the situation is very critical. i certainly could not support such a solution. >> so you are okay with shutting the government down on february 8th? >> well i -- i certainly think that there should not be -- we should not go forward without a solution to that is where my vote will be, yes.

>> so that means you would be okay with shutting the government down because you could m-- would not vote for it without a daca deal. >> i think that we should -- yes, i do think that we should not have any solution without a daca deal. however, i do not support a government shutdown. i do think that we have to keep government open. but it is important to me to make sure that we have a solution for our d.r.e.a.m.ers. >> do you have a number of more moderate democrats in both the house and the senate who are living and working in very red states or red districts or who -- and who need to get re-elected and have different interests to represent, how do you -- how do you maintain their safety and also maintain the safety of these d.r.e.a.m.ers? >> well, i do know that there are many different issues that should be worked on in a c.r. we have issues pertaining to

pensions, veterans benefits, and the d.r.e.a.m.ers. and i think that we need an overall solution to our budget issues. it is in the interest of moderates in the red states to have that kind of solution as well. >> i want to talk about the language that is being used surrounding this debate. you had a tweet where you said that trump is making, quote, white nationalists demands. do you think it helps to describe these demands as white nationalist when you are trying to work with republicans? >> well, this is the same president who said that he would prefer immigrants from norway rather than those from the s-hole countries of africa and haiti. so it is pretty clear where he's coming from. he's also made statements supporting the white nationalists in charlottesville. so he has definitely shown that

he has certainly not for the d.r.e.a.m.ers, but clearly not for legal immigrants to this country. that is the astounding thing. immigrants have contributed to this country in such a substantial way and yet he's using tomorrow as a way of creating more fear of immigrants who have been shown to be less violent, less crime prone than native born people. >> but you are talking about white nationalist demands. you are not talking about donald trump, you are talking about people who support his immigration plan. so are all of the folks who support his immigration plan and all of the things he wants in an immigration bill to make a deal for d.r.e.a.m.ers, are they all white nationalists. >> one thing i could say is that his immigration policy, shutting down legal immigration seems to be written by steven miller who is part of the bannon-breitbart effort to keep this -- keep america white again.

and we know that that is why they want to shut down legal immigration, to an extent that we've never seen before. where immigrants cannot even petition for their parents, let alone anybody else, brothers and sisters and adult children. they want to cut legal immigration by half. and we've never seen this before. he wants to return back to the time of 1924 when we had a law that mainly brought in nordic europeans, deeply restricted italians and jews and banned asians from coming to the country and this didn't change until 1965 because of a law in 1965 we finally have the diversity of immigrants that we have now. >> one last question. are you willing in order to get protection for the d.r.e.a.m.ers, are you willing to give some money for the wall? >> we will have to see what kind of discussion there is. there actually is a very good bill that i support, in fact i'm a co-sponsor, this is the

william herd pete aguilar bill which is a bipartisan bill and it provides some monies for repairs and for increasing security, it -- it goes into a study to see what we really need at the wall. because i think that we should have concrete information that is based on fact before we plunge into putting money into the wall. >> congressman juty chu. thank you very much. appreciate it. >> thank you. and ahead, the republican party's no win -- w.y.n.n. situation. what they are doing with the casino magnet's money. this is something that i'm really passionate about- i really want to help. i was on my way out of this life. there are patients out there that don't have a lot of time. finally, it was like the sun rose again and i was going to start fighting back now. when those patients come to me and say, "you saved my life...." my life was saved by a two week old targeted therapy drug.

that's what really drives me to- to save lives. tripadvisor compares prices from over 200 booking sites to time to bask... in low prices! find the right hotel for you at the lowest price. refreshing, isn't it?. tripadvisor. when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night, so he got home safe.

yeah, my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. what?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. welcome back. billionaire casino magnat wynn resigned as rnc chairman after reported sexual miss conduct by multiple employees at his casino. he denies the allegations. he was a major republican booster donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to gop organizations and candidates over the years. and now republicans have to decide what to do about that. the republican governor's association announced they will return a $100,000 donation from wynn resorts. some republican lawmakers who received campaign contributions from wynn are giving that money to charity. including house speaker paul ryan and 2017 special election winners karen handle and greg

gianforty. the president referred to wynn as a great friend and he served as vice chair of his inaugural committee. back with the panel after this. . whatever type of weekender you are, don't let another weekend pass you by. get the lowest price when you book at hilton.com

welcome back for "the lid." our cameras are staked outside of the house intel committee right now. they're behind closed doors. who knows what they're doing in there. but at some point today they're supposed to be voting on whether to release devin nunes's memo. from the looks of it, they will vote yes to do so. donald trump will have five days to decide if he wants to stop them from doing it. but it was reported over the weekend that john kelly made it very clear to a.g. jeff sessions that the president wants it released.

>> so it's likely that the president would approve of the committee's decision to release the memo, and we would all be able to see it. i'm looking forward to it. >> why? >> i'd like to read what the committee chair, devin nunes claims. adam schiff says it's a bunch of baloney, and he will also give his own memo. >> this is the state of play right now. the republicans say we have this memo, and we're going to show you all the ways in which the doj and fbi are correct. the democrats say oh, no, no, no. we're going to have our own memo showing you all the ways the republicans are corrupt in doing this. everybody is looking at it through their partisan lenses. it's all how it's going to affect them politically. is there any realization in washington that the american public is sick of this sort of stuff? >> i don't think they realize that. i don't think when you're not in

d.c., when i'm back in ohio, in atlanta, in central texas, this is not what people want to hear about right now. they want to hear about jobs, the economy, what's happening with immigration. this petty "game of thrones" nonsense isn't going to ultimately change how they work or how the investigation works or the results of 2018. i find all of this to be disappointing. if there is something wrong with how the fbi is doing their job, then nunes and the members of the committee have an obligation to release this information and correct it. but it seems right now, it's just al capone's vault. it doesn't seem like anything they're going to reveal, because people who have seen it already say it's conjecture. >> it continues this corrosive attitude toward washington and this feeling that there's nobody in washington you can trust. institutions that used to have standing no longer do. the stock market keeps bringing records, but by two to one, americans say the country is on

the wrong track. that is a disconnect. in the past, if the economy's good, people feel like the country's on the right track. a lot of americans feel like there are good things, but we are going in the right direction. >> what is it? >> i think a lot of it is donald trump and the economic gains that happened as part of the trump boom have gone to the areas of the country that voted for hillary clinton. and so if you have this weird mix of results where the people who are hurting last year and in 2016 may, their recovery is slower than those who actually are against trump for political reasons and don't like him personally, so i think that contributes to those numbers. >> what does this look like in real america, everywhere is real america, but what does it look like outside washington? does it look like the republicans are doing everything they can to undercut the doj and the fbi, the closer it gets to donald trump? or does it look like everything

donald trump and says, says or does is a reason for mass hysteria? >> i think it's, even if you go beyond the partisan lens, the most simple way to look at it is this, if you ask somebody in the middle of missouri, in the middle of california, hey, do you trust the fbi to find a missing kid? they say yeah. people still trust the institutions. what they don't like seeing is politicians and in particular from this president trying to undermine institutions that we generally trust for their own political benefit. it's not like tomorrow people are going to suddenly not believe what the fbi has to say. but a president who attacks his own institutions on a regular basis is not a president we can trust. there is this whole study of racial perceptions of things. there are a lot of people who think this country is a safer, more responsible place than it was before trump got in office. but there are a lot who are

unhappy. and if it doesn't come out in the voting booth, it's going to come out in other ways in the country if we don't have discipline. >> i ran into person after person who said they were sick of all the fighting. they wanted to see something get done. thank you for being here. ahead, vice president meike pence face the ultimate vision test. this new day looks nothing like yesterday.

trails are covered. paths aren't what they used to be. roads nowhere to be found. ( ♪ ) and it's exactly what you're looking for. ( ♪ )

let office depot® officemax take care of you. and it's exactly what you're looking for. 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

you know what's not awesome? gig-speed internet. when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids, and these guys, him, ah. oh hello. that lady, these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh, sure. still yes! xfinity delivers gig speed to more homes than anyone. now you can get it, too. welcome to the party.

in case you missed it, the state of the union is tomorrow night and all eyes will be on the president. all eyes. especially those of vice president mike pence who's had more than a year to get his gaze in gear. this was the veep today as he welcomed the new secretary. and this was a week ago as he celebrated the tax reform. he is laser focussed even when he's out of focus. but that stare will be put to the test again. he will join the elite men, vice president biden and cheney. it's a proud tradition for the second in command, that look of loyalty, that stare of solidarity, though some vps did it better than others. the eyes will be working overtime, because even amidst

the gridlock in the halls of congress, tomorrow night, the eyes will have it. that's all for tonight. chuck will be back tomorrow with more ntp daily, "the beat" with ari melber is next. have you seen him gaze? >> that can be handy in a lot of situations. we have a lot of breaking news, but i did want to congratulate you and your favorite band fish for winning best country, best song and best rap song. that's a rare thing to see. >> you know what, you're a funny guy. >> why are you laughing? there it is. to go full circle, you show more emotion than pence. how about that? >> i don't think that's very hard. >> okay. and on that point, i hope to see you again soon, katie. we'll be watching your state of the union