organization set limits on itself, most notably they would turn away new foreign deals, anybody that came with a deal in a foreign country would turn that away. as far as we can tell, they are abiding by, that get around it, they are trying to revive seemingly dead foreign deals from the past. >> we are so happy to have you on that beat and the nsnbc family. we hope you will join us at the table soon. thanks for joining us. >> that does it for our hour. i'm nicole wallace. chuck is giving me the stink eye, because i am 17 seconds late. >> i wish i was giving you a stink eye, oh my god, it's 5:00, she's not back from break. if it's tuesday, i hear it's above jared's pay grade. >> tonight, downgraded, jared kushner loses some of his security clearance. does it really matter? the gun divide, how an increasingly polarized all or

nothing style of politics threatens to destroy democracy as we know it. >> you can't solve this problem and use the nra and our republican colleagues have to learn that. >> finally, palm beaching into mid-term mid-ness, how the republican civil war is rising again. this time in mississippi. this is mtv "daily." and it starts right now. >> good evening, i'm chuck todd here in, no. welcome to mtp daily. we begin with breaking news in the last hour, nbc news has confirmed reports that jared kushner is losing his access to top secret intelligence, there are a lot of important caf aults to caf caveats to this story. they tell nbc news according to this memos kushner will no longer have access to highly

classified information the big question is why? because we don't know yet, at least. is it because he had multiple errors and omissions in his previous security application? is it because some of those omissions included meetings with russians? is it because of the complexity of his own business ties? is it because it's not cheer who he was working for during the transition. he had business he was trying to divert from or the government? is it because he's been interviewed in mueller's investigation, is eight combination of all of those reasons or none of them? this comes as white house chief of kelly moved to overhaul the security process. as mnbc learned, 130 people working for the president did not have permanent security clearances. those were figures as of november 2017. politico notes, kushner is not aloneful all white house aides working on the highest-level interim clearances at the top

secret level were told thigh could be downgraded. the president has the ability to basically override this decision. but he was recently ask about the backlog of white house advisers without permanent clearance, here's some of what he said. >> we inherited a system that's broken. it's a system why many people, it's taken months an months. it's a broken system. and it shouldn't take this long. you know how many people are on that list. people are not a problem in the world. so that landmark up to general kelly. he respects jared a lot. and general kelly will make that call. i won't make that call. i will let the general, who's right here make that call. >> he also ended that part of that q & a back then saying, i'm sure general kelly will make the right decision. now, we don't know if he did make the right decision as far as the president is concerned. we don't know if down grading kushner's security clearance was kelly's decision. let me check in we white house,

kristen welker, our white house correspondent on the north lawn there. kristen, there is a part of me that thinks how much of this is for public consumption and how much of this is a real rollback of jared kushner's access? >> reporter: well to your first point, chuck, i think clearly this is for the public consumption, because there was so much pressure put on this white house in the wake of the rob porter scandal. of course, that itself the staff secretary, who was facing allegations of abuse by two of his ex-wives. that was what was holding up his full security clearance. so that's when it came oundz u under microscope that dozens of top staffers were operating with interim security clearances. so this was a crisis for the white house. they had to deal with this issue. and i think the optics were working against jared kushner. remember our colleague, peteral sen alexander, asked ivanka trump if

there should be special circumstances for family members. she indicated no, there shouldn't be the family members should be held to the statement standards. they recognized there was a spotlight, they had to do something. in terms of what it means practically, the sense means he will no longer have access to the president's daily breach. i have been told essentially he will be able maintain his foreign policy portfolio. again, he won't have access to that most sensitive information. the white house pointing us to that statement from john kelly several days ago, chuck, he says as much. eechlffectively says he has to at the palestinian peace effort and serving with our relationship with mexico. stressing that foreign policy, chuck. you are right the white house felt they needed to clean this up. >> i guess my question is this, maybe the white house won't ever answer this question. maybe can you help. if he needs to note something that's highly classified, is he

going to get that access when he needs it? >> reporter: well, that is i think going to be up to the president ultimately. he has the ability to essentially say i want you to see this information. awhen, he would have to i think at this point have to argue his case with someone like a general john kelly. >> so you think it will be a case-by-case basis if he needs it? >> reporter: i think it will be a case-by-case basis. i think again when it comes to the daily briefing, something that is sort of a daily event here at the white house that that will be what yet rolled back. he will no longer have access to that. i wouldn't be surprised and okay, again, they're not giving specifics about what this is going to look like. but i within be surprised if the president felt he ned to see the information that he would have access to. >> we will not get any more information. we shall see. thanks very much. let me check in with jeremy

bash, a former chief of staff at the cia and defense department. jeremy, here's your job for, explain what jared is no longer getting access to and what does that mean for his portfolio? you can tell us specifically, what is he not getting access to now? >> reporter: okay. there are three levels of security clearance, sensitive comparted information, the highest. >> people see those letters sci, i try to demystify our acronym heavy world. >> that's sci, top secret and middle level. secret level are for the kitchen workers, the butlers the residents, people that have to act access but den have to do sensitive work. that's what jared kushner how only has act says to. he has been stripped of not just the highest level, also that middle level top secret to answer your question directly, chuck. it means he cannot see the pdb the president's daily brief and

the very intelligence reports. he into evidence to do his job on the israeli-palestinian peace team. third, he cannot go to national security council meetings. fourth, he cannot participate in conversations in which top secret intelligence is discussed. that's almost any conversation with the chairman of the joint chiefs or national intelligence or the director of the cia. fifth, he has a computer up to date his desk that gives him access to highly classified network. >> that will be ripped out of his desk. he won't be able to do work on that system. >> his father is the president of the united states, if there is a meeting with classified information and the president decides jared is in that meeting, can he decide he can come in, it's waved tore that meet something. >> i guess in theory, that could happen. would somebody be prosecuted? no, because of the, you referenced. let's be honest, if someone were to share with him highly

sensitive information in any other context in any other government office, that person who shared the information with jared could be looible for an offense against the united states, violating the rules against disclosing classified information, to officials not entitled to receive. i guess, yes, the president can waive his hand and say my son-in-law gets access, baltimore, that would send the wrong message. >> you are sending a signal this is a serious blow to jared. >> he can't do his job. let's be honest. he was downgrade. he can be a diplomat. no certainly someone dealing with sensitive issues involving intelligence about the israeli role. ask george mitchell. >> does he are a lower clearance than the ambassador to israel? >> absolutely the american ambassador of israel can't talk to jared now about certain things that the ambassador is working on. >> all right. well, jeremy bash, a nice little lesson here on how classified

information works. who can do it, who can't. much appreciated, sir. thank you very much. let's bring in an people, princeton professor eddie -- and editor of commentary magazine and contributing editor of the [ inaudible ] new york columnist. congratulation, you have more titles than anybody. >> it's amazing. >> the justice of the peace of a small town. >> there you go, caitlin, i'll admit, this for me rings much to do about nothing. but jeremy says it's painting a picture of this hamstrings jared, what say you? >> well, jeremy laid out the actual implications of this. right. what would be the result of this i am also thinking about this from a pr standpoint, which is pretty significance. consider tack we haven't seen up to date any checks on the president's children as it pertains to their roams in the white house. and this is the first kind of

exertion by john kelly of the president's children. that's been an important topic, not only as it relates to the porter scandal and the security clearance, earlier in the week, just yesterday, we are talking about. >> just monday, are you right in this world. >> we were talking about ivanka trump and this kind of grey line that is drawn with the president and his children or in this case his son-in-law. >> okay. jeremy's laid out the boy scout version. i will -- the real world version is the donald trump is going to grant jared kushner whatever security clearances he needs. because all classification, this entire structure the structure of the executive branch the power flows from the president as a person, not from -- >> there is, it's a bad precedent. it's terrible. it's not fair. other people will. >> first of all, we're not supposed to know about it. number one. people can leak it to embarrass jared and the president.

fine. i see no way on earth that jared doesn't get what he needs. >> look, i'll admit, i'm in the john. i'm in his category. i'm a little skeptical. but they do have a morale problem in that white house. there was this sense jared had his own special word. so perhaps maybe i'm being skeptical. maybe we're being to cynical about this. >> i don't think that's true. i don't think he's drawing a reasonable conclusion. with jarrett the senior communication aid leaving as well the washington post dropped that story. >> that little world is collapsing in interesting sorts of ways. two weeks ago, we were talking about the justice department calling the white house saying that significant additional information had been gathered, which required an investigation, which would hold up jared kushner's security clearance. >> for a long time. >> for a long time. >> this wasn't going to get cleaned up quickly. >> so we're talking in optics

and pr. but there is something behind this to my mind has mueller in the backgrounds. >> there is a possibility of protecting the white house from, look, we've all heard, we know kushner, there is something that mueller is looking at via kushner. is it kushner, himself? it could be saving themselves an embarrassing moment that allowed to him conduct business. >> let me go totally left field here. forget mueller. so jared kushner's business, he bought this building 666 fifth avenue, paid a billion 8 for it. it's worth $9 million. he divested his personal holdings in it. it's his family's company business that owns it. they were shopping the building in china during the transition. >> this is, that's right. this is what i hear is the problem. >> now, let me explain why this is a problem to people. so when you fill out this form, which i did 30 years ago as a white house official. you fill out this form the sf-86

in order to get a security cleempblts you have to list every adoctors you have been to, every foreign trip you made and on those foreign trip, every person you met abroad. >> good luck remembering that, by the way. >> right. i was 27 set e at the time, so it wasn't that hard. i had a sister that lived in israel. i had to try to remember who i met when i was there. and the fbi an officer of the fbi in israel went and talked to every single person that i put down on that list. okay. jared has a meeting in china with 80 people let's say and one of those formal meetings. >> all 80 people got to get investigated. >> where are you going to find them? who are they? do they have their names right? in therion puts his finger on what we keep hearing is the issue for jared that it's what, how he conducted business during the transition. who was he representing, the government, or his business practices and tant in time it was never clear.

>> right. what he would be exposing himself to and the white house to, right, is the underlying question as well. i am wonder whack the president does twh this case, whether he, you know, does grant some kind of waive of this, whether kushner is moved on to something else, maybe, you know, or today, they announced that they have a campaign manager for the re-election team, someone who is very close to jared kushner. >> right. >> i'm curious to see where he goes from here. >> then there is the entry, did general kelly win over jer anca? the palace intrigue. we have the reality. i think the concrete stuff and have you this soap opera. >> it's funny you bring that up. i think there was a theory among some in the white house that jerav anca was bleeding john kelly on daily fair.com. you would see something like that. this makes it harder to push

kelly out. >>. >> push him out for whom? what's the purpose? it's pushed out, magically, jared kushner denies the security clearance, which i don't think he will be. suddenly gets the security clearance. then it will appear as though there is some kind of a family mob running the white house, which we all think is what the case. but clearly trump doesn't want people to think that itself the ca -- that's the case. he said in that thing he granted kelly the permission the power to deny the security clearance that the optics were bad. he understood the optics were bad. >> that happened when his son was trading on his name and politics in india. >> that did not go over well. i think that it was a horrible look i thought for this white house. i think even they knew it. notice, don jr. backed out of a speech in order to fix the optics a bit. >> with don jr., jared kushner, ivanka trump, there has always

been this question of, what experience do you have to be in these positions in the first place, which has always been -- >> some people would say, donald trump, what experience did he have to be are the? in fairness to that. >> to be in this position within are you looking at classified information, when you don't have the cre den recall to do so has been a problem for a lot of people. i think the optics are important for the public at least even if it doesn't ring true. >> you bring up a serious thing, why were they so worried about your sister in israel? we had israel spies steal stuff in that area. so they were certainly concerned. in china, an actual threat to us intellectually. >> the president-elect son-in-law is in a room in beijing, shanghai. you don'tly the there are 20 members of the chinese intelli-- they have involved in massive industrial political espionage efforts. you think that room wasn't populated with intelligence officers? that's why it's a problem.

>> this is not assuming jared did harm. it's the people you are meeting with that want to do harm. stick harnd, the primaries are one week from today. all candidates need to do now is survive their bases. good luck. dear great-great gra, you made moonshine in a backwoods still. smuggled booze and dodged the law. even when they brought you in, they could never hold you down. when i built my family tree and found you, i found my sense of adventure. i set off on a new life, a million miles away. i'm heidi choiniere, and this is my ancestry story. now with over 10 billion historical records, discover your story. get started for free at ancestry.com at planters, we put fresh roawhich has its drawbacks.an, guys, know anything about this missing inventory? wasn't me! the cheeks don't lie, chet... irresistibly planters.

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. . >> welcome back today. it's meet the mid-terms. it's the battle of the republicans and their civil war. it's taking shame. it's happening right in mississippi. it looks like roger wicker has to look at a ugly primary. they will challenge him for the republican nomination later this week. mcdaniel is no stranger rung against the establishment. he nearly lost a runoff to thad cochran in 2014. they assured senator wicker he will back wicker, not mcdaniel in any primary.

of course, that itself no guarantee that trump supporters will follow suit. look at what happened in alabama when president trump endorsed the establishment candidate first luther strange. like in alabama, democrats believe they can take advantage of a messy primary, especially if mcdaniel won, they think it will decide i divide the republican party. they need the right candidate, in two days there is no doug jones-like figure in the ring. with unperson they went after, brandon presley a state competition share i cha sir a distant relative to elvis the presley, he passed on a bid last month. does he rethink it? we watch what happened over the next 48 hours. do candidates announce a candidate that will make it pro problematic for washington? more "mtp daily" in 60 seconds.

your brain changes as you get older. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember. vrm welcome back. don't let the calendar fool year. the primaries are one week from

today. we have a good idea who they will be fighting over, guns, immigration. president trump will be an issue the primaries are now about the base. on every one of those issues, both parties must decide what, if anything, they can support or stomach. joining me one of the most knowledgeable election observers alive. jerry sabados the keeper of the crystal ball. all right, let's get started. i have to say, if six monthists agow and i had a conversation and said when it begins, the gun issue will be front and center. now the republicans need to get their base out. how do you read the issue in '18 as these primaries are getting started? >> well, chuck, eight months to go, we know how an issue this hot can fade in eight months. having said that, i think this

does have staying power thanks to the young people in south florida but also it's become a national movement. so i would say democrats certainly will benefit whenever guns are an issue in blue states. the blue districts. i think they'll also benefit if purple competitive states and districts. and that's the difference. often before republicans always use the fun issue to their advantage in those competitive areas. not this time. they can do it if red areas in heavily republican areas. but the competitive areas, the balance is going to be different this time. >> look, there is a lot of things to watch for in these early primaries. i love the fact that march gives us two giant states. right? one is texas, one is illinois. and in many ways, what we learn in those first two states ends up playing out the rest of the primary season. so let's first start with texas. the first story that looks apparent to me is turnout. texas democratic turnout is living up to the hype. >> that's absolutely true. and that's what i look for, too.

because the candidates, who knows what will come out about them in the next eight months. everything from change at least in competitive states and districts. but this is really remarkable. the trend we saw in 2018 it was skyrocketing. it was good, about where you'd expected. the gains were manly on the democratic side. >> that is continuing in this early part of 2018. if democrats can keep it at that level all the way to november, they're going to have a very good year. >> what about when you look at republican turnout. it's not down. it z does -- it is performing at levels. so does this tell us that there is a persuadable former republican vote out there? and right now they're in primaries, but they're setting out there? that's what i'm unclear of. is the swing voter of 2018 somebody who normally isn't a swing voter, meaning a moderate republican? >> chuck i doubt it.

we went through this in 2016. we felt a lot of moderate never trumpers would end up voter for clinton, providing her margin. it didn't happen. we live in a highly partisan era. people ends up going with their side, no matter how many doubts they have about it. no, i think the difference, you got turnout falling inevitably overall in a mid-term year from presidential. it's a question of whether it's going to fall more dramatically among republicans than democrats. our early answer is yes. democrats will turn out at a higher rate because they're more enthused. they want to send a message to donald trump and as far as the issues you mentioned, i think the top three are trump, trump and trump. have well, it's interesting you say that. you don't see anything else break it through. i feel it will be that way and republican primaries and democratic primaries. >> oh, yeah. because the trump people have taken over the party. this is a trump party now. the establishment gop is still

licking their wounds. i think some of them have retired from politics. at at least active part offist. so, yeah, that's absolutely true. >> how do you think the tax cut play noose this? >> i feel like two weeks ago, we thought, oh, this might have resonance. now guns. does it just mean, are you, it sounds like you are in the same place i am, with i is issues pop up every two weeks. it always reverts back to trump. >> yes. because what the issues do is reenforce people's pre-elections about trump. they find something in that issue to like about trump if they are republicans and dislike about trump if they're democrats. and in the end, it's those two letters. the two most important letters in the english alphabet r and d that make all the difference in the world. so the tax element is going to be interesting. the republicans will spend a bloody fortune everywhere pushing the tax cut. i think lit help them among republicans. it's not going to do a thing

among democrats and the handful of swing voters. >> what is your take on nancy pelosi? >> well, it's pretty obvious that a lot of democrats and including some rib lals would like h liberals would like her to move on. she's shown no indication she will move on. therefore -- she has thousands of tv ads. >> no doubt she will be a feature. but because of trump, does she pale as an attempt to characterize a democrat or is that what we're going to find out in this conner lamb special, 20 on, how potent pelosi still is as a weapon for the right? >> yes. and remember, even if lamb loses by a little, it still suggests that trump is a bigger issue than pelosi. i'm with you on this i think pelosi is controversial. loads of people have doubts about her, including loads of democrats. they will look at pelosi and say, gee, i'd wish she'd move on. they will look at trump and say,

oh my god, i want to send him a message, which emotion is stronger? it's pretty obviously. it always relates to who is sitting in the white house. >> all right. larry sabado, trump, trump, trump, one issue to focus on. forget them all s. that a fair summary, sir? >> i think that's fair. it's a little st. i agree with it. >> we will be talking more. a pleasure. australia's most recent mass shooting in 1996. zek canadian later thousands are turning in their guns. why did a crackdown work so well? could it work here? australia's former prime minister comes to you next. imagine if the things you bought every day... earned you miles to get to the places you really want to go. with the united mileageplus explorer card, you'll get a free checked bag. two united club passes. priority boarding. and earn fifty thousand bonus miles after you spend three thousand dollars on purchases in the first three months from account opening

plus, zero-dollar intro annual fee for the first year, then ninety-five dollars. learn more at theexplorercard.com a hilton getaway means you get more because you get a break on breakfast get an extra day by the pool get to spend more time together get more from your spring break getaway with exclusive hilton offers. book yours, only at hilton.com

thisat red lobsterest. with exciting new dishes like dueling lobster tails and lobster truffle mac & cheese. classics like lobster lover's dream are here too. so enjoy these 10 lobsterlicious dishes while you can because lobsterfest won't last.

alright, i brought in high protein to help get us moving. ...and help you feel more strength and energy in just two weeks! i'll take that. -yeeeeeah! ensure high protein. with 16 grams of protein and 4 grams of sugar. ensure. always be you.

is president trump seeking a second term? will he file for re-election? answer probably won't surprise you, but we are still waiting on someone to announce he's running again and who that is will surprise you.

welcome back. there was lots of motion on capitol hill on guns, but not a ton of movement. there appears to be some movement in the senate. what nay agree on is hardly game changing. it's a narrowly tailored bill to enforce current backgrounds law. so with meaningful congressional action on gun restriction seemingly at a stand still, others are asking if others can serve as an example. during last week's white house listening session on school

safety. one survivor looked to australia. >> in australia, there was a shooting at sa school in 1999. you know after that they took a lot of ideas, they put legislation together. and they stopped it. can anyone here guess how many shootings there have been in the schools in australia? zero. >> there was 35 people who died in that mass shooting in australiale it was 1996, not 1999. afterwards, automatic and semi automatic rifles were band. they enacted a national registry and a 28-day waiting period for all gun purchases and 650,000 firearms were taken out of circulation in a national buy back program. australia doesn't have a right to bear arms. they also don't have a powerful gun lobby like the nra. but could australia's model have some legs in the united states

say on semi automatic weapons or something leak that. joining me the former prime minister of australia, president of the policy institute. welcome to the show. >> good to be on your program. >> it is easy for me to say all the different ways you did if australia can't happen, can't work here in the united states the biggest being our constitution. you don't have a right to bear arms if yours. we do. what do you believe is transferrable from what you guys went through to what we're experiencing now? >> well, in my previous predecessor, john howard, enacted legislation to ban all automatic and semi automatic weapons from sale in australia and from importation to australia. he had national consensus behind him. even these sporting associations of australia, our equivalent of the nra got behind it. the other thing we did was fund a national gun buy back scheme. which basically took out about

one-fifth of the entire gun stock from the country. looking in america, i've lived here now for three years the problem you have is you got this whole debate about mental health checks, fine. but i think if you really want to arrest the rate of mass shootings, you got to do something directly about automatic and semi automatic weapons, because their ability to cause mass carnage within a few seconds is there and it's transparent for us all to see. we saw it in australia once or twice before 1996 and we enacted. i cannot see how similar action was taken here, that the supreme court of this country would say the right to bear a semi automatic weapon is going to offend 84 second amendment rights. i don't think so. >> well, there is a lot of people that look at one decision mais made, the heller decision overturned a gun ban in the city

of washington, d.c. it's a press dent that says gun bans will never be -- >> that's nonsense, anti-tank weapons, why not a tactical nuke, it's a nonsense, the only people who actually have a right to use or have been in possession of automatic and semi automatic weapons are members of our military. that's what they're there for. i grew up in a farm in rural australia. we had lots of wild manimals. my foouts father used a rifle. frankly, we're supposed to have the most dangerous, most poisonous critters in the world in our country st. i don't see how anyone in this country has a legitimate need for one of these pump action machines. >> you are not the only australian that looks at us and says, boy you guy versus a guntualture here. you don't have the same guntualture. some argue the reason we have it in our constitution it was

written in response to a revolution. you didn't have that same experience when your constitution was written. >> the british come back, you don't need a semi automatic to deal with it. things have rolled on. >> i don't think it's the british we have to worry about. >> i understand the revolution, i am a student revolutionary war. number marks to you guys, because you won, they set up a convict colony in our part of the world. that's a byproduct. the bottom line is this, to think that you are now helpless as aation that to change the laws, i think it's just dead wrong, given where the supreme court could and should go in the future and any challenge to getting rid of semi automatic weapons, could you see the supreme court bench standing up there in washington, d.c. saying we are defending semi automatic weapons, possession for you, joe out there because of your second amendment rights? i don't think so. >> you came up with an important

point have you to have a national consensus first before you can substitute something like this. how did the gun buy back, it seems like it's still a rolling program. how that worked and how did you entice people. how much money did they get in. >> it was an equation of the original weapon price. if you say there is no gun culture. we are a rural country. my state of queensland a rural part, two-thirds of us live outside the cities. so that's where we live and have our being. and so there is a culture which says i may need a rifle on my farm to deal with, you know, a wild animals or something that will affect the stock or rip things to pieces. that's fine. but if you ask your average farmer or your average sporting shooter who shoots clay targets and whatever, do i need a semi a umt? even those guys, in my country, including my father and those

before him would say you're nuts. >> what else did you do to address people's concerns on security. some say i don't know if i can trust the government to keep me safe. >> i think in this country you suffered from half a century of government bashing, government equ equals evil, equals bad, therefore we can't trust them with anything. >> that is a deep cancer in this society you can turn around. i think there is a national helpless syndrome here in the united states about this. can you do it, guys. it's the united states of america the leader of the free world. >> we can do anything you want. >> you can change your laws. those of us that live here would like to see you do it. >> i always love getting a perspective on us from the outside from people going, why aren't you tackling this? >> we like this country. there are so many good things in america. this is just nuts. >> we get most things right. >> yeah, you do. >> kevin rudd, thank you for coming in. up ahead, state lawmakers are

trying to keep secrets, where do you think they learned it from? this is humira. this is humira helping to relieve my pain and protect my joints from further irreversible damage. this is humira helping me reach for more. humira has been clinically studied for over 20 years. humira works for many adults. it targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. talk to your doctor and visit humira.com. this is humira at work.

alright, i brought in high protein to help get us moving. ...and help you feel more strength and energy in just two weeks! i'll take that. -yeeeeeah! ensure high protein. with 16 grams of protein and 4 grams of sugar. ensure. always be you. welcome back. tonight i'm obsessed with lawmakers that joined a different kind of "me too" movement. in washington state the other washington, voters voted to exempt themselves from the state local records act. the bill seems to ban permanently the public's access to e-mails, text messages and calendars, disciplinary hearings

and complaint, it's happening in the era of "me too." guess what the washington state lawmakers are saying "me too." you know what bans their records from the public employer requests, these gees the united states congress, the biggest legislature of them all. what washington state is saying is congress can keep their records under lock and key, then hey, me too. the bill passed with veto-proof majorities in the democrat controlled house and democratic controlled senate. so the democratic governor can't do anything to stop the bill, if he wants to. the story gets better. lawmakers impossible for the voters to kill the bill through a referendum. in walk state they do pretty well. according to seattle "time's" they're saying it makes government more transparent. not less. do you think that sounds a little fishy? me too. n continues... oooh. as the earl of sandwich,

i dub thee... the sandwich! (gasps) brilliant! well played my lord! there was a time when the next big thing in food was stuff between bread. now, the next big thing is the capital one savor card. earn 3% cash back on dining, 2% on groceries, and 1% on all other purchases. what's in your wallet? with its historical ance records...test ...you could learn you're from ireland... ...donegal, ireland... ...and your ancestor was a fisherman. with blue eyes. just like you. begin your journey at ancestry.com

we've hit the point where it seems like the mentality in washington is to borrow a phrase from david french, if you are 80% my friend, are you 100% my enemy. is it any surprise leaders on both sides are getting ready for a war debate. eddie i love na line, 80% my friends, 100% my enemy. it is sort of the trump era, social media, this battle of the bases. that explains everything we are dealing with and guns is the symbolic example. >> absolutely. what happens in the midst of that hieyperpartisanship, what happens to principle? you would think it would moetd rate is the distinction on the sides? it seems to me, your my friends, you're with them. then the question of how do we act on principle and on behalf of right, on behalf of a just set of arrangements, seems to

get lost in it all. it's bizarre to me. >> well, our system of government isn't designed to govern if we believe, if we go about it believing we can't, that we believing we can't agree 80% of the time and make that policy. >> i agree. when it comes to the gun debate, we have seen it over and over again that we retreat to the idea that nothing will get done. it is good to see the action going on at the state level. the florida example is a small example, but we have covered national politics and politics in the white house, but looking at what these individual states are doing is really telling where the energy of sorts is. >> if i have a sense of what passes in tallahassee, that's the outer edge of what washington can get done. >> guns are a unique problem in our politics, problem, whatever, because there is the second amendment to the constitution sitting there and it limits the

ability of politicians to move on these matters and a whole bunch of people in america don't like that fact and they want to move as though they can ignore the existence of the second amendment. and their extreme hatred of it, then gets the back up of those -- there are 126 million people in this country who sleep every night in a home with a gun in it. >> that's a lot of people. about a third of the country. >> there's 80 million adults, there are 40 million kids, so there are 80 million adults and there are 90 million who vote in the midterms. >> i want to go back to this gun debate, and there are some signs that each one wants to move a little bit. but there's some that believe that if i can't get it all, i'm not going to give you anything.

>> i know i began by talking about it a little bit abstractly, and i'm going to do it again, chuck. >> you're a princeton professor and you're allowed to. >> what happens when you don't contribute good faith to your interlo interl interlocutor. if you're engaging in good faith, you're going to get hustled. if you don't pursue what you're want to pursue, you're going to get left out in the dust. you can see this in the debates with the democrats. so here we are, we're going to try to get common sense regulgu regulations, expanded background checks and then -- >> i would focus on one thing, i would say the focus on one thing could be a 21-year-old age limit

on the purchase of long guns, right? one thing. because the incremental policy would say that if you can do one thing, maybe you can do more, maybe not. but you could at least do one thing, you could respond to an event with a thing. the thing that the gun lobby is afraid of, precisely is that people will be seduced by incrementalism. which is why i think it's criminally negligent politically of the sort of anti-gun movement not to grasp that opportunity. play a long game, do a little thing, not a big thing, because if you do a little thing, you can throw your enemy on the defensive, you can say we got this little thing, and the world didn't explode, maybe we can do another little thing, politically. >> it's so rare where you can actually get an instance where you get everybody at one table.

lawmakers say this may be our only chance to do something about this one topic, you saw it on immigration and on the tax reform. >> certain folks get a little and certain folks -- and some folks seem to think, in order for this to actually work, you have to give. >> right. >> then you ask, what is the nature of compromise. >> this is the larger problem we have in our politics right now. there used to be something called oh, it's win/win. bill clinton and ronald reagan's big gift is that they knew how to let the opposition win sometimes. >> you have an enormous number of politicians who come to washington and what they want to do is go home and say they

wanted to do something bad and i stopped them. not i came to washington to do things for you or help run the country or whatever, i'm there to stop them. that is a very simple, coherent message. >> and that's a simple and coherent way to end. up next, trump 2020, a vision is coming into focus. - this is what america's about. - sometimes it's nice to see all the good that's out there. bringing folks out, we have seen it in community after community.

at planters, we put fresh roawhich has its drawbacks.an, guys, know anything about this missing inventory? wasn't me! the cheeks don't lie, chet... irresistibly planters. was a success for lastchoicehotels.comign badda book. badda boom. this year, we're taking it up a notch. so in this commercial we see two travelers at a comfort inn with a glow around them, so people watching will be like, "wow, maybe i'll glow too if i book direct at choicehotels.com". who glows? just say, badda book. badda boom. nobody glows. he gets it. always the lowest price, guaranteed. book now at choicehotels.com

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

> . well incase you missed it, the white is only thinking about 2020. pascual ran digital operations for the trump 2016 campaign, as well as the trump administration, so in many ways, this is a natural promotion for him. already are you surprised? well, don't be. he planned on running for two terms since inauguration day. he filed paper work hours after taking the oath of office that he was running for reeleblgation. but don't just take my word for it. >> we wanted to do it during my first term or at worst during my second term. i should have it for seven years, be here for the next seven years, after that, who knows? we got seven years to go, folks, we got a long time ago. there is no reason to ever mention seven years again. >> the president plans ahead, that's for sure.

but do you know who we're waiting on to announce that he's running again? bill clinton, he never publicly announced that he wanted to seek a public term. here comes trump 20 dlsh 20, get ready for a bunch of things, my guess is multiple times he would announce his re-election. does he start with the hats, make america great again? if you're a candidate and you want more time, that's the power of positive thing, right? only mentioned 7. just assuming and leaning into re re-electi re-election. tonight there is a lot of heat developing on jared kushner, and the president, his father-in-law not helping him out. this news, jared kushner, right now officially losing his access to top secret