tv Kasie DC MSNBC March 12, 2018 1:00am-2:00am PDT
1:00 am
welcome to "kasie d.c." i'm kasie hunt. we're live 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. eastern every sunday from washington. tonight, the president campaigns in pennsylvania, but there is new reporting out he's already getting cold feet about the republican candidate. we'll take you inside the remarkable race with former governor ed randall and boyle and costello. and anthony scaramucci joins us as more and more trump campaign insiders like hope hicks find themselves outside the white house. and just out tonight,
1:01 am
brand-new reporting on the future of ivanka trump and jared kushner in the white house. but first, the president begins the week with major wins for his agenda, signing his tariff plan and announcing a meeting with kim jong-un. a potential breakthrough, but also a huge gamble. but in the background the advancing mueller investigation. the public melt down of a former staffer on live television, the exit of gary cohn, and reports trump's lawyer paid alleged hush money to an adult film actress. sometimes you want to get away from it all. sometimes you want to go where everybody knows your name. >> you like me? i think so. i like you, too. i love you. pennsylvania is the state that gave us the 45th president of the united states. normally i would not come except it's pennsylvania. i love it anyway. i love the people. i went to school -- i went to wharton.
1:02 am
she's writing like i'm some kind much neanderthal. i'm really smart. i don't know if i'm a good speaker, but you know what, every time i have a 25,000 seat stadium, we fill it up. maybe it's pure ideas. i'll say to friends, did you see my speech last night? yes. i have to say, how good was i? how good? and they say, good. i said, did they show the crowd? no, they didn't. he said, but you know what? i could tell by the noise that crowd was really big. you can't hide that. it sounds like a penn state football game. it sounds like an ohio state football game. i hate to put this pressure on you, rick. they're all watching. because i won this district like by 22 points. that's a lot. that's why i'm here. look at all those red hats, rick. look, look at all those hats. >> the president also found time to talk about nafta, tariffs, tax cuts, and of course the
1:03 am
border wall. and we barely scratched the surface. joining me on set, former rnc chairman nbc political analyst michael steel. white house reporter for the washington post and msnbc contributor ashley parker. and house editor for the cook political report dave wasser man. joining us from my favorite, the city of brotherly love, former pennsylvania governor ed randall. thank you for being here tonight to talk about what is going to be i think the dominant story through the week because dave wasserman, a lot on the line for the president here in pennsylvania. talk to us about the dynamics of this race. i mean, republicans that i've been talking to, they're blaming the candidate. they're saying rick succone didn't raise any money. he shouldn't have gotten this nomination in the first place. he has failed us. so, if we lose that's the on the reason why. this is a 20-point trump district. >> you're absolutely right. republicans have been playing the expectations game for a couple weeks trying to lower expectations and trump himself finally is getting into the act. but look, for a democrat to
1:04 am
actually win a district that voted for trump by 19.6 points, two things need to happen. number one, they need a favorable environment where trump is unpopular nationally and i think that isn't getting them halfway there. the other half is the difference in candidate quality. and lamb has been relentless on message. he is an outsider at a time when his republican opponent is an eight year veteran of the state legislature and has taken right to work vote. there are 86,000 union house districts. this district has the type of dna for democrats to be able to count on some ancestral strength to make it close and perhaps win. >> ed, i want to ask you on the point dave is making. what is your sense of where this district is? the union households that are there, did they just vote for trump because he's trump, or are they going to be republican voters, do you think, for decades, and do you think
1:05 am
ultimately republicans may be able to pull this out? what's your sense? >> well, a lot of questions, kasie. >> i'm sorry. >> first of all, president trump is not unpopular in the district. he is in the very reliable monday mouth poll. he has a 51% favorable rate. so, now, with democrats he's unpopular enough that he's going to still turnout. there's no question about that. and the only way the democrats are going to win is if our turnout really exceeds republican turnout by a lot. and that's possible because connor lamb has been a great candidate and rick succone, although he won a primary, defeated two other republicans, succone has not been a great candidate. connor lamb has won all the debates. he's done a great job in not allowing this race to be nationalized like in georgia. he's pro life. he's pro gun although he's for background checks. and he's a conservative democrat. he said to nancy pelosi he would
1:06 am
not vote for nancy pelosi for leader. he took that issue off the board. and the $10 million of negative ads that republican i.e.s have been spending to try to trash connor lamb are backfiring. there is a very popular former prosecutor by the name of dave hickton who did the response to some of the ads and it's cushioned them. i wouldn't be surprised if connor lamb won, but if he loses by 2 or 3 points, that's a 17-point pickup for the democrats. it's a bad sign for the republicans. >> of course, the whole point of the president's nearly 90-minute performance was to promote rick succone. so, between jabs at the media, mr. trump managed to find time to offer his endorsement of succone, including of course some light taunting of his opponent, the attractive democrat connor lamb. >> we need our congressman succone. we have to have him. [ cheers and applause ] we have to have him. the people of pittsburgh cannot be conned by this guy lamb.
1:07 am
lamb the sham, right? lamb the sham. i hear he's nice looking. i think i'm better looking than him. i do. i do. personally, i like rick succone. i think he's handsome. [ cheers and applause ] do me a favor. get out on tuesday. vote for rick succone and we can leave right now. >> so, that's what he's saying in public. but privately the president reportedly has not been so generous. according to new reporting just in from jonathan swan at axios, trump is trashing succone behind the scenes. why? trump thinks saccone is a terrible, weak candidate according to sources who have spoken with the president. the president nearly piling on after politico reported earlier this week that leaders in the republican party had also turned on saccone. they've been telling me that as well this week. nbc's vaughn hillyard is with us from carnegie, pennsylvania. how bad is it on the ground for saccone?
1:08 am
what do you know that might not be obvious to those of us here? >> reporter: kasie, i want to start with connor lamb. he had about 300 mainly union workers, coal miners, a ruckus rally down the road. was also with connor lamb here in carnegie. they had canvassers. the campaign hadn't talked to but they were coming in off the streets, going out canvassing, phone banking. it was an operation much like we saw with doug jones in alabama in those closing days. compare that to the get out the vote effort for rick saccone. outside of the rally he has been nowhere to be seen this weekend. nowhere yesterday, we don't know where rick saccone is today. we don't know where he'll be tomorrow. he had the get out the vote rally. about 15 individuals showed up for that event. i want to put this in perspective. connor lamb's campaign has spent more than four times what rick saccone has on television. paul ryan's super pac has put comparatively more than $2
1:09 am
million on tv here. they had 80 door knockers, paid door knockers they had out here essentially trying to make up for what rick doesn't have. he doesn't have a campaign operation in place. i talked with the head of that super pac, the congressional leadership fund earlier today. she told me essential sri what they should take away from this is the republican party in these congressional races, they need better candidates and better campaigns. kasie? >> nbc's vaughn hillyard. thank you for that rather dire assessment of the status of the rick saccone campaign. i will see you starting tomorrow. thank you very much. michael steel, 15 people. >> that was a party. >> what's going on? >> there are a number of things at play here. it's just kind of amusing to listen to it all sort of play out. the president doesn't give a rats patooey about this race and doesn't care about the candidate. it's all about him.
1:10 am
when he sits there comparing himself to the democrat as opposed to the republican nominee for the seat, that should tell you everything you need to know. the second thing is lamb is a republican light and he will play in this district and he will play well in this district. he gives republicans someone to go to who may have their fill of donald trump which is why the numbers look the way they look from two years ago. and that truth for the republican party across the country right now that they need to come to grips with. you can look back and say gee we won this district by 40 points last time. this is not the last time. this is a difficult rint space now and republicans have to take ownership for that. they can blame the candidate, they can blame the campaign, they can blame the fund-raising, blame everything you want, but the one person you need to start with is the president of the united states because that's the biggest drag on every republican running in every district in this country this year. >> he does claim he's 5-0. questionable there. ashley parker, my sources have been telling me the president wanted to go and do this partly because he believes he'll be blamed no matter what. he'll be blamed, you know, if he loses, it's somehow it's going
1:11 am
to be the president's falts fault if he goes or doesn't go. obviously he made the decision he wanted to hold a rally. what do you know about how the white house is approaching this race? >> well, one thing his sort of rally we saw last night, it does give you a sense from what i've heard from people inside the white house of what we should expect in the midterms. it's going to be the president going to these districts. and again, not every candidate will want to have him. to be clear, there is a real risk to having him, which is the risk in some ways we saw last night. the candidate he's actually campaigning for is utterly incidental to the trump show. and you run the risk that the president sort of trashes you privately so then the whole story is even the president doesn't like this guy. or as we saw in alabama, i believe even when he endorsed luther strange, maybe i'm making a mistake. there is a real downside.
1:12 am
if there is a district where the candidate agrees the president should go, he's going to go there and treat it like it's 2016 all over again. so, it's going to be the frenzy, the energy which is maybe positive, but it's also going to be all of these statements once the president leaves the drilkt, the candidate may not want to answer for. do you agree the president thought that the olympics wouldn't have been fun if south korea had been nuked? that's not something a candidate wants to have to respond to. >> right. well, they should get used to answering these questions if they want to win. dave wasserman, how much do you buy this idea this is candidate based or should republicans view this as a reason to panic? >> crazy thing republicans trashing the race. that is going to be the opposite of most races this fall. but in this case, democrats to their credit have largely stayed out. dccc has not spent in recent weeks helping connor lamb. they have run -- they have let him run his own campaign. i think they have taken a page from doug jones in alabama who also won in a very red state. and so republicans, on the other hand, are counting on, i think, perhaps the last-minute surge of enthusiasm, tariffs rolled out
1:13 am
in the final week of the race, a jolt from trump to kind of light a fire under republican voters to turnout because that's been their biggest problem in these off-year elections. >> yeah. ed rendell, last word to you on the tariff question. is it your sense the president brought this issue up specifically around the politics of it as it plays in pennsylvania 18? and do you think this is a positive for the president, is this a policy that is going to earn republican votes? >> well, he brought it up to help mr. saccone. he's not doing it because connor lamb came out and endorsed the tariffs as well. connor lamb is endorsed by the local steel workers. that is not a strategy likely to help very much. the steel workers are solidsly behind connor lamb. as far as the president coming into districts, kasie, i'd like to invite him into congressman costello's district to campaign. >> congressman costello's district that is looking to change dramatically for the worst for mr. costello.
1:14 am
thank you both so much for your time tonight. we have much more to come. inside a battle that left dozens of russian mercenerys dead. we are going to dig into this under story. plus in our 8:00 hour i'll talk with olympian adam rippon. first former white house communications director anthony scaramucci joins me live. just three minutes to pop your popcorn. we're back after this.
1:18 am
ladies and gentlemen, thank you for being here tonight. rick saccone will be a great, great congressman. he will help me very much. he's a fine man and has a wonderful wife. i just want to tell you on behalf of the united states of america that we appreciate your service. and to all of the military out there, we respect you very much. thank you. thank you. and then you go, god bless you and god bless the united states of america. thank you very much. >> that was the president last night on the campaign trail giving an alternative possibility of what looking presidential could look like. joining me now is former white
1:19 am
house communications director anthony scaramucci. mr. scaramucci, thank you for coming on tonight. i really appreciate it. >> it's great to be here, kasie. thank you. >> i want to start by asking you, you said earlier this morning that you believe that this president is presidential. what was presidential about that? he seems to be mocking the office of the presidency. >> okay. so, i still don't understand why everybody has such a hard time with the president's sense of humor. i mean, that instance he's displaying a sense of humor. when he's saying things like his button is bigger than the other guy's button, if you really know him, it's displaying a sense of humor. i think he's also making another point, he made this point on the campaign many times through transition, even the short time he's in the white house, that if he acted presidential in the way that he was mocking as you saw last night, he would have lost the campaign. and so he really believes that he has to talk in a little bit of a jarring way to the american people to wake people up and
1:20 am
activate them to vote and get out there and be energized. so -- people can dislike that, but that's how he is. >> when you are the president of the united states and you have that nuclear button available to you, does joking about it -- doesn't that actually put millions of people at risk? >> no. i actually don't think so. i mean, he's a very temperate guy when it comes to making decisions, particularly about the military. i've been in situations with him where -- >> there have been several situations where his military advisors have had no idea what he was going to do before he did it, including this meeting that he's taking with kim jong-un. how does that demonstrate he's measured? >> kasie, that's totally a diplomatic response to a hostile situation and an intractable problem we've had for a quarter century plus. you can take it back to the '53 armistice. that's a totally different thing than, quote-unquote, nuclear buttons. the president, again, you guys may not like this about him, but he is a very temperate guy when
1:21 am
it comes to making decisions like that. when he's on a stage, he has a little bit of -- he's like a frank sinatra sort of performer. and he plays to the crowd. people don't like that about him. some people at least. but there's a lot of people that like it about him. and people in those sorts of towns like, by and large that district, they get the joke with the president. they understand his sense of humor, and they welcome it. they sort of know and they can read between the lines of when he's being serious and when he's not being serious. so, what i said this morning, i'll stick to. he is the president, so at the end of the day when people are talking about presidential, a lot of people don't like this and they'll be upset with me for saying it, but he is redefining what the word presidential means. he's the president. so, if he's going to joke around like that, he looked like he had a little low energy there to me the way he was blocking around like that. that's part of it. so, there's been other
1:22 am
presidents that have used wit from the podium. that seemed to be fine. the humor that he was using last night, some people don't like. but that's him. and so here's the thing -- he's not changing. i can tell you that. that's not going to happen. >> sure, we've certainly learned that about him in the last year plus. i can tell you all the evidence points the opposite direction. you say he's very even tempered in making these decisions. i mean, this has been an incredibly chaotic white house. you experienced that yourself during your very brief tenure as white house communications director. >> let's go with brief, kasie. don't hurt my feelings. we're on live tv. you can you don't have to say very brief, you can just say brief. >> fair, brief tenure. but at the same time, i see no signs that this white house is anything -- it's less stable by the day. how can you possibly argue that this president is very even tempered in how he makes these decisions? >> okay. so, let's step back. i'm not talking about like the interaction between the personalities. i'm not talking about the -- >> tariffs, kim jong-un's
1:23 am
meetings. big policy significant things. >> let me just finish. his need for speed and some of the level of interaction that he has, he plays like an nfl linebacker, okay. so, he comes at people a certain way. a lot of people in his orbit are not used to it. people that have been on the campaign like myself, i started back in february 2016. very used to it, totally capable of dealing with it. but go back to the korean situation. he pushed them very hard and people said that he was objectionable in terms of the way he was pushing them, but i believe, and he obviously believes, he's got them to the table in a position where they'll be able to cut a deal that will add to peace, stability and prosperity in the region. he indicated, i guess in the last 24 hours, that he was talking to the president of china and he sought their
1:24 am
cooperation on putting this summit together and this deal. and so, yes, he's coming at it -- i think i said on one of these programs, that his negotiation style is to hit you first and then step back and then see if he can cut a deal. he's been doing that for 45-plus years in american business. so, he's doing that now as president and it's been, by and large, effective because if you look at the policies, you look at the economic growth and you look at the opportunities creating for middle and lower middle class families, and governor rendell said it, in that district he's got a 51% approval rating. i don't know if it will translate over to mr. saccone, it probably will. >> you said that you think he's redefining what it means to be presidential because he is president. do you think that the changes he's making in that regard is good -- are they good for the country? >> some, some of them are. some of them i would say to him, if he's watching the program, i would sort of be more strategic on some of the things that he's doing. i think sometimes when he's tweeting at journalists, as an example, i would tell him, hey,
1:25 am
let's not do that. i think that we made a very big mistake early on in the administration when steve bannon declared war on the media. i thought that was a very bad idea. i didn't agree with it at all. it's okay to disagree with the media. it's okay to take issue, but i'm a very big believer in the fourth estate. i understand the documents that were written by our founders. it is super important to have a first amendment right and it is super important to check people, kasie, that are in power. and so, again, i was only there for two fridays. the first friday was more memorable than the second friday. but on that first friday i put the lights and cameras back on in the press room or at least recommended that. we as a team did it because they get very, very important for people who are in power to be held accountable. and if the president does president like some of the critiques, whether it's peggy noonan's critique or maggie haberman, you pick the journalist, that's cool, it is okay to disagree. but let's not be at war. it's not good for america. i don't think it's good for him personally and it's not good for the presidency.
1:26 am
so, that stuff i would really caution him on and give him advice not to do. but the other stuff, sort of the smash mouth talking and the aggressiveness at trying to tackle some of these very intractable problems that the united states has had over the last quarter century, i sort of -- you have to give him credit for that. the american people want results and he is delivering them. >> this president seems to be sympathetic to many autocrats. and as you point out, he does regularly attack the free press. that does not seem to indicate that he is on board with the constitutional system that we've set up. >> well, see, i know he's on board with the constitutional system that we set up. i absolutely know that. i've had conversations with him there, too. but if you're making the point that he gets into a rough-and-tumble with the press that is unnecessary, i'm going to seed that point and give you that point. what i would say to you is that you're talking about dictators and so forth. i think the grid iron stuff, again, is in the joke category. a lot of people get testy about jokes like that.
1:27 am
he has a tendency for whatever reason, because of his personality, there are certain things that he does. there is a large group of people won't like him no matter what. and there are certain things that he does that really gets their ire up for whatever reason. i have seen him up close and personal. i've had the personal conversations with him. i know that he respects the office. i know he respects the press. and i do think we need to de-escalate. i want to bring out one last point. when you're the victim of fake news and when someone -- >> we don't use the term fake news on this show. we don't use it. >> however you want to say it. inaccurate news, let's say inaccurate news. i know guys get sore about that term. when you are a victim of it, i can tell you, it is extraordinarily painful. if you don't have a deep pocket by the way, you can't really fight back. so, and people do that in washington, they do it to each other. it's happened to me, kasie. don't like it at all. and i can imagine if you're the president of the united states and it's happening to you and your family, let's call it
1:28 am
inaccurate reporting or whatever you want to call it. it can get you riled up. it can be very upsetting. and i tell people that push back at the president on that, when it happens to you, then you start to realize how painful it can be. >> before i let you go, you mentioned deep pocket books and i have to ask you about stormy daniels and this payoff from lawyer michael cohen. was president trump's conduct with stormy daniels presidential? >> okay. so, what was his conduct, though? i don't know what his conduct was. >> sarah huckabee sanders has acknowledged there is arbitration around the dispute with stormy daniels over the alleged affair. she has acknowledged that from the white house podium. >> i don't think she acknowledged the affair. i don't know what happened between the president and stormy daniels. i'm very good friends with michael cohen. i've known him at least a decade here in new york. i think if he were here on the show tonight, what he would be saying to you is that sometimes things may not, in fact, be true, but you're still trying to protect your principle and going about it the way he tried to go
1:29 am
about it. and so at the end of the day, maybe it's true, maybe it isn't true. let's let the news cycle unfold. i guess she's going to be interviewed here shortly. there is an agreement that's on the table. looks like that agreement is probably in breach -- >> do you think the president is a role model for your son? >> do i think he's a moral role model? that's a good question. i saw chuck todd ask that of secretary mnuchin this morning. i'm going to answer different from secretary mnuchin. in some ways he's an unbelievable role model because he's an entrepreneur and he's excelled in three or four different businesses, and i'll tell you what, i think he's been a great father. >> i hear you, but -- >> vice-president pence said you can't take good children. in other ways i would tell the president just like i'm telling you and i would tell my kids, dial back some of the style points. your approval rating will go into the mid 60s if you do that. and i would like him to do that, but he's 72 years old in june.
1:30 am
he's not going to change, kasie. >> anthony scaramucci, thanks very much for your time tonight. really appreciate it. >> thank you. >> when we continue, president trump isn't the first commander in chief to favor a breakthrough with north korea. >> we have completed an agreement that will make the united states, the korean peninsula and the world safer. under the agreement, north korea has agreed to freeze its existing nuclear program and to accept international inspection of all existing facilities. >> when it comes to diplomacy with north korea, many will enter, few will win. when we come back, evelyn far cast and jeremy bash join us. don't go anywhere.
1:31 am
1:34 am
when the south korean representatives who just left north korea came outside, big throng of press, they announced that north korea, kim jong-un, would like to meet with president trump. this doesn't happen. you know, they're saying, obama could have done that. trust me, he couldn't have done that. he wouldn't have done that. he would not have done it. and by the way, neither would bush, and neither would clinton,
1:35 am
and they had their shot and all they did was nothing. >> joining me now are two nbc news national security analysts, former chief of staff at the cia and the department of defense jeremy bash, and former deputy assistant to the secretary of defense evelyn farkas both of whom worked under the obama administration. i want to get your -- we have michael steel and ashley parker still with us as well. i want to get your -- the president there was talking about how all of these succession of other presidents tried and failed on north korea. and it's clear that u.s. policy has in many ways failed on the nuclearization question. but is this remotely at all a good idea? >> talking is a great idea. i've been watching this for the last, i don't know how long, you know, couple decades. >> right. >> from the hill initially. i went to pyongyang in 2008 when we had the agreement, the freeze under bush. i think the mistake we made in
1:36 am
previous administrations was that we let up on the maximum pressure. we didn't keep the sanction pressure up on north korea. we accepted their conditions, which included removing some of those sanctions. >> uh-huh. >> but, you know, it's backwards. normally the president is the closer. normally you bring the president in to seal the deal. and that's not what's happening this time. >> yeah, my reaction to that sound bite, kasie, is that a meeting is not going an accomplishment. a meeting actually is a concession, it's a huge concession to the north koreans. you are going to be putting the north korean dictator on the same stage as the president of the united states. i think north korea won round 1. they boxed the president in, they did in a sophisticated way. they drove a seam between south korea and the united states and when the south koreans came in and said we have a presentation to you, he should have said hold on, let me meet with my national security advisors. i'm in. where do we go? >> ashley. >> so, i was on vice-president pence's trip to the olympics. and one thing they were acutely aware, they did not even want a picture of the vice-president being friendly with anyone from
1:37 am
the north korean delegation. profiled ivanka trump, learning from pence's trip, she was careful to not have a photo. she was prepared on how she was potentially going to avoid a handshake. going to jeremy's point, that then the north koreans who would have loved a smiling photo with the vice-president or ivanka have a meeting with their top president and themselves is what they wanted. >> it seems to me, kim jong-un must obviously know all of this. the reporting around this president's interactions with foreign leaders in the time he sat down with putin without any americans nearby to listen to what was going ton, clearly he feels like he probably has the upper hand here. otherwise why would he do it? >> right, right. the one thing is first of all, he's at least been in office since 2011 so even though he's young, he's about 32, he's actually got more foreign policy experience than our president. and he's got professionals that i am betting that he is listening to and those professionals have sat across from u.s. teams, different u.s.
1:38 am
teams over the years, although in some cases there have been some constant. and some of those people are still in the state department. but i also want to make another point. there is a really important concession i think that the president should try to get before he meets if he does this meeting and that is he should get those three americans back right now. the north koreans are holding -- our fellow citizens, right. >> this north korea announcement is not the first time that the president has made a decision that left his advisors, i think, surprised is a generous way to put it. take the announcement on tariffs last week. a decision nbc news reported was borne out of the president's anger over unrelated issues. it prompted the release of a memo from defense secretary james mattis in which he warned that tariffs should be targeted so as not to damage relationships with key allies. later the trump administration reversed course and said there would be some exemptions. there was also the time last
1:39 am
summer when the president took to twitter and announced that he would be banning transgender americans from serving in the military. secretary mattis was given one day's notice about that decision. and was on vacation when the president sent out those tweets. implementation of the ban was later delayed as fights played out in the courts and transgender service members have been enlisting while all of that happens. secretary mattis has reportedly recommended to president trump that they should continue to be able to do so. and then there was the president's speech to nato leaders during his first trip abroad, which he was expected to reaffirm america's commitment to the alliance's article 5 provision on mutual self-defense. but elected not to. it was an omission that reportedly blind sided the president's own top national security officials. and about a month later woe explicitly endorse article 5 during a speech in poland. jeremy bash, what are the national security consequence of operating this way? >> there is a common thread in all of those examples, kasie, which is first, yes, from a process point of view, the process is broken. there is no process. but even more troubling
1:40 am
substantively, they all damage national security. so, take the tariffs, example, the defense department, people who make our weapons systems, the aerospace and defense industry, they are very concerned that it will drive up the cost of our defense systems, put pressure on the defense budget and it could alienate our key allies. >> the interesting thing about all of this, whether it's what we just saw this week with south korea, north korea, or what you just mentioned, jeremy, is the president who has his own mind, okay -- >> truly. tell us -- >> on these things. and his mind is you use the appropriate word, process. his mind is not set on process. his mind is set where he feels it viscerally. his reaction on the tariffs thing was all out of peak over what was going on in the white house. had nothing to do with a policy. there aren't policies underlying this as much as it is emotion and reaction. but here's the funny part.
1:41 am
it somehow sort of works to a certain extent. it gets people's attention. pieces on the chess board start to move in reaction to what the president is saying and doing. you wind up in a space sometimes going, how did we get here given the way we got here? and it's just, it's just an interesting thing for him, which is why he goes out and touts the success because in the end the tariffs thing is going to play well in the country. it hasn't back fired. it hasn't hit home -- >> he got a lot of cut out. >> he got a lot of cut out -- carve outs he's doing. he has a way of back dooring his way into a policy position in an -- >> making the headline and making the adjustments quietly everyone wants him to make. just ahead we're going to see if there are dots that can be connected between the man known as putin's chef and a confrontation involving russian fighters and americans in syria. ken dilanian is here for under covered after this. when i received the diagnosis, i knew at that exact moment, whatever it
1:42 am
takes, wherever i have to go...i'm beating this. my main focus was to find a team of doctors that work together. when a patient comes to ctca, they're meeting a team of physicians that specialize in the management of cancer. breast cancer treatment is continuing to evolve. and i would say that ctca is definitely on the cusp of those changes. patients can be overwhelmed ... we really focus on taking the time with each individual patient so they can choose the treatment appropriate for them. the care that ctca brings is the kind of care i've wanted for my patients. being able to spend time with them, have a whole team to look after them is fantastic. i empower women with choices. it's not just picking a surgeon. it's picking the care team, and feeling secure where you are. surround yourself with the team of breast cancer experts at cancer treatment centers of america. visit cancercenter.com/breast
1:45 am
>> the defendants allegedly conducted what they called information warfare against the united states with the stated goal of spreading distrust towards the candidates and the political system in general. the other individual defendant, yevgeny funded the conspiracy through companies known as concord management and consulting llc, concord catering, and many affiliates and subsidiaries.
1:46 am
>> the defendant that deputy attorney general rod rosenstein was referring to there is yevgeny, a russian oligarch nicknamed putin's chef because he became close with the russian president because of putin's visits to his restaurants. through one of his companies he controls those who a taktd syrian forces in early february. according to the washington post, the u.s. responded to the response with an airstrike that reportedly killed four russian nationals and possibly dozens of other russians. the kremlin has referred to it as, interestingly enough, mercenaris. list' bring in ken dilanian who has been tracking this story for us at nbc. ken, can you -- what of this do you think is the most important to understand, why would the russians be so specific in
1:47 am
saying these are mercenaries not associated with us? >> it's interesting with the mueller case. this is a month ago, february 7 and 8, a force of some 300 to 500 pro-assad fighters attack a u.s. base, u.s. and our allies on the eastern euphrates river. there is a large amount of russians on this. ac 130 gun ships, apache helicopters, smart bombs -- >> you wrote in this note for people trying to imagine what this is like at home, like black hawk down the movie. >> if you've seen that scene where the gun ships are firing on men with rifles, that's the hollywood version of what this could be like. absolute destruction. and we note there are recordings that have been released by the voice of america. u.s. funded website of russians basically complaining that they got their butts kicked. they used more profane language than that, in this encounter. hundreds of russian mercenaries are dead. we have a de-confliction line with russian forces. syrians called them up and said, hey, what's happening? they denied any knowledge of
1:48 am
this. but the interesting thing is this guy is very close to vladimir putin and the washington post had some really interesting reporting that he cleared this operation with the kremlin. now, nbc news has not independently corroborated that, but think of the implications there. if this was a kremlin-backed assault on an american base in syria, what if it had gone the other way and we are looking at a series of dead special forces, americans? and donald trump has yet to say a word about this, kasie. >> that's a test, i would say, that secretary mattis passed. i mean, he basically said, go and fire back and take these guys out. so, our troops on the ground did what they were supposed to do. troops in the sky did what they were supposed to do. i think another point we have to make is this same mercenary tactic is one the russians used in ukraine, the wagner company that yevgeny owns, they've also been active in ukraine. this is the typical kremlin trick when megyn kelly interviewed vladimir putin and he said, we have nothing to do
1:49 am
with this. i don't know what this is. he's lying. i mean, it's a way that they use to keep some distance. same thing they do with the cyber hackers and the trolls. they just have private people paying them, but they're working for the government. >> right. jeremy bash? >> i think the potential in the intelligence intercepts showing that the russian government, the kremlin actually approved of or at least knew of this attack on u.s. forces is amazing that the american government, that the
1:50 am
united states, the president himself, hasn't forcefully condemned this. and basically said this is an act of war against our troops because i think as ken put this so incredibly importantly, but for the professionals, the skill of our special operations forces who repelled this attack, our president would be standing at dover air force base welcoming home the american heroes who were killed by russians. >> who knows what that would mean considering this particular has responded as you pointed out. evelyn, i want to ask you about a different story. you mentioned hacking, these groups, fancy bear that have interfered in our election -- in our elections kind of our political system generally. you worked in the obama administration and there's been some reporting out about some frustration frankly among foreign policy officials about how far this president obama was willing to go to combat election meddling. do you think the obama administration did enough to try and basically, you know, push back on the russian effort or not? >> so i will say i was no longer in the in the administration when this happened. i left at the end of 2015. i was watching it from outside, although i knew we had very good intelligence the little they were saying publicly made me alarmed. i believe they should have done more the putin and president understand no they only understand firmness. if are you not firm with them they will keep pushing, which is why we are in danger now. i don't want to second guess president obama. he had his reasons. he didn't want to escalate the situation. he didn't want president put on the attack our election more
1:51 am
directly maybe tampering with the data in the computers. i can't say. i wasn't in those meetings the way to bet the kremlin to be stop is to be firm. >> i think actually it's slightly differently, i think the president didn't do it because he didn't want to be accused of helping hillary clinton win. the antidote was going to republicans sand thai say let's do it in a bipartisan way, they were shut down the message is that responding to russian agression in our elect, russian attacks has to be bipartisan. >> just be clear what the reporting is, so our viewers understand, there were people preparing secret cyber options to retaliate, including leaking information about putin's daughters and senior officials shut that off. they said stand down, we're afraid this will leak and box the president in. >> potentially have the president coming down on the
1:52 am
1:56 am
so what have you guys been up to since we saw you last? >> what we do best, taking the trump organization to new heights. i took a trip to india which is an incredibly poor country, where i'm hoping to make a lot of money. >> i saw "paddington 2." >> yeah, sure did, bud. >> just ahead, another packed hour of casey d.c. and we'll talk about the converging i'm leaving the track behind, but i'm not standing still... and with godaddy, i've made my ideas real. ♪ ♪
1:57 am
2:00 am
new developments until the case of stormy daniels. there's new developments that president trump's team may be trying to keep the adult film star quiet. plus, president trump hits the trail in pennsylvania just to keep the spotlight on himself. and the president ramps up expectations about his meeting with north korea's kim jong un, but there are still plenty of unanswered questions. ♪
86 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
MSNBC West Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on