i could talk to these friends forever but we're out of time. my thanks no jeremy bash, zerlina maxwell. that does it for our hour. chuck todd starts right now. hi. >> how are you? good to be back. just another tuesday, right? >> just another tuesday after another saturday, right? >> that's for sure. i'm wide awake. no worries. if it's tuesday, the president is fired up. >> tonight, the rexit strategy. >> i received a call today from the president of the united states at little after noon time from air force one. >> tillerson is out, why? and more importantly why now? >> i think he's going to be very happy. i think rex will be much happier now. >> plus how mike pompeo's department for a state department could usher in a new era for the cia and special

election day in p.a. the newest test of trumpism comes down to the wire in the keystone state. this is mtp daily and it starts right now. good evening, i'm chuck todd here in washington and welcome to mtp daily and welcome to another trumpian day of shakeups, confusion and white house drama. tillerson has been fired and he's not the only member of the president's inner circle who was ousted today. you're looking at the president in san diego. the president is speaking after signaling to reporters today that more white house shakeups are in the works. we'll be keeping a close eye on these remarks but we begin tonight with today's shake-up and how things got real messy real quick.

state department officials told nbc news that tillerson found out he'd been officially fired from a tweet. saying thank you to rex tillerson for his service. the tweet also announced mike pom paio the cia director would be replacing tillerson and gina haspel will become new director of cia. things got messier. one of tillerson's top deputy. the second had every intention of remaining. the secretary did not speak to the president this morning and is unaware of the reason for being asked to resign. what happened to that undersecretary, he was fired. then things got messier. we heard from the president who seemed to twist the knife a bit on tillerson. he made it pretty clear because he couldn't trust him on issues having to do with nuclear weapons, one having to do with mr. trump's stated desire to below up an existing deal with iran. we disagreed on things, when you look at the iran deal.

i think it's terrible. i guess he thought it was okay. it was a different mindset and different thinking. >> and another having to do with the president's decision to meet with north korea to broker a new nuclear deal, perhaps there, which he didn't bother discussing with tillerson. >> i really didn't discuss it very much with him, honestly. i made that decision by myself, rex wasn't as you know in this country. i made the north korea decision with consultation from many people but i made that decision by myself. >> then, you guessed it, things got even messier. tillerson decided to speak to the state department at the briefing. he thanked everyone. well nearly everyone. >> i will be meeting with members of my front office team and policy planning later today to thank them for their service. the men and women in uniform at the department of defense, secretary mattis and general dunford and i want to give recognition to the state

department and our partners to the 300 plus million americans, thank you for your devotion to a free and open society. >> you could sum up tillerson's farewell speech like this. he had kind words for his colleague, harsh words for russia and no words for the president. the only time he mentioned president trump's name was to tell us that he got a call from the president today at noon which was more than three hours after the tweet came out that fired him. sometimes things are messy in this administration by mistake. sometimes they're messy on purpose. was firing tillerson by tweet payback that tillerson during the summer called the president a moron. two sources familiar with the matter tell nbc news that the president never could get passed the moron comment. joining me now is john mclaughlin former acting director of the cia, also nbc news national security analysts.

welcome back to the show, sir. >> good to see you, chuck. >> let me start with this just the basic reaction to this shake-up. we could talk about how it was done. what's the -- how do you believe the world is reacting to this decision? >> well, i think they're puzzled, but fundamentally if you're a foreign government leader, you're going to say, well, this guy pompeo moving to the state department means that the secretary of state will probably now be someone who will reflect the president's views or at least speak for the president when he speaks. the cia change will probably leave them a little puzzled unless you know gina haspel and many people do and they will think that -- i think positively that, well, there's a professional in charge of the cia. that's probably pa good thing. tillerson was always a puzzling character to me. on the one hand he seemed to have sensible views. you've talked about this many

times. seemed to be on the right page in many respects but he never seemed to grasp what pompeo grasped at the cia which is you need a fully staffed agency to make policy and to make it run and he never seemed to understand that he needed to surround himself with professionals and that may have been part of his undoing if not the whole thing. >> i would say the other thing that pom paio has figured out that tillerson hasn't is that there's one person that matters more than any and pompeo has forged a very personal relationship with the president. he delivers the pdb himself, so he has all this face time. he's built a rapport and confidence. if anything every rex tillerson anecdote was about how he was building a rapport with general kelly or general mattis or with general dunford, never with the president. >> that's right. pompeo right from the beginning focused on the president as the cia as always said this as

customer number one and figured out, you know, every president absorbs information in a different way and he apparently figured out how this president absorbed information which i gathered from what we know is largely through conversation and graphics and anecdotes and pompeo's figured that out and i think delivered that part of his brief very well. >> what does this mean for the iran deal? we now have -- pompeo was a big critic of it from the beginning. he's made no bones about it. his personal views are closer to the president than rex tillerson's views. >> i think that's right. certainly if we look at what he did when he was in the congress that is absolutely true. i would think that he would pick up the job that the president gave to the state department, that is to work with the europeans and the other parties to the agreement to see if it can be amped up or changed in some way that would make it more

acceptable to the president. i think that personal that's a fool's errand because the agreement from my perspective is a pretty good one and, you know, and the europeans and the -- the others involved particularly the russian and chinese have no stomach for messing with it. that's going to be a tough job and as usual i think the president's painted himself into a bit of a corner. i don't think that's going to get done and next time the recertification comes up he may find himself in the position of oops that didn't work out. >> right. >> at the same time, you know, there are other people in the government going to be advising him about that including the cia and including secretary mattis, so that's going to be in motion. >> one more issue on timing of this. it was interesting yesterday, i believe rex tillerson was the highest ranking american official that sort of reinforced the uk's findings and the uk's blame finger pointing at the russians for what they did for essentially saying the russian

government is -- needs to prove -- basically the burdens on them to prove they weren't behind this attempted assassination of an ex-russian spy on uk soil. the timing of that, i know the president has sinced reinforced and said for the most part he concurs with whatever prime minister may is going to find, does that rattle allies at all? >> i think it does. i think it's shameful that the president hasn't spoken more forcefully on that and good on tillerson for doing it. >> but to get fired 24 hours -- wow. yeah? >> well, you know, he gets fired but if that was the cause it was for a good cause. i think back to 9/11 and i think back to the -- of course i was on the 7th floor of the cia at that time. on the very next day the leaders of the british intelligence community literally showed up physically in our headquarters

to embrace us, offer their support and they were with us 100% and right in our faces with it. so that's what we should be doing with the british now from the top of our government all the way down and so good on tillerson for doing that even if it got him fired. >> and you do think it is sending -- you think the russians are happy -- because whether it was for that reason or not they can spin it that it is. >> they can. i mean, who knows exactly why putin is doing what he's done here. i think it's a combination of things. he's doing it in part because he can. there are no consequences for him as an authoritarian leader in russia. it's a habit the russia's have that goes all the way back to the revolution knocking someone off periodically. >> sure. >> but i think it's a shameful thing when it happens in an al-lyled country. i'll be surprised if britain asks for article 5 in nato, that provision of the nato treaty but

i wouldn't be surprised, in fact, i would hope that they would ask for article 4 under which there ought to be or can be a nato discussion of this and what to do about it which would be a healthy thing i think and put this administration in a position where it has to play. >> all right. thanks for making time for me today, i appreciate it. >> thank you, chuck. i want to bring in tonight's panel. david ignatius. i feel like it's a very agust panel for an agust situation. david, you're our senior foreign affairs correspondent on this table here. >> yes. >> and ultimately -- let's set the circumstances aside. isn't the president better off having a secretary of state that shares his point of view instead of one that contrasted with it. >> the partnership between

donald trump and rex tillerson wasn't working. rex tillerson thoughtful man who tried hard, accomplished some things was not effective at state department. it's in bad shape. having somebody who can communicate better with the president and represent him overseas and communicate better with the state department itself, communicate better with the public through people like all of us and communicate with allies and adversaries directly, speaking for the president, there's no question that that is something that's in the country's interest. why this relationship with rex tillerson got so bad, why he was humiliated in such a ritual way over the last year, it was painful to watch? who knows? clearly it wasn't working. >> and that's the question here susan. what's the impact of that humiliation on the rest of this team? >> we don't know who's going to survive. >> john kelly, general mattis, those are the two i'm most interested in. >> one thing is you're seeing president trump unchained here

in the last couple weeks and he indicated in his remarks this morning that he may not be done yet assembling the team and cabinet i've always wanted. and i think, first of all, we've seen that it's not just secretary tillerson or mattis who he's repeatedly overruled. he's done a much better josh of tillerson than staying out of the public firing line. if you go back and look at the decision after decision on which tillerson has been publicly reported to be disagreeing with president trump, secretary mattis has more or less joined hands with him all along. so that raises a question about mattis's future. general mcmaster, the national security adviser is already basically reported to be a dead man walking. he was in conflict with tillerson so he might be feeling some sense of vindication but it's short-lived. they're already openly trying out replacement or successors for mcmaster. >> all right. at least there won't be internal

chaos of nobody shoring what is the president's position. he's in one place, tillerson's in another. on the other hand, how he went about this? >> right. i think that the handling of this has been terrible in both directions, actually. i don't think that in any other administration a secretary of state who is credibly reported to have said that the president is a moron would have been kept on more months. >> i'm surprised he didn't offer his resignation. maybe he did. >> maybe we'll find that out. >> then, like the second that got out. >> tillerson was in no man's land. he didn't have support of the bureaucracy. he didn't have a tight relationship with the white house. he wasn't associated with any particular foreign policy doctrine. he was from the very beginning set up for failure and it's really appalling that it lasted as long as it did. pompeo is going to have a tighter relationship with the white house and would be hard to manage the state department bureaucracy worse. >> pompeo had he been the first pick, state department

bureaucracy would hahave -- wou have really freaked out. pompeo's got an opportunity here that he wouldn't have got opinion had he been the first initial pick? >> he does have the opportunity. the state department is broken. there is some easy fixes. he could quickly nominate a series of ambassador. >> he's been popular at the cia. >> yes. there was a lot of worrisome at first. he was a kind of policy adviser more than intelligence chief that made people nervous. operators loved him. he's a gung ho guy that cia loves to work for. >> and he's not watered down their work. that was always the concern. >> so far as we know, the work of cia analyst, they prize their independentist has not been watered down. pompeo can come in and pretty much from day one fix obvious things, name ambassadors, speak to the department, speak to the public. communicate outward and inward

and that will be a felt difference that, you know -- is he going to tell the president to tweet less. is he going to tell the president to be careful in his diplomacy with north korea? >> no, he won't, because that's the lesson learned. if you do that -- that's the fire ball offense. >> first of all, he's been in more of a service position. he's providing the intelligence to president trump. he's not been in the policy role and i do think he is reported to be a much more traditional republican on many foreign policy issues, so that sets up possible conflict with trump, you know, but at the same time, you know, trump is still the one who has managed to fight and to alienate even those around him who were determined to flatter him and suck up to him and so, you know, i think sooner or later he has a habit of turning on almost everybody but one thing at least i'm hoping that we'll no longer hear all those foreign policy pundits and experts telling us, don't pay attention to the president's tweets, just pay attention to

his policy because the secretary of state today learned that he was fired by reading a tweet. >> i'm reminded of a line that i like to quote from the movie cocktail," everything ends badly or else it wouldn't end. it does feel as if in the trump administration your relationship -- all relationships with trump, they end loudly. they get repaired later but it's never smooth. >> and every time that the president hue mill yates a cabinet secretary, which he's done with jeff sessions and rex tillerson, it makes it that much harder for him to get somebody to replace those positions, to feel the many vacancies there there are and will be. >> what does this mean for the north korea meeting in. >> i think president trump needs help in preparing for this meeting. he's very inexperienced president. never served in government. having a secretary of state he trusts to set the table, prepare the way provide intelligence may

be act as a initial private -- you got to route for diplomacy here and i have a feeling that because president trump trusts pompeo, the diplomacy may be a little he's arier. >> what about -- how do you do with the mcmaster situation? it's clear -- in some ways -- get the people you trust around you regardless of what the everybody else thinks, so at this point if he's going to make the change, hurry up and make it. >> that might be an argument i could see being pervasive with donald trump. having already made the boldest foreign policy move of his president agreeing on the spur of the moment to meet with the north korean leader, heading into that summit with a wholesale change in your national security team is a pretty, pretty risky thing to do. it seems to be putting more chips in the pot. if you think someone like john bolton, surm hard liner as the national security adviser he's reported to be a trump favorite. he was just in the oval office again recently. that makes it an even riskier

outcome with that summit could be with north korea. >> i think what everybody's curious about is what is secretary mattis thinking right now. that is the brain i would like to infiltrate right now. he's not going to talk to a media reporter about it, that's for sure. up ahead, all eyes are on pennsylvania tonight. voters in the 18th district have been casting ballot all day and president trump political capital is now on the line. 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. ancestrydna can pinpoint where your ancestors are from... and the paths they took to a new home. could their journey inspire yours? order your kit at ancestrydna.com

. on any other day we probably would have welcomed this. if it's tuesday, somebody is voting some where and even though that some where is a district that won't exist anywhere in november, this race still matters. the special election between republican rick is a cone and conor lamb is taking place in a district the president won by 20 points but today's race is very

tight. a loss for republicans there could lead to a handful of republicans perhaps opting to retire rather than face what apparently might be a bigger blue wave than they anticipated. it could also mean that the president might not be much of a fixture on the midterm campaign trail as he'd like to be if his support is seen as not being able to push a candidate over the line in what is supposed to be trump country. republican candidates may end up being forced to keep their distance and figuring out how to do that. republicans abandon their pro-tax anti-pelosi messages. take a listen to what saccone's closing message now is. >> they say that the other side is energized. they're energized for hate for our president. i've talked to so many of these on the left and they have a hatred for our president. many of them have a hatred for our country and i'll tell you some more, my wife saw it again today, they have a hatred for god. >> wow. for democrats a victory tonight

could give them a blueprint for winning even in trump country this november. it's been interesting to watch conor lamb, what he has embraced of the president and what he haenlt. much more on that and we'll go live to pennsylvania in a little bit. we'll be back with more on mtp daily in 60 seconds.

i know mike, i like him. but he was not known here on capitol hill as someone who was willing to champion american diplomacy over american military. i'll keep my mind open, but i'm worried about this choice. >> welcome back. joining me now is chris stuart of utah. he's a member of the house intelligence committee and he served in congress with the current cia director mike pompeo and the secretary of state designate. welcome. >> good to be with you. >> i know you know director pompeo, the current title is director pompeo. he's clearly closer in line of

foreign policy views with the president than secretary tillerson. >> yeah. >> how important do you think that is for mike pompeo to succeed with the president? >> i think it's actually quite important. my only criticism of mike who's a close friend. he was an army officer. i was air force, so other than that he's a terrific choice. he has something that i think is very important and that is a personal dynamic with the president and for whatever reason, secretary tillerson didn't quite have that. i sat with secretary tillerson. he's one of the smartest men i've ever met and strongest leader. i had breakfast with him not long ago and i said i hope you'll stay but i think mike is an excellent choice to replace him. >> i don't know if you heard it was senator chris murphy who was speaking there before, before you came on, that is a

perception among some on the left that mike pompeo is a hard liner on diplomacy. what would you say to that in response? >> i don't think that's a very fair characterization and there's not much to base that on. he advocated for those positions that he had responsibility for. i think he'll do exactly the same thing once he's secretary of state. he will then advocate for those positions that are important as the secretary of state and i think that's that -- he's able to do that t. i don't think he's one dimensional in the way he views american foreign policy. >> i want to get you to react to something that another colleague of yours on the house intelligence committee on the republican side of the aisle, what he said in reaction to the house republican intel findings. here it is. it's congressman tom ernie. >> we've gone completely off the rails and now we're just basically a political forum for people to leak information to drive the day's news, so we've -- as you alluded to,

we've lost all credibility and we'll issue probably two different reports, unfortunately. >> can the public take either finding seriously? >> i hope they can and they should and, by the way, in our report we've tried very, very hard to be nonpolitical, not to be tri. these are basically laying out the fact and more importantly the recommendations to the american people as we go into another election. i think i know what tom was saying. he was frustrated that there has been too much partisanship on this committee. many of things we loved about the intel committee we didn't use to be a partisan. there's a question of leaking here that tom was frustrated with. i don't think because of those criticisms you therefore say that everything that we do is irrelevant or not important. in this case this report really has -- we've really tried not to be partisan in this and we hope to work with the democrats over the next two weeks to finish the report. >> it seems as if -- correct me if i am wrong, are you really

coming to the conclusion that you know there's no collusion and i ask that because, how can you come to that -- i can understand if you said, we didn't find it among the people we've interviewed but how do you make it a hard conclusion when you didn't interview michael flynn, steele, george papadopoulos, how can you confidently make that conclusion without those conversations? >> yeah. so a couple comments on that. a number of the individuals -- most of the individuals you just mentioned are under indictment therefore we can't interview them. they're now under the purview of the special counsel and we no longer have access to them. another thing is we called this an initial report and that's an important distinction and it's one that i fought for. if there's other information that comes forward, we will pursue that and we're committed to doing that, but at some point -- and after what 15 months and more than 300,000 documents and, et cetera, et cetera, at some point you reach where you just say, we're not

learning anything new, it's been months since we learned something new. let's tell the american people what we now know. let's make those recommendations especially in light that we've got an election that's just around the corner now. >> it seems to me that there's not a -- actually there wasn't as much as unity among house republicans on this side of the intel committee as perhaps others led to believe. all of the evidence that you guys have seen said the russians favored clinton over trump. here's what trey gowdy put out today. he said, it is also clear, based on the evidence, russia had disdain for secretary clinton and was motivated in whole or in part by a desire to harm her candidacy or undermine her presidency had she prevailed. period. he didn't caveat that at all. it seems that there's not -- is it that -- is there that much contention in your side of the aisle on this conclusion? >> i think our report which says

that we agree with the vast majority of the cia analysis on this. 98% of it but on one caveat and it's important one, i realize that but on one this thing, we don't agree with the cia and their final analysis. i don't know any member of the committee who doesn't at the end of the day support that. now this is -- again, there's ambiguity in this conversation. if you're trying to harm secretary clinton, can that be viewed as promoting donald trump? again, it's difficult to determine what motives they had, whether it was one or the other but i would argue, frankly, it was both. they wanted to break down trust in the institution, they wanted us to not trust one another and i think there's clear that that's their primary motive here. >> it does seem that some parts of this report are being overhiked. do you think it's a mistake for people to focus on the idea that you guys have come to a firm conclusion that there's no collusion, that is not the case is what you're saying? >> i'm saying that up to this

point we haven't found any evidence of collusion and that's just not the republicans, senator burr said that, dianne feinstein said that. >> but you acknowledge you haven't done a thorough investigation, you haven't interviewed everybody involved yet. >> i don't acknowledge at all that we haven't done a thorough investigation. i think we have done a very thorough investigation. i acknowledge that perhaps it's extraordinarily unlikely, but perhaps they'll be more information that comes forward if that's true then we'll pursue that. all we're saying is this is what we know at this point. >> and you believe the cia got this wrong completely how they got iraq, wmd wrong. >> yeah. on this one thing they did. there was a misinterpretation of some of the raw intelligence. i had a chance to review that intelligence and once again there's a little ambiguity here. i recognize that. we really believe that they just missed this one thing but it is an important distinction. if it's not true, we shouldn't

have the american people thinking that vladimir putin was determined to elect one candidate over the other. >> do you think, though, that is false yet? do you get my drift? you can't conclude for a fact but do you concede that there's still more information to be culled through? >> well, on this one thing i don't know that there really is. i think the intelligence is being collected and analyzed. i will concede this, will be debating this into the future. i'm sure we won't decide it tomorrow and we can talk about it i'm sure for weeks and months ahead. >> i appreciate you coming on and sharing your views, sir. >> thank you, sir. >> this afternoon. thank you very much. >> you bet. up ahead, it's all on the line in pennsylvania's 18th. what could a republican loss mean for the president and the gop. we're on the ground in the keystone state. that is next. ♪

next chapter ♪ 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.

if yorheumatoid arthritisevere and you're talking to your rheumatologist about a medication, 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.

so is your secretary of state been fired or did he resign? that depends on which secretary we're talking about. we'll explain coming up. there are two types of people in the world. those who fear the future... and those who embrace it. the future is for the unafraid. ♪ ♪

the future is for the unafraid. weeds. nature's boomerang. at roundup®, we know they keep coming back. draw the line. one spray of roundup® max control 365 kills to the root and keeps weeds away for up to one year. roundup®, trusted for over forty years.

i think it says a lot about democratic enthusiasm around here. people are really excited for this race and i'm happy for them that their voices can be heard all around the world today. this is a local race. >> i've always been the underdog in any race i've ever rain. this is my fifth election. i relish being the underdog. that's good. >> welcome back. you just heard there from the

two candidates on the ballot. both parties are bracing themselves for what can be a close call. this race is already a warning sign for the gop no matter the result. president trump carried the district handedly and rallied voters over the weekend but he still might not be able to cover the republican over the finish line. if he can't help them here, where can he do it? that's the big question the party has to ask itself as it has tied itself to the president over the last year. joined now by two of my colleagues on the ground here, kasie hunt is in mt. lebanon and you know a lot about mckeys port. kasie i'll start with you, before i get you to talk. i want to play some voter sound that you've interacted with. let me play that and talk to you about it on the other side. >> who are you going to vote for in the special election? >> conor lamb. >> lamb. >> reporter: why lamb? >> i'm a veteran, he's been in the marines.

he's for workers. he's for unions as you can see i'm a union man. >> i think he understands the main street local economy better. i think connor has made a tremendous effort to get the heartbeat of the communities. >> kasies that's just two voters but there you go. a lot of people are -- should we take those two trump voters, voting for the democratic here as some larger sign? >> reporter: i think potentially, chuck, if you combine it what the lamb campaign has been doing. there's -- those two people, dan and elky miller. they're lifelong democrats. he had a 30 plus year as a coal minor. he's union is organizing on behalf of conor lamb. he represents the democratic party going back to their routes and when i asked conor lamb about that today, he said similarly we are supposed to be the apart of working people and

there is a sense that that was forgotten and they both also had said to me, we definitely couldn't vote for hillary clinton but, of course they've been out working hard for lamb. there's a couple things going on for democrats here. first of all, conor lamb really channelled the energy of the resistance, so to speak that's across the country in the form of fund-raising. he's raised all kinds of money but he didn't take that and act like john os sauf. osshauf being the candidate in the georgia sixth district. good luck trying to get him to criticize president trump. >> i don't think i have a comment about that. i think it's been similar all the way along and that democrats have a good quality candidate who didn't have to run a primary, didn't have to run to the left and he executed and republicans quite frankly were caught sleeping with rick saccone. >> usually in this environment it's the outparty that wants it

nationalized and the in party wants it localized. von hilliard, kasie gets to be indoors, unfortunately to be outdoors and in the elements, clearly, there. >> reporter: i was out there earlier today, chuck. >> fair enough. he's got to remember what the totem pole is. you've seen lamb, is there enough trump enthusiasm in this district where nationalizing this race which clearly as the final weekend decision from the president's rally to rick saccone to fox news today and playing the democrats hate god card yesterday, this was clearly a trying to get the trump base fired up, are they? >> reporter: isn't this what we saw just three months ago in alabama. the question around that, donald trump showed up just three days before that election as well and in a special election like this one, are republicans going to show up.

not only is it a matter of not necessarily voting for the republican but going to the polls and deciding to pull the lever for the democrats. here on the ground, i was over in irwin here and i was talking to john thompson, he's a retired cpa, and he said that he will be voting to the polls to vote for conor lamb. so and he's not the only republican i've talked to. it's not like democrats that cassie was talking to. there's a willingness among republicans voters that we've talked to to do that exact same thing. >> there's a lot more of a pittsburgh suburban vote here. kasie hunt, if rick saccone wins, what will be the explanation? it feels like the conventional wisdom, everybody in the even in the republican party is looking at this race if it's conor lamb's to loss. if rick saccone wins what will have been missed?

>> reporter: our sources are telling us they're aggressively setting expectations for what republicans will be an early night, three point conor lamb win. the basics of it, president trump was able to get his voters out. that's the calculation that a lot of those in the republican party in washington are making when they look at the midterms. they have to decide in some ways president trump is extremely toxic. his numbers are really bad. on the other hand, if the core supporters, the people who really love the president don't get out and vote then they have nothing. they have nowhere to go. >> kasie hunt, inside. von hillyard outside. i'm just saying. we've noticed -- >> reporter: buy him hot chocolate. >> let john kasich know we're in his hometown there. von and kasie enjoy election night. while tillerson's departure could lead to a major milestone but not at the state department.

-no. -separated at birth much? we should switch name tags, and no one would know who was who. jamie, you seriously think you look like him? uh, i'm pretty good with comparisons. like how progressive helps people save money by comparing rates, even if we're not the lowest. even if we're not the lowest. whoa! wow. i mean, the outfit helps, but pretty great. look at us. wow. i mean, the outfit helps, but pretty great. we know that when you're spending time with the grandkids every minute counts. and you don't have time for a cracked windshield. that's why we show you exactly when we'll be there. saving you time, so you can keep saving the world. >> kids: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪

welcome back. what we missed was something about president trump choice to replace pompeo at cia. gina haspel. it's not that she's come under fire for her role in the torchering of two al qaeda suspects when she ran a black site in thailand.

it's not that republicans and democrats senator have been lining up before and against her confirmation. what we may have missed it's the first woman ever chosen to run the cia. the quintessential boy's club. frankly it is worth noting that a president who has struggled with women voters and been accused of harassing behavior became the first president to place a woman at the top of our intelligence community at the cia and whatever one thinks of haspel, it's nice to see that glass ceiling shattered in this year that we're seeing a lot of glass ceilings shattered. we'll be right back.

now for the lid. panel is back. i have to make a correction. john kasich grew up in rocks,

pennsylvania. which is 20 miles from mck mckeesport. so tonight's special election for a district that won't exist in nine months, which is to me is so this era. what are at stakes for the party? >> it's particularly inflated when you've got a district that's on the verge of disappearing. the margin matters because it will tell you a little bit about how much trouble is republican party is going into november. one would expect a midterm under a republican president. but if you lose seats that the president himself carried by a large margin, as he did this one, that's a bad sign, so is winning it by a small margin. >> what about the past retirement seasons, it would be rough to do that to the party at this time. there's a few down the line, including wisconsin, mr.

speaker. but what are you look for? >> number one, there's a war for the narrative, and that's why both parties have paid so much attention to a house seat that ultimately doesn't matter that much. >> both cou millions and millions of dollars have been spent by the national republican party, and they're very, very jittery, not because of the seat, but because of the war over the narrative. president trump himself was in pennsylvania on saturday holding a rally. and we do tend to make too much of these special elections, but right now, republicans are very nervous. they have made a bet to rise or fall with trump. they have made a bet that their base is going to stick with trump. this is part of proving whether that bet was right or not. >> one thing about president trump, david, is that when things are going badly, he looks for someone to blame. >> i am shocked his political team allowed him to campaign in

this district, not once, but twice. i think it was an unnecessary risk to use the president's dwindling capital right now, frankly, in at a place where his presence was only guaranteeing that it would make it more important. >> yes, but the pittsburgh area is where the trump voter lives. >> or at least the perception of the donald trutrump voter lives. i think in our head we have painted a picture. >> in the election is where they in fact lived. and i think the president understandings that his arguments for the country, depends on keeping these blue collar voters, we used to think they were blue collar democrats, now they're republican. if the democrats pull those voters back, i think it is a big deal. i think it begins to go right to the heart of what trump has been arguing his presidency is all about. >> i find it's the democrats that want to localize.

>> conor lamb has tried to nationalizing it and it's backfired on him. >> if trump does want to blane republic -- blame someone for the loss, he'll blame saccon erkssaccone. he likes rallies. >> no doubt. but it seemed like an unforced error, and that's why i think he may blame someone for that, maybe his political team. >> if he wins, he'll definitely take credit for it. >> i think he deserves credit if they win. saccone was a dead man walking, so in fairness, maybe trump was the lifeline. >> he got out the air pump, but i think trump w--

up ahead, the secretary of state has been fired. the secretary of state has resigned. don't get them confused. i'm not a bigwig. or a c-anything-o. but i've got an idea sir. get domo. it'll connect us to everything that's going on in the company. get it for jean who's always cold. for the sales team, it and the warehouse crew. give us the data we need. in one place, anywhere we need it. help us do our jobs better.

with domo we can run this place together. well that's that's your job i guess. ♪ tailored recommendations, tax-efficient investing strategies, and a dedicated advisor to help you grow and protect your wealth. fidelity wealth management. to help you grow and protect your wealth. 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.

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 secretary of state is calling it quits. oklahoma secretary of state lopez that is. when i saw that breaking news

alert, i get from the "daily oklahoman." he spent a year on the job, which sounds sort of familiar. before getting the job, he worked decades in corporate america. lopez is expected to stay on until the end of the month. though some may be more enthused about it than others, i know these jobs aren't even remotely the same, except for the title, there are a few more similarities between them. you have to stand in front of microphones. and you have to stand by yourself looking kerns, plus you have to sit behind your boss, looking concerned, that's never easy. whether it's rex tillerson or dave lopez, change is inevitable. but we can take a queue from oklahoma and know it's all going to be okay. "the beat" with ari meller starts now. >> now do i know you 25 seconds

somehow, someday? >> no, just take it, you'll need it. use it. tonight rex tillerson got canned, returning the favor and firing him via tweet. but this is not all personal drama tonight. rex tillerson leaving with a russia warning today. and all eyes on this incoming secretary of state, mike pompeo, what will he do on some of these big issues that will affect all of our national security, including north korea, russia and increasing international strains or trump's tariff policy. we begin today with something that's been kicking around, and this is kind of funny, chief of staff john kelly, basically gave a warning that there was a tweet coming. we thought this meant that there was a donald trump attack, but not an i remember pending