good evening from msnbc headquarters, we are continuing our coverage against syria chemical programs by the united states and allies, including britain and france. president trump authorizing strikes targeting three sites near damascus, a research facility, storage facility and command and control facility. the stated goal, according to the pentagon, to degrade the ability to launch chemical weapons. president trump saying this earlier at the white house. >> the purpose of our actions tonight is to establish a strong

deterrent against the production, spread and use of chemical weapons. establishing this deterrent is a vital, national security interest of the united states. the combined american british and french response to these atrocities will integrate all instruments of our national power. military, economic and diplomatic. we are prepared to sustain this response until the syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents. >> it's unclear what the president meant by a sustained response. the strikes are now over. secretary of defense, james mattis, briefed reporters earlier in the evening. had this to say. >> this is a one-time shot. i believe it sent a very strong message to dissuade him, to deter him from doing this again. we used a little over double the

number of weapons this year than we used last year. it was done on targets that we believe were selective to hurt the chemical weapons program. we confined it to the chemical weapons type targets. >> in a speech, president trump called out russia and iran over their support for the syrian regime. let's cross over to keir simmons in moscow, russia for us with reaction. it is 8:00 a.m. we are getting the first initial public reactions from russia to the developments. keir, what do you have for us this morning? >> reporter: i think we have seen, in a sense, the first wave of russian reaction, in a way, what you heard from russian officials in that first wave, if you like was predictable and a predictable response they have

been preparing for some time. you had the russian foreign ministry describing it as a hit on a sovereign state that has been trying to survive under conditions of terrorist aggression. the russian ambassador to the u.s. saying russia has been threatened and warning of consequences. we are now waiting for a briefing from the ministry of defense. we expect that within the next hour. already, russian media are quoting the defense saying not a single cruise missile entered the air covered by russian air defense. now, that does appear to tally with what the u.s. is saying in its briefings on these strikes. the strikes did not take place in the area where the russian air defense is. russian ministry of defense is

beginning to say things like that. they will have been saying that partly to underline, to underscore the fact they didn't need to respond in their air defense in the way they suggested they might. you will be able to see whether they take the line this was a relatively limited strike and use it as a way to emphasize the u.s. and allies weakeners or weather they continue down the line the russians have been over the past week and that is to condemn, to say unjustified interference to question the claim by the u.s. that chemical weapons were used. it will be interesting to see how the russian government responds as the day plays out. >> keir simmons live in moscow, thank you very much for that, keir. from moscow, let's go to washington, d.c. and bring in nbc correspondent vivian, national political reporter for

msnbc news who covers the white house. great to have you with us on this very busy night. i know you served in baghdad. you have a lot of experience, unfortunately in conflict zones. let's talk about the political ramifications you heard from president trump. there has been some questioning as to whether or not the president has the authority to go and carry out these strikes without approval from congress. we are certainly going to talk about that later in the program. is this going to be a criticism or a valid criticism of the president going forward? >> it certainly not new. right when secretary of defense james mattis came out tonight, the first thing he said is the president has the authority under article 2 of the constitution, the war powers article. essentially, they are defending the president's actions saying he, as a matter of national security, he had the right and authority to proceed with this

the way he did without seeking congressional approval. a lot of democrats pushing back on that notion while they do believe that syrian president assad had to suffer, had to, you know, suffer consequences for his actions in the suspected chemical attack, they insist he check with congress first to have them approve such actions. so, this has always been a contentious issue. last year, when the president launched strikes in syria, this issue came up. certainly in the lead up to today's actions, congress was waving red flags, especially democrats that you need to check with us first on this. >> there's two parts in terms of the complexities of the battlefield unfolding in syria and how tonight's military action complicated that further. let me fbegin with something les in the battlefield and more with the rhetoric.

we really heard president trump go after the regime, not only the syrian president, but the iranian government and russian government for allying themselves with the regime of assad. what is the significance of the rhetoric coming out of the white house this evening against russia and iran? >> it's very significant with regard to russia. we have seen this building up over the course of the week, president trump taking to twitter, threatening russia saying the missiles are coming and watch out for it. that was a startling switch from the usual discussions that he has about the need for better relations with russia. even today, he said it in his speech, the statement to the nation, he said, i'm open to the idea with good relations with russia and maybe iran, but if it's not going to happen, it's not going to happen. there's history involved, especially with russia in terms of its relationship with syria.

it's important to understand this is a relationship that dates back to the days of the sovi soviet union. russia and the soviet union, big arms dealer to the syrian government and that continues today, over the course of the civil war as the syrian military weakened, there's been defections and a lack of training in arms. the russian government basically stepped in to help beef that up. the russian military and the syrian military have very strong ties. iran has very strong ties to syria's intelligence community, especially. you have those two elements really locking in their position in syria. of course, there's the ideological issue as well, where american strength in the region is something the russians and iranians feel is a threat to them. so, they really are beefing up their role in syria, as a result. >> vivian, you touched on the

second part of the question, the complexities of a civil war. syrians and others watching this hoping the united states does something to accelerate the end of the civil war. the united states was very clear today, the specific targets of the military operations have nothing, particularly to do with regime change or the acceleration of the end of the civil war, but act as a deterrent against chemical weapons. >> that's rilgt. then you get into dicey legal issues. syria is a sovereign nation. when you push for the oust of a leader of a different country, it's obviously bringing up very, very critical, legal, international legal issues. we saw that with saddam hussein. a lot of people saying the united states never had the authority to push him out of power in the way it happened, especially with regards to claims of weapons of mass destruction that never came true. people fearing that could be

repeating history and history that hasn't been kind to the united states in terms of relationships in the middle east. obviously, that's very complex. you have a separate battle going on in terms of the american battle against the islamic state group and other militant factions in the country. this weekend, we are expecting a renewed authorization for the use of military force, which would allow the president to authorize action against the islamic state group or any associated forces around the world that are product of al qaeda, the original parent group. you have this different element going on. we have 2000 american forces on the ground in syria. president trump only two weeks ago, saying he wanted to pull american forces out and suddenly, he's learning quickly that is easier said than done. that's where we stand tonight. >> depending on where you sit, you can see u.s. involvement in that syrian war getting more entrenched or that civil war is going to continue in some

capacity. vivian, thank you very much, live for us in washington, d.c. we heard conflicting information from the president and the pentagon over whether this was a sustained response or one-time shot. with me to discuss this is colonel jack jacobs live in austin, texas. great to have you with us this evening. let's delve into what, by most people's assessments who watched the developments over the last couple hours, two messages out of the white house. one, a sustained response out of president trump and you heard from the secretary of defense, this was a one-time shot. it was done. when they briefed reporters, the operation had concluded. what do you make of that discrepancy? are we reading too much into the language right now? >> perhaps. there are a couple ways to look at it. the first is, the defense department, on the one hand, and the president on the other, are

frequently at odds publicly. there's not a great deal of coordination that takes place or has taken place publicly between the white house and the defense department. i think what you are hearing from the defense department, with respect to this strike, that's it. the second way to look at it is, perhaps the notion that if the -- if assad uses chemical weapons again, they feel free to strike again. that goes without saying. the third way of looking is maybe trump is talking something strategic, then, in fact, we are not going to rely just on the military power as we have for a long, long time. we are going to use diplomatic and economic instruments as well. our ability to influence what is going on in syria has long sinls passed. assad has won that civil war and

the use of chemical weapons doesn't make any sense. the likelihood is he's not going to use them again in any case. >> stick around for me. i want to bring in with us ambassador michael mcfall, former ambassador to russia and now an msnbc international affairs analyst. it's great to have you with us this evening as well. i want to pick up on a point keir simmons was talking about. that was russia's response to this, from one perspective, at least, it looks like the russians may be breathing a sigh of relief, the operation was not as expansive and did not target joint facilities between the russians and syrians according to the assessments out of syria. give us the mind set of how russia may be viewing the operations this evening. >> well, i think you summed it up rather nicely. i think 48 hours ago, after a tweet by the president

threatening vladimir putin personally, there was a fear, if you listen to what officials were saying in moscow and their media, this was going to be a major sustained campaign and even what the president said in his address tonight, you might have thought that. the actual military operation was finite. number two, they coordinated through the channel of communication that they have in syria to make sure there were no russian aircraft in the air when the attack was done. i think, it appears to me, they went way out of their way, the trump administration and the pentagon to make sure no russian soldiers or russian facilities were hit in this attack. i just would note, i want to remind people when we talk about the legality of the attack, we

have been fighting in syria for many, many years now. there are 2,000 soldiers in syria. we have been trying very, you know, with a lot of precision to avoid our military being in conflict with the russian military. >> ambassador, let me pick up on that point, is there a valid question to be asked whether or not the authorization of the use of forth granted to the president by congress following 9/11 to go after terrorism in this broad, abstract way, used to justify the united states in syria, going after groups like isis and offshoots. that wouldn't necessarily be applicable to what the administration said was very defined targeting of a chemical weapons program. >> i agree. there's lots of issues there. i just want to keep underscoring, when i hear people talk about the illegality of the

force in syria, we have been using a lot of force with syria, including when i was in government. the obama administration wanted authorization and congress did not want to engage in that debate. you are right, from a legal point of view, it seems to me invoking article 2 as secretary mattis did, to say imminent threat. i can't remember exactly the words seems stretched to me, to be honest. i want to flip to the converse. it's illegal by international law to use chemical weapons against civilians, against anyone. so, just bear in mind that international law has been violated time and time again within syria, by the assad regime and president putin, when i was still in the government signed up with president obama to agree to eliminate all chemical weapons from syria, not

just 90%. we agreed, together, to eliminate all. that obligation also has been violated. >> colonel jack jacobs, looking from the military objective, we heard general mattis who made the reference we used nearly double the fire power and the resources than used in the strike about the same time last year, following the deadly chemical attack that took place around this time last year as well. is tonight's message that general mattis, sorry, secretary of defense mattis wanted to deliver, that this is going to be a deterrent? did we use enough fire power, in your assessment to make that message clear? what, if anything, guarantees we are not going to be down this road in a couple months from now? >> there's no guarantee. he still has chemical weapons stockpiled, plenty of them, too. this is not necessarily a destruction of his capability as

a message and punishment. he can use them again. i don't think he will, but he can use them again. about the numbers of weapons, don't forget we have three times as many targets as we did last time and second, we like to have multiple warheads going into targets. we want to make sure the target gets penetrated and destroyed properly and to take up the slack in the event any of the weapons fail to get to the target, get shot down, get jammed and so on. we always use lots more weapons than we need. i think the message has been delivered clearly. >> we'll see if president assad hears that message going forward. colonel jack jacobs, stick around with us. still ahead, we are going live to tehran to get the reaction from there. you are watching msnbc's coverage of the us, british and

french strikes against syria. loved to smile; and we knew he would need braces because his teeth were coming in funny. that's when he had the bunny rabbits. we called him the bunny rabbit. now, those are the same two front teeth, there, that they are now. then dray ended up having to wear braces for 5 years because he never made it to appointments, because he was busy playing basketball. if he missed practice, he don't get to play in the game. this is the picture that was on the front page of the newspaper. all you can notice is the braces! then, once he got to michigan state, he broke the retainer! my bottom teeth, they were really crooked, and i just wasn't getting braces again. smile direct club fits into my lifestyle so well. the liner is so great. it's easy to just grab it and go and then i can change on the road. i did photoshoots with my aligners in and you can't see them. i wish smile direct club would have been around when i was paying for them. i wouldn't have to take him out of school. i wouldn't have had missed work. it's like a great feeling to have good teeth. a smile is a first impression, that's why i think having a great smile is so important. you know what's awesome? gig-speed internet.

you know what's not awesome? 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.

we are prepared to sustain this response until the syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents. >> welcome back to msnbc's continuing coverage of the strikes in syria. this is a picture of the war room tweeted by french president, emanuel macron, along with a statement of, quote, a red line has been crossed. french warplanes were part of striking assad's regime after they killed men, women and

children with the chemical weapons. one of assad's allies has been thai thai ron. >> give us a sense of what their reaction is overnight and what has the rhetoric been to the lead up of an inevitable strike? >> good morning. iran already reacted shortly after the strike. the foreign ministry here issued a statement saying this was an illegal attack on syria, a sovereign nation. it should never have happened. this is going to have broader consequences in the region after this attack. as you mentioned, iran is syria's closest ally, close adviser to the supreme leader,

was in syria a few days ago as talk was mounting and pledged allegiance to the area and iran was going to stick by syria. they have, along with russia, condemned the attack. i think the iranians will be breathing a sigh of relief that this wasn't a much broader and sustained attack, that it didn't try to overthrow assad and, especially the iranian assets were not targeted in syria. iran can take a step back. this is not something to get embroiled in with everything going on with the u.s., threats with president trump to pull out of the nuclear deal, calling them the main protagonist. they don't want the u.s. to come down like a ton of bricks. they are going to be relieved this is over for now and the iranian assets were not targeted, they very, very strongly condemn it was illegal and pledging alliance and support to the assad regime as

they have throughout the civil war. as you know, syria is a very, very important country to iran and they don't want to lose their foothold there. for now, iran, i think are relieved. we don't know what any future actions will be, especially leading up to the deal, if there's action against iran in that region to sort of get iran to react in a bad way that would make it easier to pull out of the nuclear deal. >> let me ask you, from the perspective of the iranians, we hear from the west, the united states, they have their red lines when it comes to the use of chemical weapons. iran, obviously a country that's a victim of chemical weapons in the past, how do they see these alleged chemical weapons attacks taking place in syria. how does that take place in iran, the public, the government there. do they see it from a different perspective? do they have a different set of facts?

what is the rhetoric on this issue? >> exactly. you are exactly right. iran was a victim of chemical weapons in the iran/iraq war. they have condemned it. but having said that, their line on the chemical attack in syria is similar to the one of russia. they don't believe it. they think this has been set up by the west as an excuse to hit syria and also to come down hard on iran and russia. they think this is all been manufactured by the west. so, they are not buying it. they are saying this is a western ploy to destabilize syria and the nation even more. they are saying these attacks, these targeted strikes were conducted so a proper investigation couldn't be carried out in syria. this is the evidence, this was their own doing and they wanted to mess up the ground where an alleged chemical attack was

placed. no proper research and materials could be taken from there. they are not buying the line that assad used chemical weapons and they never have in the past. this is a western ploy to bring down assad and detain anyone that supports him. >> it was set to begin. it is on the ground investigation in duma, i believe it was supposed to start in the coming days. ali, live for us thank you very much. a press conference a few hours ago, defense secretary, james mattis was asked about the legal basis for the strikes. listen to what he had to say. >> as far as the legal authority under article 2 of the constitution, the president has every reason to defend american vital interest. that's what he did tonight, under that authority. >> democratic representative, barbara lee tweeted, if president trump is considering

military action in syria, he needs to come to congress first. congress, not the white house, is responsible for debating and authorizing war. speaker ryan needs to allow us to have this debate. congresswoman, it's great to have you with us. thank you for staying up so late with us. let me begin with with your assessment of the decision to use force tonight. the defense secretary made the case this was in the self-defense interest of the united states. you don't see it that way, i take it from your tweet earlier in the week. >> he does not make the case and does not justify what the national security interests are. you can create a national security interest anywhere in the world to justify the use of force. when the constitution requires the president to come to congress for an authorization to use force and i have been fighting for this and now we

have bipartisan support urging the president to come to congress as it relates to syria in general. that is a civil war that we are in among other civil wars with the president does not have the authority to use force. it's very dangerous what happened. we need to debate the costs and consequences of military strikes and also the broader wars going on in the region so the public can understand what the dangers are, what the costs are, our brave men and woman deserve to know congress has their back, that they are going to be protected and congress has to exercise our responsibility. we have been missing in action and this is a very, i think, well i would say in many

respects, most legal scholars indicated this is an illegal action and the president needs to come to congress. >> congresswoman, you made the point there is bipartisan support for the point you raise. i wanted to read a tweet put out by a republican congressman from michigan, justin amash saying the strikes against syria are unconstitutional, illegal and reckless. the next speaker of the house must claim congressional war powers. speaker ryan has completely advocated one of his most important responsibilities. you talk about bipartisanship on this issue. is there anything that can be done between now and the midterms to try to reclaim what you and congressman amash see as the war powers? >> i serve on the appropriations committee and, of course, we have the power of the

pursestrings. last year, during the appropriations committee process, as we were writing the defense appropriations bill, i offered an amendment to repeal the 2001 resolution and authorization that i voted against and two, give congress eight months to come up with a new one while the current one was in place. we had bipartisan support to repeal that and to move forward to try to have a debate and vote on a new one. do you know what happened? that was a 326 page bill. between the time of the appropriations committee and as it moved through the process, that one section was taken out. speaker ryan did this arbitrarily. i suspect it was at the orders of the trump white house. we are going to continue to fight the bill, bipartisan support and at least use the power of our appropriations to

begin to say no to these unauthorized war until congress is fully engaged in doing our work. >> of course, all that happens over the course of several months ahead of the midterm elections. congresswoman barbara lee, thank you for staying up late. a quick break from our coverage of the strikes in syria continues after this. so you're looking for male customers, ages 25-54,

who live within five miles of your business? like these two... and that guy. or maybe you want to reach women, ages 18 to 34, who are interested in fitness... namaste. whichever audience you're looking for, we'll find them we're the finders. we work here at comcast spotlight, and we have the best tools for getting your advertising message out there. anywhere, any way your audience watches. consider them found.

welcome back to msnbc's continuing coverage of the strikes in syria. for more reaction from congress on all of this, i'm joined by congressman john, a democrat from california and serves on the house armed services committee. thank you for staying up late and joining us this evening. let me begin with your perspective on what happened tonight. does the president have the legal authority to carry out the strikes he ordered? >> absolutely not. this is one more example of a president who doesn't give a hoot about the laws of the united states or the constitution. i picked up the constitution on the way in, listening to everybody. congress, only congress, article i section 8 only declares war. article ii second 2, he is the commander. that is all it says.

it doesn't say the power of the president to wage war. it restricts the president's power to wage war. what we have to do is regain the power of congress. we cannot allow this man, this president to run all around this world just sending off missiles when ever he thinks there's a problem out there. indeed, there is a problem, it's a very, very serious problem in syria. assad is a butcher. he is doing terrible things to his people. launching missiles can't going to solve that problem. we need a coherent, strong, strategy, a smart strategy through time to deal with syria. we certainly have never seen that out of this administration. >> congressman, i have to push back and say when president obama went to congress to get the authorization for the use of force, he didn't get that from congress and when that red line was -- >> that's correct. >> -- when that red line was broken, there were elements of self-defense the united states has to engage in when chemical

weapons are used. >> those weapons were not used against the united states. they are not used near the united states soldiers. it's quite a different situation. in fact, chlorine has been used there nine times over the last several months. >> right. >> the fact of the matter is, in 2013, we did challenge president obama on his authority to strike on that red line. so, what happened was a diplomatic program put together with a multiple countries, including russia and the chemical weapons and all the precursors were removed from syria. that was under the authority of the united nations. in subsequent years, syria rebuilt its chemical warfare operations. here we are. so, where do we go from here? there is no strategy, other than to launch a bunch of missiles. that may have short term effect

but it isn't going to deal with this terrible war, the civil war is seven years old. we are looking at a situation where you have iran, turkey, the united states, russia, syria, israel and other countries, basically the gulf states all involved in this thing. what are the consequences going to be here? have they been thought out? it appears not. we had 30 hours ago secretary mattis and general dunford. he said he would come back to us with a full explanation of both the strategy and would also consult with congress before anything was done. perhaps he did consult with the big four, the four legislative leaders, we don't know that, yet. what we do know is the words used to justify this, simply are not there. >> of course, we remember the infamous tweet from president trump saying the president back

then, president obama must get congressional approval before attacking syria. big mistake if he does not. the president is now doing exactly the opposite. congressman, thank you very much for joining us this evening. >> thank you. let's turn to nbc's news global editor, cal perry. good to have you with us on set. let's go to syria, a country ravaged by war, once again, feeling the blunt of u.s. military strikes, a little more significant than last year. how is this playing out in syria? >> a great victory for al assad. no doubt, well planned and put together by the government. you know this as well as anybody, the way arab thortarian governments spin things in their favor. it's nod hard to do on this one because we played a three-day bad game of hide and seek.

the president said he was going to hit syria. we know they had the equipment moved out of the areas, those hangars. the chemical weapons sites were probably wound down 72 hours ago. now he's saying on state run television he thwarted. >> sometimes surviving is a victory. >> he's calling it the three-headed monster carrying out the attacks. they said they shot down almost all the missiles. >> what we saw, does that change anything on the ground from the fighting sides? >> only reinstates assad's power. he won this war, but he's done so with the backing of russia. it's been a horrendous, bloody seven years paid for by syrians, half a million dead, 11 million displaced. this is not going to change

anything. there was a message sent but i'm not sure if it was sent to syria or domestic consumption here politically. >> there's certainly a lot of questions whether the president had the legal authority to do that. we heard from moscow and ali saying both countries are breathing a sigh of relief. on the spectrum of how severe the united states could have carried out attacks where was this on the spectrum? >> minimal, 1 out of 10. if we hit a barracks full of iranian soldiers or russian soldiers, that would have escalated things. it's a fine line. if you want to degrade the government, they are russia. >> change the dynamic of the war. >> it is russia. it's greatly going to escalate it. if you send a message like this, you run the risk of what we are seeing now, a day of celebrations across syria,

putting down of the rebel group that is are trying to cling on. let's be very clear about this, chemical attacks are a horrible, vicious thing. every single day, assad, with the russian backing are rolling these out on top of civilians. that's not going to change. >> there were chemical weapons attacks that did not draw a response. great for your insight on that. the president launched these attacks. we are going to have more on that when our coverage continues right after this quick break. stay with us.

dray, when he was younger, he loved to smile; and we knew he would need braces because his teeth were coming in funny. this is the picture that was on the front page of the newspaper. all you can notice is the braces! then, once he got to michigan state, he broke the retainer! my bottom teeth, they were really crooked, and i just wasn't getting braces again. then i discovered smiledirectclub. it's easy to just grab it and go and i can change it on the road. i did photoshoots with my aligners in and you can't see them. a smile is a first impression, that's why i think having a great smile is so important. welcome back, everyone. the strikes in syria were launched in time for i menace political angst for the president. i'm joined on the phone by an msnbc analyst and someone very familiar with the very big news of the day, the other news of the week, if you will. revelations of president trump's

personal attorney, michael cohen. david, thank you for joining us on the phone this late in the evening. let's begin with the developments involving michael cohen and the developments of his attorney. what can you tell us about the significance of that? >> caller: michael cohen is at the epicenter of overlapping trump scandals. there's the issue with stormy daniels, the raid on his offices in his home seem to be related to also, other payments. he was connected to a $1.6 million payment that a top republican fund-raiser made to a girlfriend who had an abortion. there was a report tonight, still unconfirmed by other media that he made a trip to prague during the campaign, a trip that is discussed in the steele

dossier. a trip he denied making. so, you know, he is you know, trump's fixer and trump's biggest vulnerability at the moment. >> let me hone in on the report saying sources, again, according to the reporting, bob mueller, the special counsel has evidence cohen was in prague in 2016, that confirms the dossier. i know you worked a lot on the dossier. what would be the significance of cohen being in prague in 2016 for the steele dossier? >> caller: well, michael cohen went to prague to meet with russian representatives, secretly and late august or early september in 2016 in the middle of the campaign to discuss the relationship between the russian government and the trump campaign.

now, you know, to be fair, michael cohen told me and told everybody else he hasn't been to prague and that he never and wasn't part of this, you know, this trip, and wasn't part of this engagement with the russians. so, you know, mueller obviously would be looking at something like that. if the report is at all accurate and mueller has this information, it is tremendously significant, the issue of collusion and michael cohen's credibility. now, it is a reputable news service, but nobody else confirmed this, yet. we need to wait to see if there are other news organizations that can match this story. but, this would just blow open the trump-russia investigation, if true. >> it will be interesting to see if other news organizations in

the coming days do, in fact, pick that up. thank you for joining us this evening. we should note, going back to the syria crisis, in the previous hour of msnbc's live coverage of themsnbc's live covf the strikes in syria earlier tonight. we showed you what we believe to be social media video of the air strikes against syria. however, we have now learned that these images were not of tonight's joint military operations. we apologize for this error. a quick break for us. more of our continuing coverage after this.

welcome back to msnbc's continuing strikes in syria. overshadowing is the president's

turmoil. former cia director, john brennan weighed in on whether the president's troubles at home may have impacted the decision of when and how to strike syria. here its what he said a short time ago. >> i think the way that the strikes were carried out, was, was, i think consistent end with what the united states has tried to do in the past when dealing with difficult situations? one is that we didn't do it unilaterally. we did it with our closest allies. secondly, we were surgical in terms of the strikes. going after the fabrication, storage, as well as delivery mechanisms and airfield. so i think the way that was done. consistent with the way that the u.s. military tries to do in the situations. as far as whether or not things came too play. hope they didn't. i've certainly don't know. there is good reason to try to deter, bashar al assad from carrying out chemical attacks. the types of strikes taken were appropriate. there are questions about the president's constitutional

authority. sure he used his article 2 authorities which allows him to take action to prevent arm to u.s. national security. this is different than the strikes we have been taking inside of syria against terrorist elements. isis, al qaeda. a different strike against syrian targets. >> direct or brennan, rod rosenstein, acting on all russia, he told intimates he is mentally prepared at least to be fired. something that has been long rumored. if that happens, if it happens tonight. sunday night. next week, what stage do you think we will have reached? what, what will that mean for the country and this investigation? what level of warning would you recommend? >> well, i am worried about, the possibility that, rod rosenstein may be fired. i think that mr. trump can come up with some pretext for the

firing. which would be a prelude to trying to undermine the ongoing special counsel investigation. i think that, if rod roseenstein was fired, members of congress should go to, basically battle stations. because, this, i think is going to send a clear signal. mr. trump will do whatever it takes to undermine the investigation and prevent it from coming to its conclusion. >> i am in new york. msnbc coverage of the strikes in syria will continue after this break. stay with us. you know what's awesome? gig-speed internet.

you know what's not awesome? 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.

breaking news obvious syria. u.s. forces firing missiles in response to a suspected chemical attack on the syrian people. good to be with you this morning. i'm francis rivera. >> we're here in new york. it's 6:00 a.m. in the east. 3:00 out west. and here is the latest. explosions rang out over parts of syria last night around 9:00 p.m. eastern time. that was 4:00 in the morning in syria. moments after president trump announced he officially ordered strikes to punish the syrian regime for last