markets will hit correction territory soon. you can always find me on social media. thank you for watching. "deadline white house" with nicolle wallace starts right now. >> hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. in the same way that katie couric's interview with sarah palin revealed her staggering deficiencies as a vice presidential candidate and the yawning gaps in her knowledge about world events and policy, chris wallace's sunday interview with donald j. trump reveals that nothing is sake red. not a national holiday which america pays tribute to the men and women of the military who give their lives to protect our freedom and security. not the man who serves as the president's chief of staff or the woman who enacts his hard-line immigration policies. nothing and no one is spared from donald trump's obsession

with himself. >> bill mccraven, retired admiral, navy s.e.a.l. -- >> hillary clinton fan. >> who led the operations, command of the operations that took down saddam hussein and that killed osama bin laden. says that your sentiment is the greatest threat to democracy in -- >> he's a hillary clinton backer and an obama backer. and, frankly -- >> he was a navy s.e.a.l. -- >> would be nice if we got osama bin laden a lot sooner than that. think of this. living in pakistan, beautifully in pakistan in what i guess they considered a nice mansion. i've seen nicer. >> and about general bill mcraven. about his nearly four decades of service to the united states. he went from rotc to platoon commander with the navy s.e.a.l.s. he was overseeing four s.e.a.l. teams, and joined the fight in

iraq after 9/11. he was in charge of the risky and successful raid on osama bin laden's compound. in april after trump made the unprecedented decision to resoak john brennan's security clearance, mcraven stepped up and the former cia director's defense writsing in "the washington post," a good leader tries to embody the best qualities of his or her organization. a good leader sets the example for others to follow. a good leader always puts the welfare of others before himself or herself. your leadership, however, has shown little of these qualities. through your actions, you have embarrassed us in the eyes of our children. humiliated us on the world stage. and worst of all, divided us as a nation. if you think for a moment that your mccarthy-era tactics will suppress the voices of criticism, you are sadly mistaken. the criticism will continue until you become the leader we prayed you would be. now months later, here's mcraven's response to trump's

broad side attack on sunday. i did not back hillary clinton or anyone else. i'm a fan of president obama and president george w. bush, both of whom i worked for. i admire all presidents, regardless of their political party who uphold the dignity of the office and who use that office to bring the nation together in challenging times. joining us at the table, retired u.s. army colonel jack jacobs, and msnbc military analyst. betsy woodruff, zerlina maxwell, director of progressive programming at sirius xm, rick stengel and joining us from florida, former congressman david jolly. let me start with you, colonel jack. what to make of the president's inability to see himself as the leader of the country. >> well, he's wrapped up in himself, obviously, and can't see any distance past that. and so everything gets defined

in terms of him. the problem with that is that what we see here, castigating somebody who is a patriot and not only is a patriot but has spent his entire career raising another generation of patriots. we can't forget about the fact that when -- as you move up the chain of command you're responsible for everything that happens and fails to happen, including the professional development of everybody working for you. so after a period of, what, nearly four decades, think about how many sailors admiral mcraven has trained directly and indirectly and how much his reach will go into the future. i think castigating somebody like that demonstrates a lack of knowledge about how the world actually works and may be more than just self-centeredness. it's a lack of interesting of how things actually happen in the world. >> how offensive does the

conduct of the commander in chief have to be for a member of the military to criticize him? >> well, if you are in the military, if you are in uniform, you're not allowed to criticize anybody in the chain of command. it's punishable under article 134 and so on. there's an argument that says once you get out and you're retired, you are getting paid not to come to work so you're still subject to the uniform code of military justice. but if it's really egregious, as we see here, then you have people who are retired who feel no compunction about speaking out. if you're in uniform, you keep your mouth shut which is one reason a lot of people i know in service, even when i was in service, didn't vote because they didn't want to feel internally or externally beholden to whoever was occupying the office because it's the office at the end of the day that's important, not the man. >> let me talk to you about the critique of admiral mcraven.

it's worth debunking that so even trump's 35% to 40% don't have the wrong impression of this american hero. he is not a hillary clinton supporter and for him to come out and set the record straight about that and say i was a fan of president obama and president george w. bush, that seems to me as you sort of hit upon, there is no one that sort of -- the president is also the commander in chief. he is atop the chain of command. talk about how h.r. mcmaster and jim mattis and the people you know well, how they have to sort of salute the commander in chief no matter who he is and no matter what he orders. i imagine mattis is someone in that category that he can't criticize this president but found himself standing along the southern border last week. can you guess how he might have felt about that? >> probably nauseated i think is probably the word. you know, you have to do what einstein called a thought experiment and ask yourself the question, why would any of these

people work for this administration? and if you get them up against the wall and ask them that and you're inside the cone of silence, they'd probably say that they do it because nobody else can or nobody else would. it's the old observation of the first hebrew scholar who said, if not you, who? and if not now, when? it puts them in a difficult situation. it means because they are dedicated to the country, they can't leave. and they're not going to leave until they're fired because if they do leave, who is going to do it? who is going to be the person who is going to do what they do to try their best to keep the republic safe if they leave it's liable to be anybody who takes over. and so when we ask rhetorically, why do these guys stay? they stay because if not them, who? >> they say and you aredavid jo they're afraid of what their

departure would mean. if you look at the installation of matt whitaker at the justice department, a matt whitaker-like figure atop of any other agency means someone who is as donald trump articulated in an interview about a year with "the new york times," his roy cohn, his fixers atop the agencies that affect so many lives. if you could just weigh in on donald trump's sort of audacity of the attack, the audacity of going after robert mueller. the audacity of going after admiral mcraven. these are the best among us and donald trump isn't. >> men like mattis and others stay out of honor. and this ultimately, i think, is the greatest frustration for donald trump. it's this. the nation chooses to bestow honor on certain individuals. one cannot claim honor for themselves. as a nation we bestowed honor on admiral mcraven, on rob o'neil and his fellow s.e.a.l. team six members. on the khan family on their son who gave his life in service to our country.

on men like john mccain for their heroism. and donald trump, this is a man without honor who desperately wants it. a man with no kindness, no empathy, no understanding. and, nicolle, even his supporters acknowledge that. even his supporters who say, yes, but we get tax cuts and, yes, but we get obamacare repealed. they'll admit and tell you they look the other way at this president's dishonorable conduct. and that ultimately when we hear these outrageous comments from the president always comes back to his supporters who refuse to speak up or worse, the national republican party today who doubled down on hitting admiral mcraven n gand getting the president's back. we have come to expect it. but we should not expect it nor accept it from his supporters and from republicans at large. that is probably the most heartbreaking moment of all this is that as a nation, we truly have a political party that gets the president's back in moments of dishonor like we're seeing from him today. >> let me put up the tweet david

jolly referenced. this is the rnc backing up the president and his attack on admiral mcraven. the rnc writing worth noting after recent comments. retired admiral william mcraven was reportedly on hillary clinton's short list for vit presidents in 2016. he's hardly a nonpolitical figure. i guess the problem is that -- and, therefore, he's fair game for the president's smears? >> i think to david's point, this is where it becomes really important. as citizens of this country, donald trump is who he is. he's not going to change. we've seen that. but what do we do now, and the republican party because we have two political parties right now nationally, they have a responsibility to do the right thing in this moment. doubling down and attacking somebody who has been an american hero is, like, full stop unacceptable. and they shouldn't be respected as a political party until they apologize for that and rectify

the situation. i mean, i think in moments when donald trump is attacking members of the military, are the days where i cannot process that. because his rhetoric around race and gender, that is really disqualifying in another way. but he's the commander in chief of all citizens and of the military. and he needs to respect that and the republican party cannot claim to be the party of patriotism and the party that supports the troops if they are going to back him up when he defames people who have served our country for decades. >> let me show more of who the republican party today came out and attacked and who donald trump attacked. this is admiral mcraven. >> if you make your bed every morning, you will have accomplished the first task of the day. it will give you a small sense of pride and it will encourage you to do another task and another and another and by the end of the day that one task completed will have turned into many tasks completed. making your bed wils also reenforce the fact that the little things in life matter.

if you can't do the little things right, you'll never be able to do the big things right. and if by chance you have a miserable day, you will come home to a bed that is made. that you made. and a made bed gives you encouragement that tomorrow will be better. >> i'm going to bet what i always bet, a dozen doughnuts that donald trump doesn't make his bed. >> well, my kids don't make their bed either, even though -- >> i always make my bed. for that very reason. if nothing else works out, at least -- >> you can control that. >> that's what i'll tell them. i want to make one point about what general mcraven did that i found so inspiring. when he made the statement about donald trump's threat to the press and to free speech was the greatest threat to a democracy, what that crystallized for people is what american soldiers like jack fight for. they don't fight for boundaries. they don't fight for borders. they fight for freedom of speech. colin powell said all we ever ask for is the land to bury our

dead. soldiers fight for the right that gives people to speak. they fight for the flag and for the right of people to burn that flag. that's what american soldiers fight for and donald trump has no conception of that. he has no understanding of that. everything for him the military is transactional. it's not about protecting values. ultimately, the military in our country is about protecting our values, which trump is undermining. >> you know, benjamin franklin said just before the revolution, something donald trump doesn't understand. we must hang together or we will surely hang separately. it's worth remembering. and it's something that -- >> and remember the framers made civilian leadership of the military which is the 50 tifirse in human history that ever was. i'm beginning to think it was a bad idea now with our president. >> incredible reporting about sort of in the room with donald trump and the military and they write, rhetorically mr. trump is embracing the united states 1.3 million active duty troops as my

military. my generals. and posted on twitter that under his leadership the american armed forces will be the finest our country has ever thad. but top defense officials say mr. trump has not fully grasped the role of the troops he commands. nor the responsibility he has to lead them and protect them from politics. they continue, short lie after becoming commander in chief, president trump asked so few questions in a briefing at macdill air force base in tampa that top military commanders cut the number of prepared power point slides to three. they had initially planned for 18. said two officials with knowledge of the visit. the commanders slotted two hours for the meeting. but it lasted less than one. it's important to remember the nature of the criticism. mcraven levels that trump found so troubling. and that is mcraven went after trump specifically for his attacks on the press. mcraven is not the only public facing, visible former member of the military who has raised this specific criticism recently. david le pen who was a colonel and served with general kelly

mean was the spokesperson for the department . the president uses the term enemy of the people to reforethe press corps. that's one of the first big examples of a former trump administration official signing on the to the criticism that mcraven has made here. as "the new york times" reporting indicates, this particular type of criticism, this particular attack of the president, has been making on reporters, and on the media industry is often in some ways particularly resonant with the armed forces because everyone who serves in the united states military takes an oath to defend the constitution. and that includes explicitly the right of the freedom of the press. >> let me give you the last word here. we know from reporting, from our free press that the president, the pdb has pictures. he doesn't like to be briefed and you can't say the r word for russia. we know a briefing from the pentagon that was to be two

hours lasted less than one. 18 slides, which is still a pretty short briefing from the military was cut down to three. how does the military actually feel, because i think they'll be the last organization or entity to lead and they're more voiceless than the intelligence commune community. there are not a lot of people. how do they really feel when they can't brief the commander in chief with more than three, i'm guessing, picture slides about operations on which lives depend. life and death decisions get made by the commander in chief about the military. >> the way to do it, the easiest thing to do is to work around him. at the end of the day, you do things with the -- do the things you have to, whether you have approval for them or not. and that sort of stuff has already happened. many, many times. it's interesting. the irony is that if you are in an environment in which somebody

considers themselves to be the guy who makes all the decisions and then ironically, the decisions wind up getting made at a lower level which is not a bad thing necessarily but it does mean that the president doesn't know what's going on and that's very dangerous indeed because it's only one instrument. it's going to be integrated into the diplomatic instrument, the economic instrument and as a result, our foreign policy then becomes fragmented because it's -- you've got nobody who is going to integrate them. so decision-making happens elsewhere and it's very dangerous when decision-making happens elsewhere, except in this case. >> so you're a diplomat, too. very, very -- >> and i am not running for anything. >> colonel jack, thank you for spending some time with us. when we come back, what a difference a mueller basher makes. donald trump draws a line in the sand around that sit-down interview with robert mueller saying he'll not answer questions from the special

counsel after more than a year of insisting he was eager to do so. then a typo on twitter is just a typo on twitter unless it's about the man in charge of the house intel committee. a man with subpoena power. and the residents of pair die california, some of the most horrific devastation. they were greeted by a president with thoughts n praye s and pra the people of pleasure, california. maybe his mind was in finland. we'll explain that next. it was here.

i couldn't catch my breath. it was the last song of the night. it felt like my heart was skipping beats. they said i had afib. what's afib? i knew that meant i was at a greater risk of stroke. i needed answers. my doctor and i chose xarelto® to help keep me protected from a stroke. once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. warfarin interferes with at least 6 of your body's natural blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor. for afib patients well managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® compares in reducing the risk of stroke. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of stroke.

while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. learn all you can to help protect yourself from a stroke. talk to your doctor about xarelto®.

to help protect yourself from a stroke. this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today.

justice department. a loyalist. someone who sees the mueller investigation into russian medsling and possible obstruction of justice exactly as he does. >> if whitaker decides in any way to limit or curtail the mueller investigation, are you okay with that? >> look, it's going to be up to him. i think he's very well aware politically. i think he's astute politically. he's a very smart person. a very respected person. he's going to do what's right. i really believe he's going to do what's right. >> but you won't overrule him if he decides to curtail -- >> i would not get involved. >> we have heard that before. but the installation of whitaker as acting ag, a move approved by the president's lawyer on the russia probe has also ushered in a brand-new posture from the president. donald trump telling chris wallace that he will not sit down for an interview because, quote, he's wasted enough time on this witch hunt. trump also telling wallace he will submit those written answers he completed last week

very soon. the president's views on the interview hardening as democrats turn up the heat on their efforts to protect the mueller probe from whitaker. a group of them announcing today they're suing to block whitaker from serving as attorney general. joining us, frank figliuzzi, a former fbi assistant director for counterintelligence and matt miller, former chief spokesman for the justice department. david jolly and the gang are still here at the table. matt miller, we've had this conversation. i had 6.4 minutes of optimism that maybe whitaker would be convinced if the decision came to him to approve a opinion. he might be inclined to do so. new reporting in "the new york times" suggests that sources close to him say that would not be the case. is that where this is heading? the president won't sit for an interview. some semblance of written answers cobbled together between the president and his lawyers. where is this going next? >> you know, i think that's been the president's plan all along. i said this last week. i don't think it's a coincidence the president stalled on

answering these questions n oan once he gets a new ag, lo and behold, he'll suddenly give these answers to the questions and won't answer the questions about obstruction of justice and i gather probably won't answer other things as well. one of the other things the president said over the weekend, you know, about whitaker is he didn't know his views on the case before appointing him. we just know that's not true from reporting. we know the only reason he was at the justice department in the first place is the president saw him speaking out on television against the mueller probe. had him interview with a job with the white house. he didn't get that but they pushed him over to the department of justice to be the white house's eyes and ears. and he sat in the oval office and nodded along gleefully when the president would attack the mueller probe for over a yoor up until the time he got the acting ag job. the fix has been in for a while. doesn't mean he'll reach in and end the mueller probe but it does mean if the special counsel wanted to get a subpoena to force more answers from the

president, he's probably not going to get it from his boss? >> the only qualification that trump always evaluates is someone's public persona. their appearances on television and their policy positions on the mueller probe. they are the only things i bet he knows about everybody, even people that have nothing to do with the mueller probe. >> i think we're seeing a strategy play out here. and it's important to key in on this refusal to answer questions on obstruction and how it fits with the whitaker appointment. so what i am predicting is a line clearly drawn that actions after trump became president are off limits. they're going to challenge those as executive decisions, protected by privilege and well within the realm of the presidency. and they feel confident, i believe, that whitaker is going to back them on that so if mueller presents a report filled with allegations post inauguration, that they feel confident that whitaker is going to say, that's off limits.

i'm not supporting that. i think that's what we're seeing here is that trump is emboldened. public refusal to answer these questions. and kind of a strategic mistake that many lawyers would say is because the obstruction questions are softball questions. mr. president, did you intend to obstruct when you did this, that, fire comey, write a false memo about trump tower. he says, no, that wasn't my mind-set. that's the end of the instruction questions and mueller is left to circumstances -- circumstantial evidence from others. why are -- is he refusing to answer the obstruction questions? he feels confident he's going to appeal, argue that post inauguration conduct is protected. >> let me stay with you, frank. chris christie, presidential ally, confidante and candidate for attorney general said on television that whitaker is there to land the mueller probe. he was installed by don mcgahn, the former white house counsel, after sessions recused. my understanding is to spy on him. he was his appointment as acting

ag was emmitt flood, the person in the white house counsel's office in charge of the russia probe, signed off on that appointment. will those two men have to answer questions about whether they intended to obstruct the investigation with those two decisions to install whitaker in the first place and then to approve the appointment as acting ag? >> and this is where this whitaker appointment could really backfire. and if you are whitaker, and by the way, i have no sympathy for an unqualified individual who pretends to be qualified. but if you're whitaker, you're trapped in a corner. if you take overt steps to quash the investigation, to limit it, to limit the budget, you'll find yourself testifying before the special counsel team. he's already, i think, being looked at for whether he plays a role in obstruction. and those who appointed him and those who convinced the president to appoint him. this is all fair game. if mueller can investigate why comey was fired and whether

that's obstruction he can look at why sessions was let go and the whole move to replace him with whitaker is fair game. >> matt, one more for you, but we have -- we have obstruction fatigue. there's been so much misconduct that we know about. all the president's conduct that we know to be under scrutiny for the obstruction of justice. badgering sessions to unrecuse. querying white house aides when they came back from their interviews. tweeting his attacks on sessions and others. his desire fire mueller. all these flash points are public facing. do you think there are more people under scrutiny and lawyered up and potentially concerned about their legal exposure than we talk about? >> i would think so. as you point out, there have been so many acts that construct the known universe of potential obstruction, evidence of obstruction of justice. all the president's interactions with the department of justice. times he's asked people on his staff and people in the

intelligence community to irn intervene at the department of justice. all of those are potential crimes. people who have gone in to interview with the special counsel and largely cooperated, as we know from reports that have leaked out, usually from their attorneys. you have to wonder when they go in, if they aren't truthful, and if evidence emerges that they helped the president do something to interfere with the investigation in any way. if they tried to help him remove the attorney general for interrupt reasons, not for valid reasons. and that does, of course, expose them. now that i'll say, all the evidence we've seen so far tends to point just to the president's direction. we've seen evidence that don mcgahn at times when the president was trying to interfere with the investigation pushed back and refused to do things. that doesn't mean there are other people in the white house who are very close to the president who are involved in some of his schemes. and help them execute them in a way that would cross the 39 lino

illegality. >> the list of people receiving subpoenas from the house intel committee, and other committees looking into a wider universe than just the president. >> right. exactly. we don't know for sure whether or not mueller is going to revisit the firing of sessions as potentially part of a probe. we do know for sure that that was judiciary committee is going to do so. they've been extremely clear about the fact they are chomping at the gobit to bring matt whitaker in front of that committee. and if there's a single shred of written communication from within the justice department that casts light on the nature of the decision-making process that led to sessions being pushed out and whitaker being installed, you can bet all you got that that communication is going to go to congress and that we'll know about it. >> and we'll all learn the word executive privilege. >> but what i also wonder and probably more knowledgeable people than me. there's a constitutional issue

here. he's not a senate-confirmed nominee as the head of the justice department. any decision he makes as an acting attorney general without being senate confirmed comes into question. if you had a senate and a house that, and you will have a house that wants to be engaged on this, you'll have hearings on this, whether it's constitutional, whether it's legal. you'll have people in the justice department who may say, i -- why should i follow the order of someone who is not senate confirmed as the head of my agency? >> and the question of the constitutionality of whitaker's installation will be litigated. as you noted, democratic senators have sued to push for a -- there's all sorts of interesting legal action going on. and it is something debated whether the president had the constitutional authority to put whitaker in that spot. but the legal fights here are going to be really interesting. >> i'm sure there are a lot of men and women at the justice department who never thought they'd grow up and defend matt whitaker's appointment. >> they were like post midterm elections we're going to fire jeff session. that's why the letter didn't

have a date on it and it was ready to go as soon as the elections happened. as citizens, what do we do now? we voted in the midterm elections which it's so crazy that was just a week ago and we're not talking about it. but people in this country responded to the behavior of donald trump. they responded to the obstruction of donald trump and the corruption and said we do not want that. we want a governing body or part of congress to oversee this behavior. so i think that he is in a new day if he thought the plan they hatched to put whitaker in there, the mole basically, to put whitaker in there to rein in the investigations. interesting that when chris wallace asked the same question abby philip asked, he did not call him stupid but i think that their plan is not going to work because the end of the day, the president is not above the law. in this country, that still has to be true and i think as citizens we need to make it clear to our elected officials and call them and make sure they're holding his feet to the fire for these actions because he cannot continue to obstruct

in plain sight. >> no one is going anywhere. oh, they are. matt miller and frank figliuzzi are leaving us. you're always welcome to stay for the whole hour. after the break if you have any doubt the president's tweets is a maturity of an 8-year-old boy, we'll show you his weekend nickname for adam schiff. here's a hint. it rhymes with unfit. to stop tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. aleve. all day strong.

he was chosen for the purpose of interfering with the mueller investigation. he auditioned for the part by going on tv and saying he could hobble the investigation. i think the appointment is unconstitutional. he is clearly a principal officer and the fact that he is a temporary principal officer doesn't mean that that is any less subject to senate confirmation. >> that was congressman adam schiff on trump's acting attorney general matt whitaker whose comments apparently got under trump's skin. here was the president's official spent. so funny to see little adam schitt. you see how trump misstpelled hs

name there. not mentioning the fact that bob mueller who is highly conflicted was not approved by the september. schiff responded, wow, mr. president, that's a good one. was that like your answers to mr. mueller's questions or did you write this one yourself? you know, we should stop talking about the bottom because we're just tumbling and falling and it's like scuba diving. we've all got the bends. but what of just the childishness? this doesn't portend well for the lawyers who are going to be deal with the very serious matter of responding to subpoenas from democratic-controlled investigative committees. >> yeah, if donald trump was the teacher in your fourth grader's classroom you'd remove your student from the classroom. that's the type of behavior we continue to see from this president. but while we're seeing him lash out, it's because congressman schiff is correct. matt whitaker was put in place solely to do one job and that's to bring the mueller probe to a

close and frankly then accept all the responsibility for it. you heard donald trump say that in his interview with chris wallace. he'll accept whatever matt whitaker decides to do. and so you see the president continuing to lash out because he knows he's in a corner. frankly, i don't think he should submit any answers to questions because i think mueller has too much in a volume of evidence that he can't see what that is. so we see the president engage in this behavior. the one thing about tweets like that, and comments like that from the president is though we have come to expect them, we can't accept it as normal. and i know that's a daily fight for many people across the country. we know the president is going to engage in this behavior. but the moment we finally resign ourselves to accepting that as normal behavior, we've lost a cause much greater than politics. >> that's the precisely the right explanation for why when there's a departure from a norm that is so stunning, that leaves you gob smacked if you ever came near politics or government or

campaigns or congress before. that you just hit pause and you don't let him -- let it pass. people that study this slide to dictatorship, it's letting these things erode. >> although the question is, how do you protest? the irony of this tweet comes in the same week where the white house was trying to make jim acosta not allowed to have his press pass because he violated decor decorum. donald trump is the chief violator of decorum in chief in american history. >> in the world. in the world. there are dictators -- >> it will reap the whirlwind of this for generations. children are seeing this. we have to protest about it but they go, the president of the united states tweets like this, i mean, what are you going to do? >> you cover this white house. the truth is there are people in there that feel ashamed of this conduct. and those are the -- there's someone i read about today with

a seven-figure book deal who sold a book called, i think, "den of vipers." there are people who will come out and talk because i know this from the palin experience. whatever is outward facing, reality is a million times worse. >> that said, i wouldn't expect "den of vipers" to knock the president too hard. presenting himself as someone that's going to take the inside view and focus more on the staff and the people around the president rather than necessarily digging in on the president's psychology. it's going to be a real interesting book, though. one thing to remember is when we talk about the comments the president made about adam schiff. i covered the investigation into potential coordination between trump world and russia and talked to a ton of people who either had clients who went in and were interviewed by those investigators or interviewed wiinvestigators themselves and one thing you'll hear if you have those conversations is that schiff, besides being someone who, on tv, presents himself in a very organized, clear and easy to follow way, behind the

scenes, he's a really good interviewer. he was considered one of the sharpest members of that committee who had the questions that would get people in the most trouble who could dig out new lines of information, get under people's skin. i don't have direct knowledge if trump has had conversations about those interview sessions with people who went in but so many people who are really close to trump got the adam schiff treatment over the course of that probe and it's unimaginable that the president doesn't know about it. >> schiff wouldn't be able to get them in trouble if they hadn't done something wrong. so just speak about all the unfinished business. the republicans on the committee, nunes is essentially a white house staffer. deployed to the hill to sort of be the matt whitaker of the house intel committee's investigation into russia. but the democrats made public a lot of items that if they were ever in control again they'd return to. there was the blocked call don junior got. open secret that there are a lot

of questions about the veracity of don jr.'s testimony when he was on capitol hill. new information about michael cohen. just talk about all the unfinished business in that committee. >> one of the biggest black boxes for democrats on house intelligence is steve bannon. when he went in to be interviewed by that committee, he made a sweeping invocation of executive privilege. he claimed that conversations that happened before trump became the executive during the transition were protected by executive privilege. that means there is some transition conversations that folks on this committee would like to know about. he claims that conversations he had with other white house staffers to which the president was not privy were also protected by executive privilege which means there are outstanding questions about some of those white house talks. and one thing that members of the committee are particularly keen to do on the democratic side is to reassert this aggressive muscular understanding of the rights that congress has to get at conversations the white house staffers have.

>> all right. it's going to be interesting. donald trump's visit to the victims of the deadliest fires in california's history. he made that trip with finland on his mind. it's no wonder he got the name of paradise, california, wrong. minimums and fees. they seem to be the very foundation of your typical bank. capital one is anything but typical. that's why we designed capital one cafes. you can get savings and checking accounts with no fees or minimums. and one of america's best savings rates.

to top it off, you can open one from anywhere in 5 minutes. this isn't a typical bank. this is banking reimagined. what's in your wallet? should happen everydred five hundred years, right? fact is, there have been twenty-six in the last decade. allstate is adapting. with drones to assess home damage sooner. and if a flying object damages your car, you can snap a photo and get your claim processed in hours, not days. plus, allstate can pay your claim in minutes. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? to learn about their medicare options before they're on medicare. come on in. you're turning 65 soon? yep. and you're retiring at 67? that's the plan! it's also a great time to learn about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan,

insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. here's why...medicare part b doesn't pay for everything. this part is up to you. a medicare supplement plan helps pay for some of what medicare doesn't. call unitedhealthcare insurance company or go online for your free decision guide about the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. selected for meeting their high standards of quality and service. this type of plan lets you say "yes" to any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. do you accept medicare patients? i sure do! to learn more call or go online today for your free decision guide. oh, and happy birthday... or retirement... in advance. - mwith the best ofodi, the prespressure cooking andsps, air frying all in one. with our tendercrisp technology, you can quickly cook food, juicy on the inside and crispy on the outside. go from fresh to deliciously done in half the time. which means it may become

the only thing you use in your kitchen. (tapping) for cooking, at least. (upbeat music) the ninja foodi, with tendercrisp, the cooking while parenting technology. in what should have been a natural for any president or politician, consoling a state and its citizens reeling from disast pertrump yet again showed his tone deafness. the town is called paradise but more than once, the president called the town pleasure. he referred to a conversation he had with the finnin sh presiden about forest management and somehow turned that into blaming california for not raking its leaves enough. it spelled governor-elect gavin newsom's name wrong, more than once. i'm from california. we grew up with wildfires and

this is a tragedy. but he also had a bizarre fixation with the floor of the forest. it's not macy's, mr. president. >> i'm committed to make sure that we get all of this cleaned out and protected. got to take care of the floors. the floors of the forest. very important. you look at other countries where they do it differently, and it's a whole different story. i was with the president of finland and he said we have a much different -- he called it a forestation and they spent a lot of time on raking and cleaning and doing things and they don't have any problem. >> you know, we've talked about this before. there's a reason the president gets talking points from the white house staff so that he doesn't say absolutely ludicrous and insane things. >> can i read your tweet? >> yes. >> better to remain silent and

be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. >> abraham lincoln. and trump does that every day. if he were smarter he'd say, i'm not going to say anything and let people around him. but this continuing nonrealization that he's the head of the federal government. 60% of the forests in california are run and managed by the federal government. so when he criticizes it, he's criticizing himself. he still has this distance that he keeps from his own job which is also why he's unfit to have that job. >> i also think that climate change, we talk about it only when there is a crisis. we're in an ongoing crisis. it's a national security issue with which we have now a timetable that scientists have told us if we don't get our acts together, in about 20 years, we can't reverse the course that we're on. when we're seeing hurricanes stronger than ever, seeing tsunamis in asia, we're seeing forest fires that have never been this big in california, and are devastating, that's, you know, that's like a red bell

ringing very loudly telling us that we need to do something. instead of at least admitting there may be a problem that is related to the climate, he's installing a climate denier at epa. and so i think that, again, it goes back to, what do we do as people who have to live here, breathe the air and drink the water? what do we do in terms of forcing our government to do the right thing because it's about our national security. climate change is not something that's a hippie issue that only, you know, lefties care about. it's something that is impacting children who, in flint, still can't drink clean water. >> you're also right about it being a national security issue. i want to go through this getting the town wrong. it makes a bigger point. he says we just saw, we just left pleasure, a chorus of reporters says paradise. he says, or paradise. what we just saw at paradise is just, you know, it's not acceptable. the toronto star, daniel dale said, what's interesting is not that trump sometimes misspeaks.

but rather than apology he'll always say, or the correct word as if it's a subjective choice between the correct word and the equally vald word he used. this is, again, this is the orwellian back to this, this is the orwellian side of what he is telegraphing to his 40% of the country. the town, it is paradise or pleasure. this town i visited, it is not only called paradise, it is pleasure or paradise. >> it's interesting. it's odd. and this sort of strange forced a agnosticism, he has suggested that important, notable things aren't notable. this is something we've seen in the course of the fallout from murder of jamal khashoggi. he says it is impossible to know whose responsible for the murder, impossible to know if

the crown prince of saudi arabia had anything to do with it. the reality is that the cia which works for the president assessed yeah, we do know and we know it was the crown prince that wanted this to happen. he talks about climate change the same way. says we can't know if the climate is changing, different scientists say different things, it is a head scratcher. that's not true. everyone that understands climate science agrees that climate change is happening and it is people's fault. for the president to suggest these aren't notable doesn't make sense. >> you raise a really important story. david, i want your thoughts on this, too. we talk day after day about the president's assault on the truth. the murder of jamal khashoggi was always notable in the same way there are crime shows on every channel late night when i find myself flipping, the murder

where there were cameras running in another country, the intelligence community was always going to find out. what are your thoughts where it stands today, where the president stands very much at odds with his own intelligence community about nbs' role in the murder of jamal khashoggi. >> this comes together from the small to the very grave. this is a president in donald trump that won't accept responsibility or accountability. he has been president for two years. the u.s. forestry service has some jurisdiction over forest fires. ask him as president, what has he done to correct their mitigation strategies. if people coming across southwest florida, you had two years. why haven't you fixed it. why hasn't foreign policy on saudi arabia and national security gone more friendly to people like muhammed ben salam. what can we do, those that are

frustrated by it, because it all comes together in this. we arrive at the last day of the trump administration just as outraged as we did on the first day, just as committed to suggesting this is not normal, that we have a president who displays a certain incompetence that's dangerous to the united states, and that we continue to see behavior we would not want our children to model. we need the same outrage on the last day as we had on the first day of the administration. >> we're going to fit in a break. don't go anywhere. we'll be right back. break. don't go anywhere. we'll be right back. it's loud, stressful and draining. and we love it. i refuse to let migraine keep me from saying... "i am here." aimovig, a preventive treatment for migraine in adults, reduces the number of monthly migraine days. for some, that number can be cut in half or more. the most common side effects are pain, redness or swelling at the injection site and constipation. talk to your doctor about aimovig. and be there more.

talk to your doctor about aimovig. when the guy inown front slams on his brakes out of nowhere. you do, too, but not in time. hey, no big deal. you've got a good record and liberty mutual won't hold a grudge by raising your rates over one mistake. you hear that, karen? liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges. how mature of them! for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty mutual insurance. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

i just got my ancestrydna results: 74% italian. and i found out that i'm from the big toe of that sexy italian boot! calabria. it even shows the migration path from south italia all the way to exotico new jersey! so this holiday season it's ancestrydna per tutti! order your kit now at ancestry.com

no president liked his press coverage. john kennedy cancelled a subscription to new york herald tribune. nobody called it the enemy of the american people. sir, leaders and authoritarian countries like russia, china, venezuela now repress the media using your words. >> i can't talk for other people. i can only talk for me. >> but you're seen around the world as a beacon for repression -- >> i am not talking about you, sometimes maybe, but i'm not talking about you. the news about me is largely phony. it is false. >> oh, we're talking about you, and you know things are bad when fox news calls awe beacon of repression. go chris wallace. news in the last hour on the president's war with the media. the white house dropping plans

to restore a press pass. seeking to establish rules for decorum for press conferences going forward. i wonder if the president will stop calling them enemies. journalists called on to ask a single question and then yield the floor to other journalists. that's all right. and most reporters will say may i ask a two-part question. and that seems all right. but the discretionary of the president or other white house official taking questions, follow-up question or questions may be permitted. but the idea that this is equal to stripping the security clearance of a critic, stripping the press pass of someone you don't like. this isn't about how and when you ask a follow-up. this is about what chris wallace said. donald trump, under donald trump america has come chris wallace's words a beacon for repression. >> the other thing that's

important about this particular list of rules coming out is that historically the press has regulated itself. that's part of the reason we have the white house correspondents association. there are always reporters working the white house who sometimes engage in unethical behavior, sometimes cause problems, don't necessarily maintain the decor um of the room. if you talk to some foengs in the press room, there are peers that criticize the way he handled some briefings. that's just a fact. but historically it is the responsibility of those peers to regulate themselves. it is not the responsibility of the white house to parachute in, tell journalists how to do their jobs. journalists are supposed to tell them how to do their jobs. what this is, the white house is tip toeing into tefrt thrritory used to belong to reporters -- sf >> but the white house correspondents association didn't step up in this case. they should represent the press.

they should have said we collectively boycott this or walk out. there's not a lot of self regulation there. the issue here is what donald trump wants is what president putin has, one press conference a year where questions are submitted in advance. there's one question, you can answer it. that's what he wants. that's what they do in authoritarian countries. >> my thanks to you. that does it for our hour. "mtp daily" starts with katy tur in for chuck. >> can i add something? i know they want one question and yield to other reporters, but some of the most important answers come with follow-up questions. we have seen that time and again throughout the presidential briefings or white house briefings. i asked donald trump about him asking russia to look into hillary clinton's e-mails. him saying later on, whatever you have to show for