that's going to wrap up this hour of "msnbc live." i'll see you tomorrow on "today." andrea mitchell is standing by for "andrea mitchell reports." >> sitting by. thank you very much. coming up, president trump saying unless there's an end to what he calls partisan investigations, there will be no progress on legislation. >> if there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation. it just doesn't work that way. a star is born. georgia's stacey abrams takes the national stage in a powerful rebuke to the president and his policies. >> making livelihoods of our federal workers a pawn for political gain is a disgrace. the shutdown was a stunt injured

by the president of the united states. and the women in white, marking 100 years of suffrage. democratic women get a standing ovation and a rare nonpartisan shoutout from the president. >> we also have more women serving in congress than at any time before. [ chanting "usa" ] and good day, everyone, i'm andrea mitchell. congress responding to the president's confrontational state of the union speech with few hints at compromise. the president vowing to build the border wall, dividing him even from many is not republicans, with only nine days left to prevent another government crisis. that plus the president's

unprecedented threat at the state of the union address against congressional oversight and the mueller probe. >> an economic miracle is taking place in the united states and the only thing that can stop it are foolish wars, politics, or ridiculous, partisan investigations. >> joining me now, nbc white house correspondent kristen welker, white house correspondent kasie hunt, and peter baker, chief white house correspondent for "the new york times." everybody has been working around the clock, assessing, where do we go from here. kristen, first to you, the president talking about compromise but then in the speech, little sign of compromise, certainly not on the wall, and then this threat on investigations going forward.

>> and that threat, andrea, which you highlighted so well just now, really does underscore the disconnect between the white house, saying this is going to be a speech about unity and the fact that president trump essentially said, look, we're not going to be able to get anything done if these investigations move forward. and on that front, andrea, there has been a development. lawmakers in the house intelligence committee voting today to release the transcripts of dozens of witness interviews to special counsel robert mueller. they say those transcripts should be getting to the special counsel later today. the intelligence committee, adam schiff, the chair of that committee, indicating they are going to provide new details about the specter of the investigation that will be launched on capitol hill. adam schiff saying this, we're not going to be intimidated or threatened by him. so taking his own defiant stance, andrea, even as

president trump did issue that threat yesterday during his state of the union address. now, the president was also defiant when it came to immigration, again demanding money for his border wall. and we just learned moments ago, he's going to be traveling to el paso on monday, andrea, to really try to hammer his point home. so what we saw last night were moments certainly of bipartisanship. but the president still digging in on a lot of these critical issues, andrea. and this is not bipartisanship on specific policies going forward. there were these specific moments, speaking about normandy, and the guests were so appropriate and so moving, all the guests in the first lady's box. but kasie hunt, you were in the chamber, that rare opportunity to sit and watch all of this as it's unfolding, and it just struck me that there was such a division, more so, well, i guess we expected it given the democratic majority taking over, but even in some instances republicans not cottoning to his

threats against investigations. >> it's always an incredible opportunity, andrea, as you know, to be in the chamber for one of these events because it is a moment in history. i've been privileged enough to be there for several of them now, and you're right, this one was particularly uncomfortable at times. and, you know, you could feel the divisions that we all talk about, that you see play out on the airwaves and headlines and chirons in cable news, but especially when the speech turned to the border, democrats started shifting uncomfortably in their seats, i heard some of them almost booing when he talked about caravancaravans, f example. that's not to take away from some of the touching moments that did exist in his speech. the president of course has a knack for the theatrical, and some of it was very nice, singing happy birthday, i've never heard the entire floor of

the chamber sing happy birthday to an 81-year-old holocaust survivor, that was quite a moment. and those women who started cheering him, i'm not sure that's exactly the reaction he was looking for when he talked about female employment, a lot of those women you're seeing on the screen right now took seats away from republican men and were cheering more for themselves, of course, than for the president of the united states. but your overall point is well-taken, there were uncomfortable moments in the room with republicans, with his comments about investigations and war, really quite provocative. at the end of the day we'll have to see how this speech ultimately affects whether or not we're going to see another government shutdown. that's the question i've been asking lawmakers so far. it seals as though their negotiations are continuing apace. there's not been any screaming headline breaking news out of the latest conference report, both republicans and democratic leaders right now seem to be on track saying, we can get something done if the president will just let us.

that's something of a shift in rhetoric from especially mitch mcconnell. so really, again, it's back to the president and whether or not he's going to be able to think that he can declare victory with whatever they come up with, andrea. >> as all of us were so busy with fact checking, our teams last night, he's going to el paso on monday. he claimed that the border fencing made el paso safer. the sheriff and others there point out, as well as our own checking, that their crime rate was dropping for years when construction on the border fence began in 2008. the crime rate rose in the year after completion of the fence, in fact. there are a lot of others, on the economy and other issues. and peter, peter baker, you know, you've covered so many of these. you also did a report on what the president said at lunch yesterday before giving the speech. hardly signifying that he intended in this off the record lunch to be conciliatory. according to your reporting, he trashed chuck schumer, trashed john mccain.

give me some of those details. >> exactly right, every year before the state of the union address, the president, not just this one, has a habit or tradition of bringing in network anchors to get a preview of what they might hear that night, meant to be off the record. but details have slipped out in right now years. this one was particularly interesting. he of course was planning this message of bipartisan unity, at least for part of his speech. that was the theme that was intended. but at lunch it didn't sound like that, it sounded like a guy raring for a tough campaign next year willing to go after his opponents. he went after joe biden, he said joe biden is dumb. he said, when i make a gaffe it's on purpose but when joe biden makes it, it's because he's dumb. he called chuck schumer, senate minority leader for the democratic party, a nasty son of a bitch. he mocked governor ralph northam of virginia saying he choked like a dog at that news

conference over the weekend when he tried to explain the racist picture in his medical school yearbook. and he still seems obsessed by senator john mccain who passed away last year, but the president has yet to forgive him for voting against a move advanced to repeal obamacare and talked about that again at the lunch with these anchors and said offhand, "and he had a book that bombed," actually the book was at the top of the bestseller list. i think he gave a feeling at that lunch where his head really is, no matter what the scripted, ritualistic, "let's work together" text that he would read later in the evening said. >> totally in campaign made, looking towards 2020. no matter what else happens, he's really responding viscerally to any infringement or any attack on him, perceived or otherwise. this is what chuck schumer had to say on "morning joe." >> he was insulting you as well as insulting a deceased american

war hero, john mccain. >> i can answer, but john mccain is a hero. and to do what he did to him -- but that's who he is, you know. >> and in fact checking also on the economy, peter, having covered the white house before, you know very well when the economic boom started coming out of the deep recession. he's claiming credit for the entire economic miracle, the reality is quite different. >> yeah, look, obviously the economy is doing well, and he's president while it's doing well. presidents are always going to claim credit when the economy is doing well on their watch and when it goes south, they'll find other things to blame. but you're right, he inherited an economy that was already growing, had been growing quite a while when he came into office. the growth rate of new jobs and economic activity during the first months during the first 20, 21 months were exactly the

same as the rate during the last 20, 21 months of president obama's presidency. the fact that this recovery has continued as long as it has is something that he can at least go out there and campaign on. he kept a recovery that might have otherwise fizzled outgoing at this point. whether it will fizzle out before he gets to the election of next year, that's the open question. >> peter baker, kristen welker, kasie hunt, thank you all. former california congressman and house budget committee chair leon panetta who of course was white house chief of staff to president clinton and secretary of defense and cia director to president obama. you've done it all, you've seen it all. how about that speech last night? >> well, you've heard a lot of the commentary. i pretty much felt the same way, that i had a lot of hope that somehow, what the president was

urging in terms of unity could actually happen, that we could bridge these gaps that have really made washington a dysfunctional place. but as you try to hope for the best, you heard the rhetoric of divisiveness, the rhetoric relating to reckless investigations somehow undermining our economy, when that's the way we enforce the rule of law in this country. his comments about caravans and burgeoning crime, when the facts are very different. the use of fear in order to justify a wall. all of that makes you very skeptical that somehow this president has the capacity to really try to unify the country. >> in your role as defense chief and former cia director, the missile treaty that ronald reagan signed with mike hail

gore mikhail gorbachev in 1987, the president says he got rid of the inf treaty because it doesn't cover china, it was a bilateral treaty between the u.s. and what was then the soviet union. they did attempt to get russia to comply, but there are no negotiations to include china and broaden the scope of this to make it a global treaty. and what do you think about getting ready of it now in six months without any effort to repair it? >> well, i'm very concerned. and the president's words last night indicated that he's prepared to establish a whole new arms race with the russians. and that's dangerous for the world. the problem is that this administration and this

president has been very anxious to go ahead and tear up agreements, whether it's on climate change, whether it's on trade with asian countries, whether it's on iran. a lot of these agreements have been torn up and now he wants to tear up the inf. but there's never been a strategy to follow through on the chaos that results from tearing up those agreements. and i'm afraid this is the same situation, that he'll move away from the inf and rather than negotiating and really making an effort to try to bring countries together in order to retain that treaty, that he's going to allow it to expire in order to then proceed with what will be an arms race that will make the world a much more dangerous place. >> i want to ask you about the president and his intelligence chiefs, because our own nbc analysis shows that in the last 85 days, he has only had in-person briefings 17 times.

according to reports, he doesn't read the briefings himself at other times. so he's really not getting the daily fix that presidents used to avidly absorb. >> well, frankly, it shows in the way he's conducting foreign policy. just last week, all of our intelligence heads presented a very different picture of the world than what the president talked about last night in the state of the union speech. the intelligence chiefs made very clear that isis remains a real threat, that there are thousands that are resilient and can again represent a real threat to our country. he says, you know, that isis has been defeated. north korea is a country that the president thinks can denuclearize but his intelligence chiefs have made clear that they want to maintain their nuclear power. iran, he says, has breached the

agreement with regards to nuclear weapons. the intelligence chiefs say that's not the case. whether it's climate change, whether it's border security, the reality is this president presents a very different picture to the world. and a lot of it is due to the fact that he basically resists getting the truth. he wants the world according to trump, not the world as it is. >> and the secretary of state mike pompeo today at a summit of countries involved in the war against isis and in the fight in syria, is trying to reassure allies in his remarks so far today that we are not withdrawing from the fight, it's not the end of our fight against isis, that we still remain engaged. how does that comport with the reality that we are withdrawing our troops, that is happening, according to all of our reporting, and once we are not on the ground, how are we going to monitor that from outside the country? >> well, the reality is that it's very difficult to do that.

you know, the president really depu did not discuss this position with anyone, in particular the head of our troops in that region was not talked to. there were those who felt they were not even -- they were not even aware of the fact that he was going to tweet that somehow we were going to take our troops out of syria. even the majority leader in the senate, mitch mcconnell, very concerned about the fact that we're going to suddenly pull out our troops from syria and moved a resolution to indicate that we ought to be careful about doing that. look, the bottom line is you cannot deal with issues on the ground, you cannot deal with isis unless you have a presence there. yes, we can use intelligence, yes, we can use other bases. but without troops there, without really looking at what is happening on the ground, we are blindsided.

and isis will take advantage of that, make no mistake about it. >> some of your successors were in the chamber yesterday, and there were pictures of the head of intelligence applauding at various times, policies on the wall and such. is that appropriate? do you think they should be applauding, or should they be more like the supreme court and general dunford and others who were very careful not to show particular support one way or the other? >> i always felt, andrea, as director of the cia, that you really ought to be restrained in terms of the applause lines that the president is presenting in those speeches, mainly because you have to be objective. you have to be somebody who really is trying to present the truth and not doing it on any kind of partisan basis. sometimes -- i understand that situation in the state of the

union, i've been there myself, everybody is getting up to clap, you question yourself, whether you should or you shouldn't. but i think the better course is to really try to be restrained because you have an obligation to present truth to the president and it shouldn't be affected by the politics of the moment. >> general joe dunford of the joint chiefs was a model of exactly what should be done. >> that's right. >> in those instances. thank you very much. thanks, leon panetta, great to see you. >> good to be with you. coming up, home base. republicans trying to avoid another government shutdown or presidential emergency declaration. a top republican senator on the state of play, joining me next. stay with us. ning me next stay with us take your razor, yup. alright, up and down, never side to side, shaquem. you got it? come on, get back. quem, you a second behind your brother, stay focused. can't nobody beat you, can't nobody beat you. hard work baby, it gonna pay off. you got this. with the one hundred and forty-first pick, the seattle seahawks select.

alright, you got it, shaquem. alright, let me see.

- want to take your next vacation to new heights? tripadvisor now lets you book over 100,000 tours, attractions, and experiences in destinations around the world like new york, from bus tours to breathtaking adventures. tripadvisor makes it easy to find and book amazing things to do. and you can cancel most bookings up to 24 hours in advance for a full refund. so you can make your next trip monumental. read reviews, check hotel prices, book things to do, tripadvisor.

in the past, most of the people in this room voted for a wall. but the proper wall never got built. i will get it built. simply put, walls work and walls save lives. >> president trump insisting last night that he will build that long-promised border wall. but his threats to bypass congress and declare a national emergency in the last few weeks are sparking warnings from his own party leaders. joining me now is republican senator john barrasso, the third ranking republican in the senate, member of the foreign relations committee. senator, it's great to see you again, thanks for being with us. >> thanks for having me. >> what is your response -- let

me just ask you, going forward, there are nine days left. i am told reliably from republicans as well as democrats that there are very good negotiations going on among appropriators to come up with a solution. but can you get the president on board? are we going to face another emergency in nine days? >> well, i think a mature governing body never shuts down the government, no matter which side is causing it. so i'm opposed to government shutdowns. i've actually introduced legislation to permanently end government shutdowns. the conference committee is meeting. they're meeting today with the experts, not political people but experts on border security, who have said there are key points along the border where barriers are beneficial and necessary. if they can work along the lines of what president clinton and bush and obama have done with border security and barriers, then they'll be able to get to a positive solution that the president will sign.

>> i want to play a little bit of the democratic response last night. so i don't think you would disagree at least with the concept, as you just said, of opposing shutdowns. this was stacey abrams, of course. >> making livelihoods of our federal workers a pawn for political games is a disgrace. the shutdown was a stunt engineered by the president of the united states, one that defied every tenet of fairness and abandoned not just our people but our values. >> i know you wouldn't phrase it that way, but the fact is that the american people were against this shutdown. and it muddied up both political parties. >> well, senator portman has a billion th bill that i sponsored, senator warren has a bill on the other side of the aisle, both designed to eliminate the possibility of future shutdowns. and the question is exactly how

you do it. i think it's important for the president to sign the remaining seven appropriations bills that have previously passed so we can fund that last 25% of the government and keep the government completely open all the way through the end of this fiscal year. that's what i'm encouraging him to do. >> senator, will you suggesting you think there's a way to get the president to sign those other bills? they were passed back in december, before christmas. >> well, i encouraged him to sign them then. i encourage it now. but i also encourage the appropriations committee working together to come up with a solution to deal with this additional 234 miles of border security and barrier. there's about 700 miles so far already built. there's about a 2,000-mile border. i agree that border security is critical to our national security. a wall alone, a barrier alone will not be enough. you need the technology, you need the boots on the ground, you need the manpower there.

but there is continuing to be a threat to our nation from our southern border. >> our reporter, garrett haake, telling us from outside the meeting that senator shelby came out, and you know how experienced he is at this, and he says he's optimistic and he says he's spoken to speaker pelosi. there seemed to be a feeling that if the president stays out of this, that you guys can get it done. >> i have a lot of confidence in the 17 members of this committee. the republicans and democrats are experienced negotiators. they know how to get to a solution. i met with senator shelby earlier, i'm going to meet with him again in a few minutes. i share his optimism. i think there's no grounds to shut down the government again. >> what about grounds for an emergency to get around the appropriators and move military spending to the border for this wall? >> i think the president was resolute last night when he talked about the need to secure the border. i think he will do whatever

needs to be done to accomplish that goal. he campaigned on it. he continues to raise it at meetings on various topics. he's going to get it done one way or the other. i would recommend it be done through the appropriation process, the regular legislative process. i think that's the best way to get it done, to continue the work that previous presidents have done. if that isn't accomplished, i think he will go ahead and use the emergency powers that a president has to accomplish his stated goal. >> but we've all been reporting that mitch mcconnell warned him that if he were to do that, there would be legislation to override it or overrule it. >> well, i think that speaker pelosi would do that, she would bring to the house legislation to override what the president has done by emergency powers. that would then come to the senate where there would be an additional vote there. if it passed, of course it would then go to the president who would veto it and then there

would be veto override situations. so i think the best outcome is the one i'm working toward which is agreement by the 17 members of the committee to come up with a solution to deal with -- to fund all of the government and deal with the security needs at the border. >> worst case scenario, senator, do you think there would ever be enough, 20 senators, 20 republicans to override the president's veto? >> i don't see that happening, andrea, i really don't. you have a republican senate committed to securing the border. but we'll see. i don't want to get to that point, as i said earlier. the best thing to do is to have members, elected members of the house and senate working together. and i share the optimism that you just mentioned from senator shelby, of working together with the democrats and republicans to get the solution to keep the government open, the government funded, and secure the border in the ways that the experts who do this all of the time say would

be the best for our national security. >> good luck on all of this, senator, thank you very much for giving us a report on what's going on there, appreciate it. >> thanks, andrea. >> you bet. coming up, rising star. more on the democratic response and what stacey abrams is bringing to the party. we'll go live to georgia for reaction, right here on "andrea mitchell reports." stay with us on msnbc. ." stay with us on msnbc. hey, darryl! hey, thomas. if you were choosing a network, would you want the one the experts at rootmetrics say is number one in the nation? sure, they probably know what they're talking about. or the one that j.d. power says is highest in network quality by people who use it every day? this is a tough one. well, not really, because verizon won both. so you don't even have to choose. why didn't you just lead with that? it's like a fun thing. (vo) chosen by experts. chosen by you. get 50 million songs now with apple music included, on us.

on both ios and android. it's the unlimited plan you need on the network you deserve. so we improved everything. we used 50% fewer ingredients added one handed pumps and beat the top safety standards the new johnson's® choose gentle

even as i am very disappointed by the president's approach to our problems, i still don't want him to fail. but we need him to tell the truth and to respect his duties and respect the extraordinary diversity that defines america. because america wins by fighting for our shared values against all enemies, foreign and domestic. that is who we are. and when we do so, never wavering, the state of our union will always be strong. >> stacey abrams, the former democratic nominee for georgia governor, delivering a powerful response to president trump's state of the union address in her home state. abrams' coveted spot sparking praise from democrats who are

hoping she will play a more prominent role in the party after an historic gubernatorial campaign, even though she lost, catapulting her into the spotlight. nbc's rehema ellis joins me from atlanta. what's the reaction there? i can imagine the home state is pretty proud. >> reporter: not only the home state but people i think around the country are proud of stacey abrams. we're here at a diner in atlanta, and talking with dr. john smith, he's a doctor of education. you were able to hear that sound bite that andrea mitchell just played. what did you think of stacey abrams and her response to the president's address? >> first of all, good morning, good morning to everyone out there listening. i want to say i think stacey abrams set the tone for the democratic party to come. i think she put us in a position to not only elevate ourselves and elevate the democratic party but she also gave some very, very important responses to the preside

president's situation. he's in a situation where he hasn't supported us, he hasn't reported his taxes, he hasn't done any of those things that are necessary to hold the president's position in high regard. >> reporter: so many people say they want someone to bring us together. do you think stacey abrams is that person? >> i think she can bring not only the democratic party together but she can reach across the aisle to other parties as well and bring those parties to the conclusion that we do need to be a unified country in order for us to suck sa succeed, in order for us to prosper. there are aspects that we need to work together, work across the aisle, exchange ideas and concepts, and have a happy medium where we can meet our differences and come together for the country. >> reporter: so many people, andrea, are looking for a way for the country to come together instead of identifying our differences, and find the things that say we are more alike than

different. >> rehema ellis, so great to hear from you. thanks for that very refreshing point of view from a diner in atlanta. coming up, breaking news from virginia. the state's attorney general admitting he has his own blackface controversy. he's the third in line. details are next on "andrea mitchell reports" only on msnbc. . whooo! want to take your next vacation to new heights? tripadvisor now lets you book over a hundred thousand tours, attractions, and experiences in destinations around the world! like new york!

from bus tours, to breathtaking adventures, tripadvisor makes it easy to find and book amazing things to do. and you can cancel most bookings up to 24 hours in advance for a full refund. so you can make your next trip... monumental! read reviews check hotel prices book things to do tripadvisor

about 50% of people with evesevere asthma k? have too many cells called eosinophils in their lungs.

eosinophils are a key cause of severe asthma. fasenra is designed to target and remove these cells. fasenra is an add-on injection for people 12 and up with asthma driven by eosinophils. fasenra is not a rescue medicine or for other eosinophilic conditions. fasenra is proven to help prevent severe asthma attacks, improve breathing, and can lower oral steroid use. fasenra may cause allergic reactions. get help right away if you have swelling of your face, mouth, and tongue, or trouble breathing. don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. haven't you missed enough? ask an asthma specialist about fasenra. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. and when we have breaking news out of virginia.

with the state's governor still in hot water, the state's attorney general, mark herring, is now apologizing for wearing bla blackface in college. in his statement he said, some friends suggested we attend a party dressed like rappers. we dressed up and put on wigs and brown makeup. carefully worded, that. joining me now, a national political reporter from "the washington post." amy stoddard from real clear politics. and elise jordan, contributor to "time." annie lynskey, let's talk about what's happening in virginia and i want to talk about your list warren reporting. this is carefully worded, brown makeup, not black makeup, rapper, whatever we think of that, but what is going on in virginia? because mark herring would replace justin fairfax if both the governor and the lieutenant governor were knocked out. >> it seems like there were an awful lot of people in virginia

who had a history of black face and this is not a great development for the country, the state, or politics. i think that we're all a little sort of surprised and amazed. and just shocked by it. >> what is your take on this? it seems to be an expanding problem in virginia, and what one suspects is not limited to virginia. >> it's amazing that people in the '80s were doing this and thought that it was acceptable, and that people like herring called on the governor to step down just days ago, knowing this was in his past. the democrats there are in such a state of anguish, not only that northam has refused to step down and is really defiant, but of course they had high hopes for the future of justin fairfax. and the whole story that he's involved in is really wrenching the idea that they have to

literally call on someone to stand up if they have not been in blackface in the past is stunning. it reminds me, as you remember, andrea, years ago, of when there was an attempted coup on newt gingrich, he resigned, bob livingston was going to step up and be speaker, and he was involved in his own scandal and they ended up putting hastert into that job who later we found out had terrible scandals of his own. really more bizarre than fiction, and i wonder how they will find a way to resolve this. >> and indeed, it's a timely reminder of what happened back then. i think bob livingston may have been speaker for a day, speaker-elect for a day before having to step aside. tim scott, the only black republican in the senate, from south carolina, spoke about all of this today.

>> for a long time people have tried to pose this as a republican issue and we're finding out today it's a human issue. it's unfortunate we're finding this out so late in the game. it's obviously a very important issue as people try to figure out how to do the right thing as soon as possible. >> elise jordan, we've faced these problems before. you are a daughter of the south originally, i think. this is just an incredible stain on both political parties. >> i'm glad that senator scott is speaking truth in that this is not a problem that one political party has ownership, it's an american problem and we need to be dealing with it. it is at least promising that people are outraged, they are outraged for their black brothers and sisters, that their elected officials had this kind of horrible behavior in the earlier days of their life but still did it at a point and thought it was appropriate.

and while virginia seems to be a place where this abhorrent culture really thrived, it happens all over the country, and we need to be better, we need to do better, and we need to call to account those who behave in this manner. >> this is clearly going to be a vetting issue in 2020, and already, annie linskey, your reporting about list welizabeth warren, it turns out she has a texas bar registration card from 1986, defining herself as an american indian. >> yes, the significance of that card that we turned up is that you're seeing her claim this ethnicity, claim this race in her own handwriting. and that's something that i've been covering elizabeth warren for a long time, that's just something we haven't seen before. somehow it's quite impactful for people to see that she was truly putting herself out there as a -- calling herself an american

indian when in fact she's a white woman. and i think that's an issue that she's been grappling with for quite a while but is coming into much sharper focus when you see this. >> and it strikes me that by bringing this up, the president in his own way, by his slur on her and his nickname for her, has exaggerated the importance of this issue and put democrats on the defensive, in this case elizabeth warren. >> the president with his nicknames, that's the sort of power he has with them. there's often some piece of it, while this one is quite offensive and the cherokee nation is quite offended when he uses this one, but this is one that there is some tiny grain of truth to, when you sort of get well beneath the offense of the slur that he's using. that's where people have sort of ignored it a little bit, because they thought, that's trump being

outlandish, whereas when you look at it, she did in fact make this claim and you're seeing it now for the first time in her own handwriting. >> thank you all so much, we have to leave it there. coming up, second date. president trump announcing another summit with kim jong-un. what could go wrong? you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc. as my broker... what am i paying you to manage my money? it's racquetball time. ♪ carl, does your firm offer a satisfaction guarantee? like schwab does. guarantee? ♪ carl, can you remind me what you've invested my money in. it's complicated. are you asking enough questions about how your wealth is being managed? if not, talk to schwab. a modern approach to wealth management. so we improved everything. we used 50% fewer ingredients added one handed pumps and beat the top safety standards the new johnson's®

choose gentle on car insurance? did the little piggy cry wee wee wee all the way home? weeeeeeeee! we we weeeee! weeeeeeee! weeeeeeee! weeeeeeee! max. maxwell! yeah? you're home. oh, cool. thanks mrs. a. geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more. we know that when you're >> tspending time with thelass grandkids... ♪ music >> tech: ...every minute counts. and you don't have time for a cracked windshield. that's why at safelite, we'll show you exactly when we'll be there. with a replacement you can trust. all done sir. >> grandpa: looks great! >> tech: thanks for choosing safelite. >> grandpa: thank you! >> child: bye! >> tech: bye! saving you time... so you can keep saving the world. >> kids: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪

our hostages have come home. nuclear testing has stopped.

and there has not been a missile launch in more than 15 months. if i had not been elected president of the united states, we would right now, in my opinion, be in a major war with north korea. >> of course, there hasn't been any denuclearization since the first summit, so as i say, what could go wrong? joining me now is wendy sherman who helped negotiate with north korea before and met with kim jong-un's father as i recall from 2000 when we were in pyongyang at the same time. joining me now is also jeffrey goldberg, editor in chief of the atlantic and msnbc global affairs contributor. well, wendy, did it make your head explode a little bit? we would have been in war with north korea if he hadn't become president. >> indeed, i think we might have been at war with north korea because the president did fire and fury. because the said my button is

bigger than your button to kim jong-un. and because the president ratcheted up the rhetoric to the point where everybody was concerned we might be at war. and now he believes that a bromance and a tweet and a few lines in a state of the union is going to make it all nice. >> what are the risks here, jeff goldberg, about him going into a summit where we have not gotten the inventory of weapons we were demanding as the prerequisite for future talks? and we don't know where their hidden sites are, what they destroyed already can be quickly reconstituted. there's more than enough evidence, including the world threat assessment that they are cheating and they will not fully denuclearize. >> right. i would call that the basket of traditional threats. what are novel in this situation because of the nature of this president and obviously the nature of the north korean leader is that the personalities

in place are so volatile that anything can happen. you know, when we talk about this, we talk about inventory issues and negotiation issues. this goes deeper than that. this goes to a question about the president and his commitment to a reality-based discourse surrounding this. obviously his intelligence agencies are telling him one thing about north korea. he's decided another. and it goes to a very deep issue about his preparedness, about his interest in the actual details of this. when he came out of the first summit, he basically signalled to the world and his view was the conflict was over because he had a meeting. all kinds of things can go wrong. by the way, to be fair, all things could conceivably be right. we're not at war with north korea, that is true. anything is possible. but the level of volatility here is something that i think the professionals would worry about because anything can go south at

any moment given the nature of this relationship. >> and the fact that you don't have an experienced defense secretary, jim mattis had pushed back when at the first summit the president discussed cancelling the troop exercises, the joint exercises with south korea which would have happened otherwise last spring. and it didn't. >> right. the president doesn't like expertise. the president does not like expertise. and that seems to be to traditional thinkers such as myself, that seems to be a deficit. >> it's a problem we have someone here with expertise, and wendy sherman negotiated with all of these guys and ended up with the iran nuclear deal and other things the president seems to be discarding at will. >> yes. i think what was interesting about last night was two things in foreign policy. one, that there was so little quite frankly. it was an announcement of the north korean second summit and a domestic political push to say we weren't going to go the way of venezuela and be a socialist

country. we then heard stacy abrams talk about an america for all versus president trump's america first approach. andrea, quite frankly, what we heard was the president willing to negotiate with kim jong-un, who is a dictator, and to negotiate with the taliban without the afghan administration in the room, as if the taliban really want peace. >> jeffrey, the other concern here -- and we've touched on it -- is according to our own analysis here at nbc, the president's only had 17 intelligence briefings in 85 days. and whether -- he's not a reader, so he doesn't take home books and books of stuff like previous presidents, republican and democratic. >> right. >> and then he's pushing back against a lot of what they're telling him. so his database is not there. >> right. i mean, you know, i think the number of briefings he's actually had is immaterial. it doesn't matter if he had a

thousand briefings. what's salient here, what the actual issue is the president's learning curve, is the president's willingness to listen to the experts and we don't have that, as far as i can tell, in this president >> jeff goldberg, it's always good to see you. thank you very much. wendy sherman as well. and we'll be right back. there's little rest for a single dad, and back pain made it hard to sleep and get up on time. then i found aleve pm. the only one to combine a safe sleep aid, plus the 12 hour pain relieving strength of aleve. i'm back.

aleve pm for a better am. brushing only reaches 25% of your mouth. listerine® cleans virtually 100%. helping to prevent gum disease and bad breath. never settle for 25%. always go for 100. bring out the bold™

thanks so much for being with us. that does it for today. remember, follow the show

online, on facebook and on twitter at mitchell reports. and here is ali velshi and stephanie ruhle for "velshi & ruhle." >> it's great having you here, andrea. hello, everyone. i'm ali velshi. >> i'm stephanie ruhle. it is wednesday, february 6. let's get smarter. >> the state of our union is strong. [ applause ] but we must reject the politics of revenge, resistance and retribution, and embrace the boundless potential of cooperation, compromise, and the common good. in the past, most of the people in this room voted for a wall, but the proper wall never got built. i will get it built. if i had not been elected president of the united states, we would right now, in my opinion, be in a m