"andrea mitchell reports" begins right now with my friend kristen welker in d.c., hey there. >> hey, my friend, good to see you. a busy day. all signs are that president trump will sign a bill to prevent a government shutdown. why won't he publicly commit? >> it's hard to say definitively whether or not the president will sign it until we know what's in it. >> i think the president is inclined to accept the agreement and move on. double standard? vice president mike pence under fire for criticizing congresswoman omar's tweets as anti-semitic while staying silent on the president's prior comments. >> at a minimum she should be removed from the foreign affairs committee. and veep. cory booker says it would be malpractice if he didn't choose a woman as his running mate in a

field where five of his competitors are women. >> i'm not going to box myself in, but should i become -- you'll know i'll be looking to women first. and a very good wednesday to you. i'm kristen welker in washington. we'll get to andrea live in poland with more on her exclusive conversation with the vice president in just a moment. but we do begin with some promising signs from the white house. three sources familiar with the president's thinking tell nbc news this morning they anticipate president trump will sign the bipartisan border deal struck by congressional negotiators to avoid another partial government shutdown. white house insiders warn that nothing is official until pen meets paper. can you acknowledge here and confirm that he will sign it? >> again, we want to see what the final piece of legislation looks like. it's hard to say definitively whether or not the president is going to sign it until we know everything that's in it. there are some positive pieces

of it. but one way or another, one thing you can be sure of is at the end of the day the president is going to build the wall. he said he was going to get it done and he will. >> and joining me now, my teammate over at the white house, nbc correspondent peter alexander rememb alexander, kasie hunt, host of "kasie d.c.," thanks to all of you for being here. peter, as we set the scene here, obviously we've all been reporting throughout the morning that all signs are pointing to yes, and yes with this president, nothing is finalized until it's initialed, right? >> kris, exactly. let me just say you look good on that desk while andrea is traveling overseas. we are hearing now from multiple sources that the president is inclined, expected to, anticipated that he will sign this bipartisan border deal. it's significant for a variety of reasons. the first is it's an

acknowledgement effectively by the president that there's no good, at least on his side, for there being another government shutdown. this would avoid a government shutdown assuming all things go smoothly in the next 48 hours. that funding deadline is scheduled for this friday at midnight so the president appearing to learn some lessons from the 35-day shutdown that hampered washington and frankly affected so many americans recently. there was also a noticeable change in tone from the president. i was in the cabinet room with him yesterday where he appeared to be steering clear of the language saying that he was going to declare a national emergency. that's something he's been threatening. we've been getting signals about it over the course of the last several weeks. as republican lawmakers have expressed real reservations about that, we're now hearing this new strategy from the white house and from those close to the president that what he wants to do, frankly he's hinted at it as well, is reallocate, reprogram federal money to go toward barrier projects. so even if he got less money than he may have wanted

specifically from this bipartisan border deal he could still, as he suggests, find other money. he threw out $20 billion in a tweet overnight to go towards his plans, as he claims, to, quote, finish that wall, kris n kristen. >> peter, to that point, let me go over to kasie, because leader mcconnell yesterday essentially gave the president the green light to go ahead and do that. he said, look, he should sign this deal and if he wants to find other ways to fund his border wall, go ahead and do in a do that. legislators have been putting a few final touches on it but there are a few wrinkles. >> there are always last-minute things in congress, the violence against women act is expected to expire, they're talking about that. they're talking about back pay for contractors from the last shutdown, those people who didn't get paid once the

government reopened. there are some last minute things that are under discussion. but i do think, you know, the overarching question remains exactly what you were talking about peter about, and that is, what is the president going to do? you have to remember, republicans up here still are a little skittish based on their last experience because they had been assured behind closed doors the president was on board with this strategy, that they weren't going to shut down the government. they took action, mitch mcconnell specifically took action in the senate. and then all of a sudden the entire thing fell apart in the face of opposition from the right wing, both from congress and also on the airwaves that we know president trump pays so much attention to. so i was just in a press conference with the top republican leaders in the house, and right now they're saying that they support the framework, kevin mccarthy says in general, if the bill comes out the way it's been framed, he will support it. but you're also seeing them leave room, well, we want to see the text of it, we're not urging the president to sign it yet.

my read on it is they don't want to get burned the same way mitch mcconnell got burned last time, they're leaving themselves wiggle room because the reality is they don't know what the president is going to do and they don't trust him necessarily to say he's going to do something and then stick too it. because you and peter better than anybody know just how quickly this president's mind can change and how dramatically. i think that their best case scenario is what you outlined, that the president would sign the bill and then potentially move some money around. mitch mcconnell did signal that he wouldn't necessarily have too much of a problem with that. democrats i think feel differently. i think if the president tried to move money out of some of these accounts, democrats would be very quick to point out what was getting the short shrift in order for the president to have this money to build his wall. and he does of course have limited ability, congress has to sign off on major or larger sized transactions. but at the same time, i think everybody is just really hoping we don't have to go through as a country what we spent the last

month of the last shutdown going through, kristen. >> no one has any appetite for that on either side of pennsylvania avenue. mike murphy, kasie hits at the crux of what is in the back of every single lawmaker's mind, the fact that if you go back to december, it seemed as though the president was going to sign that initial deal and then he backed out at the last minute because of all of that criticism from his conservative allies. do you think they've handled this moment differently? has the president behaved differently because he was so badly stung by that last shutdown? >> well, i think he learned from the pain last time, at least partially. but republican congressional leaders are nervous today because they're in the toddler management business. i think both the republican party and a grateful nation are imploring the white house chef, don't screw up the cheeseburger or meatloaf at lunch, keep him happy today because we need to land this plane.

he pushed us over the cliff once, they don't want to do it again. it looks like he's moving toward that direction. i do think he learned something last time, which is don't play poker with riverboat pelosi when you have no cards. he has no leverage, the democrats are the majority in congress. trump has to be the hero of every story, he will manufacture a way to be the winner, getting some money, some wall. he won't give that up. as far as the base commentators, they have an influence on trump but i think it's waning a little. he's already attacked ann coulter. he might have figured out the fact that the base is voting for a republican, they're not switching over to kamala harris. >> and mike, following up on that final point, let's just take a listen to what sean hannity overnight, because he's been railing against this deal ever since it was announced two

nights ago, and yet last night he seemed to give the president just a tiny bit of wiggle room. let's take a listen. >> i'm not as concerned as some other conservatives if the president signs the bill. but there's a couple of it'ifs. the president would need to declare a national emergency. this is the time. that is a necessity. >> mike, that's essentially sean hannity's way of saying, it seemed to me, if he signs it, bottom line, he has to take another step like a national emergency, like what peter mapped out. what did you hear in sean hannity's remarks? >> sean hannity, like a lot of personalities in cable news, is in the daily crisis business, every day is an emergency, you get more clicks, you get more business. hannity in pain doesn't really matter to trump. we have this little soap opera, tune in tomorrow to see if i'm okay, meanwhile we have a big crisis over a legal fight, maybe

we're going to raid the corps of engineers fund and have a big fight over cutting flood protections. as long as the drama goes on, i think sean hannity is happy. so the president may be figuring that out, and know in the end they're chained together and hannity isn't going anywhere. >> kasie, let me go back to you, quickly. map out the next 48 hours. how does this get done by friday from the practical sense? could we see votes as early as today? >> kristen, don't forget that congress can act very quickly if they want to. and some of those steps have already been put into motion. they're still writing the bill, and we're learning this morning that hoyer, the number two democrat in the house, steny hoyer, said that the earliest votes would likely be tomorrow night. we expect this to start in the house of representatives. that's simply to do with how long it takes to put pen to paper and write a massive bill like this. they also have to do something which we in capitol hill parlance refer to as martial law

on the floor of the house, they have to take some action to speed up what's going on. we expect that to happen today. the reality is if everybody is on board, congress can move at close to the drop of a hat. if the president is on board, this can be done by friday. if he's not, he won't. >> i know peter and the team at the white house will be trying to get that answer as soon as possible. peter alexander, kasie hunt, mike murphy, thank you for starting us off today. coming up, fighting back. congresswoman ihlan omar fighting back. vice president mike pence weighing in in an exclusive interview with andrea mitchell from poland.

your brain is an amazing thing. but as you get older, it naturally begins to change, causing a lack of sharpness, or even trouble with recall. thankfully, the breakthrough in prevagen helps your brain and actually improves memory. the secret is an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

overnight on the plane to an international summit in poland, vice president mike pence condemned congresswoman ilhan omar's controversial comments on israel, tweeting "they were a disgrace and her apology was inadequate. anti-semitism has no place in the united states congress much less the foreign affairs committee. those who engage in anti-semitic tropes should not just be denounced, they should face consequences for their words." andrea mitchell was on the plane and asked him about his comments. take a look. >> i have to ask you about your

tweet against congresswoman omar. you read her out, we understand you want her to be kicked off the foreign affairs committee. at the same time republicans were very slow to go and punish congressman steve king of iowa. and the president's muslim ban. can you understand how that creates a climate of toxicity in all directions? >> well, representative omar's tweets were a disgrace. anti-semitism has no place in the united states congress or anywhere in our country or the free world. i think it was right for democrat leaders to condemn those remarks. but i think it's important that people that articulate anti-semitic views are also held accountable. the republican leadership was right to condemn steven king's

remarks and also to remove him from the committee. there were consequences to what he said. and unless representative omar resigns from congress, at minimum democrat leaders should remove her from the house foreign affairs committee. i served on that committee for more than a decade, andrea. one of the things that always united that committee was strong support for our relationship with israel and a strong condemnation of anti-semitism. the truth is anti-semitism is not just wrong. it's dangerous. and polish jews during the nazi occupation experienced one of the darkest chapters in human history, i'll be at the warsaw ghetto tomorrow, my wife and i will pay our respects at auschwitz on friday. it's important that the leaders in the congress take a firm stand against anti-semitism. and i think it requires consequences in this case. >> and what the president said

about banning all muslims in 2015? >> well, look, the president has instituted a travel ban for the security of the united states of america. it represents extreme vetting, to ensure that people coming into our country, whatever their background and from whatever nation, represent not a threat to the people of our country. and that's been upheld all the way to the supreme court of the united states. and we'll always put the safety and security of the american people first. look, we embrace the broad diversity of the american people. we embrace legal immigration. but the president will always put the safety and security of the american people first. >> joining me now from warsaw, poland, nbc news chief foreign affairs correspondent and of course the anchor of this program, andrea mitchell. andrea, congratulations on a fantastic interview, we'll play more of it in just a moment. i want to drill down with you a little more on this issue that

you were speaking with the vice president about and read you the tweet from congresswoman omar to the president who said, quote, you have trafficked in hate your whole life against jews, muslims, indigenous, immigrants, black people and more, i've learned from may words, why worl you? >> donald j. trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on. we have no choice. we have no choice. >> so andrea, what do you make of what the vice president told you today? >> well, it's complicated, because of course the muslim ban

per se was not upheld. there were other iterations of it before it became country-specific, and that's what the supreme court upheld, not a broad muslim ban. i was trying to get at the whole issue of how muslim-americans have been discriminated against and have been categorized and profiled by this president when he was a candidate and since. that said, what she said was deemed, you know, inappropriate. it was an anti-semitic trope as far as the democratic leadership is concerned and a lot of other people are concerned. it's a big theme in poland because the vice president and his wife will be visiting the uprising of the polish jews in the warsaw ghetto in 1943. it lasted for a month against the polish and nazi regime. then on friday of course auschwitz. there's a very heavy overlay here of politics here as well. the truth is that steven king, congressman king was not punished by the republicans

until -- for years when he was talking against hispanic-americans, only when he said the most recent things about white supremacism was he kicked off the committees. so there's a big tortured history here. and vice president pence is the strongest, if anything, the strongest supporter of the state of israel, of israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu of anyone in the administration. that said, you can criticize israel without being anti-semitic. >> and andrea, as you are noting, the vice president's agenda is a weighty one, and he's getting ready to meet with nato allies. i know that you asked him about that, the president's relationship with nato. obviously it has been a rocky one. i want to play for our viewers your interview segment on that and then get your reaction on the other side. >> what are you trying to do here? fix the problem? nato allies are concerned that he does not support the alliance. >> president trump has made it

clear the united states stands strongly behind the nato alliance but we expect our nato allies to live up to their commitment to spend 2% of their gdp on their common defense. the president truly believes that burden-sharing means that each of us does our part. and coming into office, president trump observed that too many of our nato allies were allowing the american people and the american military to carry a lion's share of the burden of europe's defense. >> do you feel snubbed that some of our biggest allies are not sending top democrats here, france, germany, england? because of their anger of our getting out of the iran nuclear deal. >> i couldn't be prouder of the fact that 50 nations will be represented here. when president trump went to riyadh in our first year in office, he spoke about the

common threat that iran posed with its malign influence. it's the leading state sponsor of terrorism and is exporting violence all across the region, destabilizing nations across the region. it's that reality that's brought these nations together in the months since. >> and the vice president also is greeting some of the 4,500 american troops that are here, 800 of whom are part of a nato commitment. poland is one of the nato countries that has committed more than the 2% that the president is demanding so it's a poster child, or poster nation, for a strong nato alliance. the president has privately said to nato colleagues, upsetting the alliance, that he wanted out of nato. and also of course the imf treaty cancellation. so there's a lot at stake here with europe very nervous about the american commitment. that's what the vice president is here to address, as well as

of course trying to defend their position on iran as the europeans, kristen, are trying to avoid the american sanctions that have been reimposed after the president got out of that deal as well. a big foreign policy moment for the vice president, and by proxy, the president. >> well, tremendous interview, andrea, that covered a lot of ground. we will be following your reporting for the rest of the week. really appreciate it, good to see you and safe travels. >> thanks for doing the show, thank you, kristen. >> always, thank you, andrea. and coming up, right hand woman? senator cory booker talks to rachel maddow about a potential running mate. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" only on msnbc. rts" onlc ♪ don't fence me in. ♪ let me be by myself ♪ in the evenin' breeze,

♪ listen to the murmur of the tall concrete, ♪ ♪ send me off forever, but i ask you please ♪ ♪ don't fence me in. special offers available at your local mini dealer. when did you see the sign? when i needed to jumpstart sales. build attendance for an event. help people find their way. fastsigns designed new directional signage. and got them back on track. get started at fastsigns.com. for 14 years, i played professional football and i thought my health was perfect. then i had a screening and doctor's discovered i had a serious medical issue. unfortunately, it was the end of my football career, but if i hadn't been tested it could have been the end of my life. i believe in preventive testing, it saved me. many health issues like mine have little or no symptoms.

life line screening goes beyond your anual check-up to tell you what your body isn't. call and schedule an appointment. call right now and save over 50%. just $149 for 5 painless screenings including an ultrasound test that actually looks inside your arteries for plaque that builds up as you age, increasing your risk for stroke and heart disease. after all, 4 out of 5 people that have a stroke, have no symptoms. if you're over 40, take control of your health today and call life line screening. life line screening. the power of prevention. call to learn more. the power of prevention. in so many ways. which cage free eggs taste fresher and more delicious? only eggland's best. which organic eggs have more vitamins and less saturated fat? only eggland's best. better taste, better nutrition, better eggs. make us better people.istening has the power to change us, with audible, you get more. two audible originals- exclusive titles

you can't find anywhere else. plus a credit good for any audiobook and exclusive fitness and wellness programs. all with our commitment free guarantee and always ad free. the most inspiring minds. the most compelling stories. the best place to listen. download audible and start your free trial today. - (phone ringing)a phones offers - big button,ecialized phones... and volume-enhanced phones., get details on this state program. call or visit

and accessoriesphones for your mobile phone. like this device to increase volume on your cell phone. - ( phone ringing ) - get details on this state program call or visit if you got the nomination would you commit to choosing a woman as your vice presidential running mate? >> i think it would be malpractice -- i'm not going to make specific commitments. i believe there should be a woman vice president right now. should it come, you know i'll be looking to women first. >> senator cory booker making some news with my colleague rachel maddow last night, perhaps feeling some pressure with the record breaking number of women running to unseat

donald trump in 2020. joining me down to break it all down, jeremy peters, "new york times" political reporter and an msnbc contributor, and heidi przybyla, nbc news national political reporter. thanks to all of you for being here. we have a little bit of breaking news from the white house, president trump just told reporters that he doesn't want to see another government shutdown, he's going to look for land mines in the government funding bill, and then when asked if he would sign the bill he said he wants to see it before he makes a determination about whether to sign it. jeremy, what do you make of that? >> i think this is reflective of what's happening across the conservative world right now, which is they're going through these stages of grief. eventually they will have to get to acceptance, president trump will have to do that too, he has to sign this. >> there's no way he backs out at the last minute like last time? >> jeez, predicting anything with this president, as we all know, is quite a dangerous business. so never say never with donald

trump. but i think he has to sign it, as things stand right now. government shutdowns are just too risky. and you can see the groundwork being laid in the conservative media, fox news, rush limbaugh, they're saying, well, it may not be everything we want but what's he going to do, this is the reality of divided government. that tells me the white house has been doing its due diligence, president trump has been on the phone calling people, we know, saying, come on, let's get this done, guys, make it easy on me. >> i don't think he feels as though he can bear another shutdown politically. we'll play that sound for viewers as soon as we get it. beth, i want to pick up on cory booker's comments that were really remarkable to rachel maddow last night. essentially he was asked if he could choose anyone other than a woman, he indicated that he was going to look very seriously at a woman. >> yes, how could he not? we're in this amazing moment where we have five, perhaps six viable women candidates either in or gerti igetting in shortly.

cory booker couldn't let that question go by saying, i'm not going to think about any women, it's natural he would say that. cory booker is interesting in this case because he's trying to do something here, we've seen a split between the democrats running for president, between the fighters and the bridge builders. cory booker is trying to be a bridge builder right now, an uplifting message, very positive. he talked about how he worked with his governor, chris christie, on things in new jersey. he's testing the theory that ultimately what democratic voters will want is somebody who can be positive and uplifting and work with others. and that's not the tack we've seen taken by, for example, elizabeth warren, who i went to see announce her candidacy last weekend, where all she's talking about is fighting. >> i think that's a really important point. of course there's a lot of attention on the potential independent candidate, howard schultz. he was pressed overnight on a range of different topics and he didn't really do in some of his answers a great job of filling in the blanks, including when he talked about his taxes.

take a listen. >> you're a billionaire. >> yeah. >> give me a sense, are you talking about you should pay 2% higher, 10% higher, 20% higher federal income tax? >> i don't -- poppy, i don't know what the number is. >> would it go up to the rate under president clinton? are we talking about significantly higher? >> i think what is being proposed is 70%, that's a punitive number. >> what's not punitive? >> i don't know what the number is. i'm suggesting i should be paying higher taxes. >> so heidi, he couldn't give a definitive number. is that a problem? or is it too early to really criticize him for that? >> in theory there is a good market for an independent candidate like a howard schultz. if you look at the polling data, 42% of americans now identify themselves as independents, more than democrats, more than republicans. democrats say they want a more moderate candidate. the problem is in this particular candidate's profile, that he is failing to answer the

number one issue that not only democrats but a lot of republicans feel energized about. if you look at the polling data, three-fourths of americans do feel the rich don't pay enough in taxes. and the fact that his previous statements that he's made criticizing a lot of the policy proposals that are popular in the democratic party right now like the green new deal, like medicare for all, and then failing to have specifics of what his own agenda is, just looks like he's punching down. and i think it's going to create a problem for him in that he's not offering anything visionary to fill that space, which in theory does exist. >> it wasn't just taxes, it was really a range of issues. he was asked about health care, medicare for all, and he seemed to struggle with -- he knew what he was against but he didn't really seem to have details on what he's for, the specifics of it at least. >> right. and that is why this idea of an independent candidate is going to evaporate just as fast as it

has in every other presidential cycle, unless evaluated some kind of grand visionary proposal that can excite people. the green new deal, even a lot of democrats are failing to wholeheartedly endorse that. why? because there's not a lot of specifics. there's a huge market there for green energy production and creating jobs through a green revolution. but again, he's not offering anything in the way of specifics. >> we pick up on that point, the concern that some democrats do feel that when they see the green deal and they see so many of their fellow democrats flocking to that, that there's a concern that the party is being moved to the left too far. what are you hearing? >> there certainly is evidence of that. not just the green new deal, as we've been saying. it's medicare for all, it's the millionaire's tax that elizabeth warren is proposing. certainly the energy in the party is on the left.

you'll start to see candidates, sherrod brown isn't in yet but he's exploring, senator michael bennett from colorado on "meet the press" this weekend, they're saying, hey, guys, this is all sounding very coastal, it might work on the coast but here in the middle of the country where the election is probably going to decided in 2020, these positions still seem a little out there. yes, you're right, polling shows the majority of americans want to see people pay more taxes, rich people pay more taxes, that shouldn't necessarily be radical. but if it's in the context of all these other sort of left-swaying issues, that is a little bit of a danger for democrats. >> we're just getting the tape of president trump speaking about venezuela and then answering some questions. let's take a look. >> and, uh, i think it's going to work out very well. >> reporter: is that a solution for venezuela? >> there are a number of solutions, a number of different options. we look at all options.

>> reporter: are you thinking of sending troops to colombia? >> i never talk about that. >> let me add something on the first question that was raised by vanessa. president guaido, the person about to lead the transition in venezuela, has a strong support. we need to give even stronger support. i think what happened with the eu has been very important. we will host the lima group next week in bowigotabogota. we will, all the countries in the hemisphere, give him the strong support he needs to lead venezuela. >> reporter: if president maduro stays in power, do you have a plan b? >> i always have a plan b and c and d and e and f. i have great flexibility. i probably have more flexibility than any man that's ever been in this office. so we'll see. there are many plans. and we'll see where we go. right now we're in an incredible period. i saw the tremendous numbers of people yesterday, you know,

you're talking about during the week, just numbers that you rarely see anything like it, the protests. a lot of things are happening in venezuela that people don't know about. there's a lot of support for what we're doing and the people that we're talking to, a lot of support. tremendous. >> reporter: at the border in venezuela, how [ inaudible ]? >> they have to be able to let the food in. in many cases it's getting in. they blocked one of the bridges but they haven't been able to block the others. they have to try. i think he's making a terrible mistake not allowing that to happen, it's showing bad things. we're trying to get food to people who are starving. you have people who are starving in venezuela. it just shows what can happen with the wrong government. you have the wrong government, bad things happen. but you have many, many people that are in real trouble from

just hunger. we're delivering and we're sending tremendous amounts of food and other things, supplies. >> mr. president, if i may add to that, i think we have to give a very strong message to dictators. obstructing the access of humanitarian aid is a crime against humanity. and we have to ensure that the humanitarian aid gets to the venezuelan people. and colombia is highly committed to receive humanitarian aid from the u.s. and other countries so it can access venezuela and help the venezuelan people. >> reporter: will you sign it? >> i haven't gotten it yet. we'll be getting it, we'll be looking for land mines, because you could have that, you know, it's been known to happen before to people. we have not gotten it yet. it will be sent to us at some point and we'll take a very serious look at it. we have a lot of things happening right now. we're building a lot of wall right now with money that we

already have. and when people see what we're doing, i think they'll be very surprised had of we're doing a lot of work. and we have planned to do a lot of work. but i have not seen it yet. i appreciate all the work the republicans have done, because they're really going against a radical left. it's a radical left. and they're going against it very hard. and they're fighting. but we're in very good shape. and we're going to take a look at it when it comes. i don't want to see a shutdown. a shutdown would be a terrible thing. i think a point was made with the last shutdown, people realized how bad the border is, how unsafe the border is. and i think a lot of good points were made. but it i don't want to see another one, there's no reason for it. and we're going to look at the legislation when it comes. and i'll make a determination then. >> reporter: is there more money this time than what was on the table months ago?

>> we already are building existing wall with existing funds. but i have a lot of options, just like we do with venezuela, we have on the border. and we have a lot of options and a lot of things are happening, very positive things. you know, the numbers are almost $23 billion which you don't report too often. it's about an 8% increase over last year. so if you look at the total funding, it's over -- it's almost up to $23 billion. it's about 8% higher. the border area is happening. it's going to happen at a really rapid pace. we're giving out contracts right now. and we're going to have a great wall. it's going to be a great, powerful wall. people will not be able to get through that wall very easily. and i think you see that. i think you see it happening. it's very important. it will also have technology. it will have drones. it will have everything else we have. if you look at the other elements, i.c.e. funding will be

complete. we have other things happening which people aren't talking about. we've gotten a lot of funds for a lot of other things. with the wall, they want to be stingy. we have options that most people don't really understand. >> reporter: will you send 5,000 troops to colombia? >> you'll see. >> reporter: what does that mean? >> you'll see. any other questions? [ inaudible question ] i will visit, i want to visit colombia. i look forward to visiting. we're working very, very closely on the drug situation. >> reporter: would you consider amnesty? >> it's something we haven't thought of. [ inaudible question ] it's always interesting. anything ted does is interesting. that's certainly an interesting one. >> reporter: colombia's drug policy? >> we're working together so

that colombia eradicates some of what they're growing in colombia. i wouldn't say that at this moment you're ahead of schedule. but hopefully you will be sometime in the near future. >> but let me mention something to that question, mr. president. in the first four months of our administration, we have eradicated 60,000 hectares, more than was eradicated in the previous eight months. we have a goal, and we will commit to that goal, because it is our moral duty to have colombia free of illegal crops and free of narco trafficking. we have to deliver. we will deliver because it is our moral duty. >> i just want to say before you leave, the economy is doing incredibly well. numbers are really high, really good. we have a big team of people, very talented people over in china right now, negotiating on the china deal. it's going along very well. we'll see what happens. i think it's going along very well. they're showing us tremendous

respect. and something which a lot of countries didn't used to show the united states, they're showing us respect now. big difference from the old days, i will tell you that. so the deal with china is going very well. the economy is doing fantastically. you saw the gallup poll that came out, 69% or so say they're going to be in better shape next year than even this year, they're very happy right now. and that's the best numbers they've had in 16 or 17 years. but the economy is strong. we have a lot of companies coming into the united states. they want to come into the united states. we have a lot of good things happening. the wall is being built as we speak. thank you all very much. thank you. thank you very much. >> and that is president trump meeting with the president of colombia, both leaders unified in their calls for nicolas maduro to step down as the leader of venezuela. nbc news white house correspondent peter alexander is back with us. so peter, give us your analysis of what you heard from the president when it comes to

whether he will sign that bipartisan deal to fund the government. he's not ready to say publicly yet that he's going to sign it. instead he said he wants to see it first. >> reporter: yeah, kristen, i think that's right. he did leave himself that wiggle room. but this is also the clearest indication yet in the president's own words on camera that he is leaning toward moving forward with this. he praised republicans for their work on it, effectively persevering, as he tried to cast it, through the democratic obstruction, as the president tried to frame it. he said he'll be looking for land mines but emphasized he did not want to see another shutdown, something he obviously learned a lesson from. i was struck by the way he tried to frame that last shutdown, saying the 35-day shutdown that polls show most americans blame him for, that cost him in approval ratings, he said it was actually a very productive thing, that it benefitted americans because we learned about issues we're facing down

at the border, but then he said, but we don't need to do it again. that was striking to hear from the president. the bottom line is if things move along as scheduled, as planned, that we will be avoiding a government shutdown at the end of this week. >> peter, thank you for sticking around for that great analysis, really appreciate it. things continue to be fast moving there at the white house. jeremy, let me get your analysis as well, because we heard something that struck me. the president continues to repeat this line about the radical left. as he argues, the democrats are trying to usher in socialism. you and i were talking about 2020 before we turned to the president. this seems to be a preview of what we can expect on the campaign trail, that the left is radical, they're socialists. >> exactly, i'm glad you connected it to socialism, because they have been hitting this, beating this drum for quite some time now. it actually started during the 2018 midterms, kristen, when you saw this in republican ads, because they found that it was rather effective. the problem was it wasn't effective enough to counter the surge of democratic support that

we saw and that allowed them to take over the house. you're seeing it in other areas. you saw the president talk about in the state of the union speech last week about these democratic-led proposals to loosen abortion restrictions, they're painting that as very radical although the truth is a lot more complicated. they're doing this on the border. they're trying to portray the democrats, much as nixon did and other republicans have but nixon really pioneered this in the '60s and '70s with this "party of lawlessness," this "break down in civility" and cultural values that the democrats would permit if allowed to take over. i don't know if it's going to work, is he really the beacon of values and morality? i don't know that many americans see him that way. >> and that's the question, yet he's good at messaging. democrats undoubtedly are huddling, trying to figure out how to counter all of this messages. jeremy peters, thank you so much for covering a range of topics for us today, we really appreciate it. "the washington post"

reports that robert mueller is zeroing in on a meeting between paul manafort and a man linked to russian intelligence. it took place in 2016 say new york cigar room and it was with konstan kilimnick who mueller has indicted. "the post" reports, quote, it was at that meeting that prosecutors believed that manafort and kilimnick may have exchanged key information relevant to russia and trump's presidential bid. the encounter goes very much to the heart of what the special counsel's office is investigating, prosecutor weissman told a federal drug. mimi rocah, former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. clint watts, national security analyst for msnbc and a former fbi special age. and julia ainsley, nbc news national security and justice reporter. julia, i want to start with you. bring us up to speed. what's the takeaway, what's the significance here? >> kristen, "the post" is simply reading this transcript, the 143 pages that came out thursday night. and it was from a sealed meeting

that was then released with some redactions in which weissman, a prosecutor for mueller, said that the meeting that paul manafort had with konstan kilimnick in august 2016 goes to the heart of the investigation, because at the time he was donald trump's campaign chairman, meeting with someone with ties to the kremlin, they discussed polling data he would share and they also discussed a peace plan in which to possibly ease or end sanctions on russia that have been in place since their annexation of crimea in 2014. why weissman is making this argument to the judge goes to what could happen today at 1:30 when these prosecutors and the defense goes back to the same judge. they are trying to make the argument that what paul manafort lied about to prosecutors was material, because that will ultimately lead to whether or not his plea agreement would be torn up and he would face even more jail time. >> and clint, what is your reading of this meeting?

and pick up where julia left off, what will you be looking for today? >> there are several things. one, this occurred at a time when this was the campaign manager, so this is significant. sometimes the trump team will try and parse out and say, well, this was before or after manafort was in the campaign. this meeting happened in the center of it. it also happened after that very strange thing that happened at the republican national convention when essentially there was language put in there that was more russian-supporting and less ukrainian-supporting. there were discussions between manafort and kilimnick about some sort of peace deal with ukraine. the other part is this has been laid down as a foundation for collusion since last year. if you go back to the van der swan sentencing memorandum of last year, it simply said person "a," an agent for russian intelligence services, during 2016. that is a very deliberate connection that was made there, that was more language than you

would normally see in a sentencing memorandum. this would be that connection. if you're going to build a collusion case, you have this meeting, you have quid pro quo policy would essentially come together in an investigation. >> and he has certainly been central throughout the course of this investigation. mimi, i want to ask you about another key player here. michael cohen, as you know, the top republican on the senate intelligence committee, richard burr yesterday slammed him after he asked to postpone his appearance, he said he wasn't feeling well. then cohen was spotted out at dinner. his legal advisor hitting back on defense earlier today on msnbc with my colleague hallie jackson. let's take a look. >> any good will that might have existed in the committee with michael cohen is now gone. on twitter a reporter reported he was having a wild night saturday night eating out in new york with a buddy. didn't seem to have any physical limitations. i would prefer to get him before he goes to prison. >> before he goes to prison. >> senator burr, we are coming

in less than two weeks. we're coming. your staff didn't tell you that before we went on television. we are coming. there were no false excuses. he went out to dinner with his wife. he's coming in the next two weeks. you knew that and didn't tell everyone, and that's disappointing, but i think you're a good guy. >> mimi, is this problematic for cohen? >> at the end of the day i don't think it's problematic if he ends up showing up. delays happen. i don't know whether this is a legitimate delay. there was a delay previously for a different reason. but if at the end of the day what cohen wants out of this is, one, to tell his story as he's always said, and to tell the truth, and two, to get some kind of benefit ultimately with the sentencing judge, which he still could get. he's only going to get that if he actually shows up and testifies truthfully. so i think if he doesn't show up and he doesn't testify, he's just creating new problems for

himself. but ultimately, i think a delay is not going to create huge problems for him. >> all right. well, a lot of headlines related to all of this today. thanks to all of you, julia andsly, mimi rocah, and clint watts, appreciate it. and coming up, betrayal. a former u.s. service member charged with stealing state secrets and giving them to iran. pete williams with that breaking news right ahead and it's right here on "andrea mitchell reports" only on msnbc.

stop fearing your alarm clock... with zzzquil pure zzzs. a drug-free blend of botanicals with melatonin that supports your natural sleep cycle so you can seize the morning. zzzquil pure zzzs. got it. ran out of ink and i have a big meeting today. and 2 boxes of twizzlers... yeah, uh...for the team. the team? gooo team... order online pickup in an hour. today, save up to 50% at the chair event. at office depot officemax.

just last hour, federal prosecutors charged a former air force intelligence officer with spying for iran. prosecutors say monica wit helped iranians use malware to break into computers of her former colleagues. she disclosed the code name and mission of a department of defense classified program. i'm joined now by nbc news justice correspondent pete williams. thanks for being here, pete. >> you bet. >> how serious are these charge s? >> they're spying charges, espionage charges. she defected to iran in 2013. the likelihood the u.s. will lay hands on her is remote unless she tries to travel somewhere. they have also charged four iranians the government says she gave information to about her colleagues, and those four then who worked for the iranian revolutionary guard core launched a cyberattack to plant malware on their computers to capture their key strokes and turn the cameras on their

computers. all those people have since been warned by the u.s.. the authorities say she defected basically for ideological reasons, not for money, and she had started traveling to iran after she left the air force and was a government contractor for two years after she finished that, the fbi warned her. they said, you're a prime candidate for the kind of persons the iranians would want to turn. she said, don't worry about me, and the following year she defected. >> obviously adding to the tensions between the u.s. and iran. wit sent this text message to her handler the same year she defected and later mentioned she could contact wikileaks through russia. quote, if all else fails, i just may go public with a program and do like snowden. of course, snowden leaked top secret documents the same month in 2013. what do you make of that? >> she never did, but it just shows you that's where her mind-set was. this person that she was e-mailing is referred to in a

court document only as individual "a," said to be a person with dual u.s./iranian citizenship who spends most of the time -- that person, i don't know if it's a man or woman -- in iran. that was apparently the person that was her handler, her go between that kind of lured her into spying for iran. they gave her housing, computers to use to facilitate the spying. >> let me ask you about this text message that wit sent to her handler in 2014. i loved the work and i'm endeavoring to put the training i received to good use instead of evil. thanks for giving me the opportunity. what else do we know about the work that she did to gather all of this information? >> well, of course, she had gathered it during her time as an air force intelligence officer. she left as an e-6, technical sergeant and did more intelligence work as a contractor and had the names, of course, of her former colleagues who were targeted with the cyber hacking. had the names of u.s.

intelligence sources overseas and details of a classified government program that was aimed, the government says, at a specific target. >> so for d.o.j., what are the next steps? this has to set off all sorts of alarm bells. >> well, of course, there is always a damage assessment when something like this happens. they have obviously talked to all of her colleagues, looking at did she steal anything else, did she take anything else, were there others involved, then of course, normally you would think this would end in an arrest. that doesn't seem likely in this case. >> all right. pete williams, complicated story. thanks for helping us break it all down. good to see you. that does it for this edition of "andrea mitchell reports." be sure to follow online on facebook and twitter. here are my colleagues ali velshi and stephanie ruhle. >> great to see you. i i'm ali velshi.

>> i'm stephanie ruhle. let's get smarter. a closed door hearing whether he lied to the special counsel's office. >> democrats and republicans on the senate intel committee are telling nbc news they are nearing the finish line in their investigation in the 2016 presidential election and have uncovered no direct evidence of a conspiracy between the trump campaign and russia. >> i'm not sure how to put it any clearer than i said it before. we have no factual evidence of collusion between the trump campaign and russia. >> robert mueller knows more than the senate knows, so robert mueller is going to make the final judgment on whether there was a conspiracy. >> -- >> well, we haven't gotten it yet. we'll be getting it. we'll be looking for land mines because you could have that, you know. it's been known to happen before to people. but we have not gotten it yet. it will be sent to us at some point and we'll take a serious look at it. we have a lot of things happening right