and that wraps up this hour of "msnbc live." i'm phillip mena. now it is time for "weekends with alex witt." alex, good morning! >> thank you for starting us off. good morning to you, my friend. and good morning to all of you from msnbc world headquarters here in new york. it is 7:00 a.m. here in the east, 4:00 a.m. out west. welcome to "weekends with alex witt." was it all a hoax? a new twist in the alleged attack on "empire" actor jussie smollett. why police are now questioning his story. following the money with court battles ahead, the acting defense secretary now has to figure out how to pay for trump's wall. resounding silence. why vice president mike pence got such a cold reception and no standing ovation from world leaders in munich this weekend. and withdrawn. heather nauert backs out of the nomination to be u.s. ambassador to the u.n. the controversy that may have

influenced her decision. we begin with explosive, new details this morning. the alleged attack on actor jussie smollett. the chicago police department investigation has now shifted into whether or not the actor paid two men who were questioned to stage an assault. joining me now, nbc news correspondent kathy park. good morning to you. this is just a sad story any way you look at it, but can you give us the latest on this probe? >> alex, you're absolutely right. i mean, if you've been following this story ever since it broke on january 28th, there seems to be a new twist and turn every single day. so, overnight, we have learned that a police source close to the investigation, they're now looking into whether or not the actor, the "empire" actor allegedly may have paid the two men to stage this attack. you know, chicago police still have a lot of questions for the actor, and he has lawyered up. he has hired a high-profile attorney who issued a statement

overnight, and we want to show you that on the screen. and it says, "jussie smollett is angered and devastated by recent reports that the perpetrators are individuals he is familiar with. he has now been further victimized by claims attributed to these alleged perpetrators that jussie played a role in his own attack. nothing is further from the truth and anyone claiming otherwise is lying." so, what's also interesting, the statement goes on to say, and this is the first time -- i've been following this story for a couple days now -- is that there is indication that he knew one of the men who allegedly was part of the incident on january 29th. he mentioned, according to that statement, that the men -- that one of the men was actually a trainer for him, getting ready for a music video. so that's the first time we heard any indication that he had any ties to the alleged perpetrators. but you know, there's still so many questions around this and throughout this entire time he

has received support but also backlash as well from social media, a lot of claims out there saying that this was all made up. but he sat down with abc earlier this week and insisted that he was telling the truth. >> at first, it was a thing of, like, listen, if i tell the truth, then that's it, because it's the truth. then it became a thing of, like, oh, how can you doubt that? like, how do you not believe that? it's the truth. and then it became a thing of, like, oh, it's not necessarily that you don't believe that this is the truth, you don't even want to see the truth. >> so, there has certainly been a lot of developments over the last couple of days. i mean, just on friday, they took into custody two men from nigeria who they thought might have been linked to the attack. they were later released that

night. and now they are also represented by an attorney who said, you know, they have nothing to do with this. so, there's still a lot of questions out there. we still don't know exactly what the motive may have been that stem from that alleged attack back in january. >> what a tale. okay. kathy park, thank you so much for bringing us up to date on all the shifting, convoluted turns in this one. appreciate that. all right, let's talk about this more. joining me now, criminal defense attorney danny cevallos and ashley merchant. danny, you first. evidence here that has had the authorities turn the tables on this investigation. how did things turn? what do they have now? >> it would be very difficult in the modern era to stage an attack like this, because you would have to do it without ever using your cell phone, without using e-mail, any other communication that we've all become so reliant on. so, what police do in investigating something like this and trying to determine

whether or not someone played a role in their own attack is search all of their communications. and if there's any obvious communication to the folks that apparently or allegedly attacked him, that's going to be a real problem for someone like smollett. in a case like this, giving a false report in illinois is a class four felony, even though it's within the disorderly conduct statute, and it exposes a defendant to up to three years incarceration. so, this is a very serious potential crime. >> okay. so, ashley, lots of political connotations to this story since day one. you've got the filing also of a false police report that danny's talking about, but with regard to, i guess things may have turned when he didn't give up his phone, to danny's point. was that something that you think was a red flag, because things could be traced, right? he was claiming privacy for those people that were on his phone or with whom he had

communicated, but do you think that's something, you know, investigators were like, that doesn't work? >> oh, definitely. i think the fact that he did not want to give up his phone put up a red flag for investigators and caused them to think, well, what is he trying to hide? and it's difficult because oftentimes i have clients who don't want to give their cell phone over to the police and it has nothing to do with the actual crime. it's just that they have privacy issues and they don't want someone going through their phone and it potentially becoming public. >> yeah, right. >> but i think that gave a red flag up. i think another red flag would be if he told the police that he didn't know these suspects and then there's proof that he actually did know them. so that's something that would cause the police to disbelieve what he told them and to look at this from a different angle. >> so, these two men, danny, they were arrested. they have been released. they were allegedly paid to stage an attack. they are cooperating, according to chicago pd. so, what kind of information are they going to be able to offer? >> if they were released, we may

infer that they were cooperating fully. and if they were paid to attack smollett, then they're probably approached by the police and they say, look, you have potentially committed a crime, so now is a good time to tell us everything you know. and history has shown that when folks like this are put in a room without an attorney and presented the facts of life, they often -- and there are tv shows, entire shows based on this human instinct -- they often try to do whatever they can to get themselves out of trouble, and that includes talking or snitching about whoever else they can. >> police in chicago, ashley, say that they've reached out to smollett. they want him to answer some new questions, like what? what will they try to do to corroborate all these stories? >> to me? >> they want to see if there's any connection between him, between smollett and these actual suspects that they have. they want to see if there's anything in their phone records

or if they had any prior, you know, there's been some reports that one of them might have appeared on the "empire" show. there are reports that he might have been a trainer. did they know smollett prior? and they're going to ask him those questions. they're going to ask him if he lied to them, if he did not come forward and tell them that they had a prior relationship. >> look, bottom line, ashleigh, are they going to ask that he come forward with his own truth, if what is being speculated now is, indeed, the truth? are they just going to say did you straight up lie? >> right! without a doubt, they're going to ask him that. they're going to interrogate him just like they would a suspect and ask him those tough questions just like they would a criminal suspect to see if the truth can come out. >> okay. i'm going to ask the two of you to sit around just for a little longer. we're going to take a commercial break shortly and get back to you. a couple more things to get to right now, though, as we start with politics. new today for the first time, we are hearing from the acting defense secretary on whether he is going to approve $3.6 billion from military construction projects to build the president's border wall, and that includes figuring out which

military projects to defund and whether a border wall is even needed. well, here's what patrick shanahan said late yesterday. >> you have not determined that specifically a wall is required to meet that national emergency? >> there have been no determinations by me. we always anticipated that this will create a lot of attention. so very deliberately, we have not made any decisions. we have identified the steps we would take to make those decisions. this is the important part of that. we laid that out so we could do it quickly. we don't want to fumble through this process. >> meanwhile, democratic congressman joaquin castro on twitter condemned the national emergency declaration as those close to the president are defending him after he said this. >> iblgd i could do the wall

over a longer period of time. i didn't need to do this, but i'd rather do it much faster. >> well, here's senator lindsey graham, who had encouraged the president to declare a national emergency. >> hasn't he opened himself up to even more legal challenges? >> i really don't think so. i think the president's been making a persuasive case that the border's broken. i support his desire to get it done sooner rather than later. and i'm disappointed that my democratic colleagues would not give the president the money to secure the border. >> meanwhile, a congresswoman whose district includes portions of the border wall is outlining what's really needed to improve border security. >> there should be a mile-by-mile analysis of what the needs are there. a large portion of the border that i represent is rural. it's remote. one of those large needs is personnel along the border. we don't have the resources that we need in terms of sufficient internet to process claims, in terms of transportation and even health care. making sure that we have an agency that's able to adapt to

changing circumstances as we see different trends in immigration and migration. >> well, the other big news headline today -- state department spokeswoman heather nauert is out as u.n. pick for ambassador. mike viqueira is at the white house with more on all this. mike, with a good morning to you, my friend, what happened here? >> reporter: good morning to you, alex. yeah, this individual, heather nauert, went from the sofa at "fox & friends" to the podium at the state department and president trump had tapped her to be the next a.m. bambassador the united states to the united nations. now the plug has been pulled on that nomination. it had not formally gone to the senate. the "washington post," alex, has some reporting on this this morning. they say it's a good old-fashioned nanny problem, that there was an individual said to be a jamaican national who had been working in her household who had not been paying taxes. some dispute in the story whether she was here legally or illegally. but given the context and everything that's happened on the immigration issue and all of the partisan bickering back and

forth and the hot-button issue that illegal immigration has become, it appears that that is what is sinking this nomination. in a statement, the state department yesterday said that she was not going to be following through with the nomination. she received praise from the secretary of state, mike pompeo, and she herself says the past two months have been grueling for her family, her family living apart in new york city while she was here as the state department spokeswoman. so, heather nauert now out as the nominee, the punitive nominee for the united nations. no word on who a follow-on nominee would be or even who the next spokesperson at the state department is going to be. alex? >> okay. more vacancies to fill. all right. thank you so much, mike viqueira at the white house. joining me now, julian manchester, reporter for "the hill" and david mark, deputy news editor at "the washington examiner." with a good morning to both of you on this early sunday. david, i know you've been following this story, so speak to the optics of all of this and how the trump administration is

responding to it. >> well, the u.n. ambassador role is a high-profile, international relations position. heather nauert, the former nominee or close to nominee, would have had big shoes to fill with nikki haley, the former u.s. ambassador to the united nations. there was always some level of criticism that she didn't have the requisite background for that position. so, clearly, the administration has to go back to the drawing board, scramble to find somebody new, and this could take at least a couple more months. >> yep. and julie, we have nauert citing family reasons, of course, but i'm even looking at something david wrote here. she has faced a lot of criticism for lack of diplomatic experience. how much do you think that may have attributed to the end result here in any way? >> yeah, i think that definitely played a role in this, and i think as nauert's statement said to the "washington post," you know, her family was under a lot of scrutiny, and i think she absolutely realized this.

she also faced a lot of criticism when she came over from "fox & friends." let's remember that the president gets a lot of criticism from other parts of the media for, you know, that revolving door between his administration and fox news. we also know that the president likes to watch quite a bit of fox news and take a lot of policy ideas from fox news, "fox & friends" in particular, so i think that played a role. however, i would point out that nikki haley actually faced kind of similar criticism for not having diplomatic experience either. let's remember that she was governor of south carolina before she came into the united nations. so she didn't have that same international expertise. however, obviously coming from a political government background into that kind of position is very different from nauert's case where she's coming in from journalism and communications into government. >> very good points. okay, national emergency, guys. let's turn the tables here and talk about that. republican representative mark meadows, who's very close to the president, made this argument late last night on fox news. >> the president did a real

shrewd thing. before they signed the bill and sent it to him, before they voted on it, he said i'm going to declare a national emergency. he put them on notice, and yet, congress didn't act. i think the supreme court will look at that -- >> interesting. >> -- and say, why did congress not act? >> what do you make of that statement, david? is congressman meadows trying to make a public case to the conservative supreme court justices? is. >> i think congressman meadows there is really getting to the heart of the matter, that this will ultimately be decided in the supreme court. president trump said as much the other day when he issued this emergency declaration. he basically said the lower courts, we know this is going to be -- there's going to be suits filed. that's already happened, even within hours of the president's action. he said the lower courts are likely to rule against me. then it goes to the supreme court, and we will see what happens there. so, i think this is setting up probably months to come, maybe even years, before it's

ultimately resolved, and there you have congressman meadows getting in his conservative viewpoints and trying to give the president some cover in the halls of congress. >> david, what you just said, that it could be years before this thing is settled, that means that it would be years before the president would get his funding and get any manner of a border wall built under a national emergency declaration? >> well, that's right. the first steps, of course, are likely to be challenges within congress. the house of representatives, of course, now under a democratic control, is going to put up a resolution essentially disapproving of this emergency resolution. that will under the law force the senate under republican control to take a stand. we'll see what happens there. highly unlikely they would override a veto by president trump, so then it does go to the courts. and of course, there are administrative agencies who have to decide how these funds would be moved around. a lot of these lawsuits from outside groups are interesting to note sometimes, in some cases

they're on environmental grounds, constitutional grounds, many other situations. >> yeah. another topic i want to look at with you is 2020. you have a new piece out that cites polls with the most popular choices in the democratic party, and the candidates are not officially in the race yet. break this all down for us. >> absolutely. so, we saw that bernie sanders and joe biden are the most popular candidates right now. and we saw that actually out of biden and sanders' supporters and other supporters of other candidates in theeratio race, w sanders and biden were actually their second choices if they had to pick another option. i think polling right now is premature and it's all about name i.d. so right now, among democratic voters, this is about who they know. the fact is, while in d.c. and while in minnesota we might know who amy cloeb haklobuchar is or york or d.c. we may know who kirsten gillibrand is, the

average american is probably not familiar with them. so ahead of going into 2020 and the primary season, these other candidates who aren't joe biden and bernie sanders, who haven't officially jumped in yet, they need to make a case for promoting themselves and getting their names out there. i would say that kamala harris has probably had the most successful rollout. you know, she came out with that ad on mlk day and has since gotten a cnn town hall and has been very good at promoting herself and doing a lot of public avails. so i think it's up to a lot of the other candidates to really push their name recognition the same way. >> 100% right. 21 months to go, guys! buckle up. anyway, thank you. good to see you both. >> thank you. there are growing suspicions, perhaps now more than ever, that paul manafort may be lying to protect the president, but why? that's next. e president, but why that's next. [knocking] ♪

♪ memories. what we deliver by delivering. ♪ 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.

-jamie, this is your house? -i know, it's not much, but it's home. right, kids? -kids? -papa, papa! -[ laughs ] -you didn't tell me your friends were coming. -oh, yeah. -this one is tiny like a child. -yeah, she is. oh, but seriously, it's good to be surrounded by what matters most -- a home and auto bundle from progressive. -oh, sweetie, please, play for us. -oh, no, i couldn't. -please. -okay. [ singing in spanish ] -please. -okay. (vo) the only network to win in all four major awards is the one more people rely on. choose america's most reliable network on the best device, iphone. get iphone xr on us when you buy the latest iphone.

my people came to me. dan coats came to me and some others. they said they think it's russia. i have president putin. he just said it's not russia. i will say this, i don't see any reason why it would be. our relationship has never been worse than it is now. however, that changed as of about four hours ago. >> new steps this morning in the house democrats' russia investigation as house intel chairman adam schiff tells politico he's discussed legal options with the house general

counsel in an effort to obtain documented details from the president's private meetings with putin. msnbc legal analyst danny cevallos and ashleigh merchant joining me again. the president's attempts to conceal the details, including confiscating his interpreter's notes, that's part of all of this. so, the best legal option as you see it is what now, trying too get those notes? >> there are three categories of persons that could be subpoenaed. one is the president of the united states. the second is the interpreter. and the third, a laughable category, is subpoenaing the president of russia, and i don't think that's on the table. >> right. >> for anyone. because how do you send some gum shoe process server over to the kremlin to subpoena president putin? so looking at the first two categories, even though the easiest route might be subpoenaing an interpreter for testimony or for his or her notes, that is a slippery slope to start going down.

we use interpreters in the united states for all kinds of confidential, very, very sensitive communications, and it might set a precedent that any time you can't get to a criminal defendant, for example, well, just get to his or her interpreter and you'll get the same information. however, that may be the easier avenue than subpoenaing the president. and the supreme court has told us that there is an executive privilege, there are things that the president can keep concealed, but to this day we don't know exactly what those are. >> but danny, before i get to ashleigh, so, this marina gross -- and this is the translator -- i'm just curious, do you know of anything when you sign on the dotted line to be an employee of the state department, you probably have to sign certain things, but is there anything that requires them to keep whatever their translation, their notes, any documents they have, in the hands of the state department, i mean, to be publicly filed? >> within the interpreter profession there is a code of

ethics, but that does not rise to the level of a legal privilege. of course, an employment contract with the state department could override that, depending on whatever the policies are of the state department. again, the interpreter's internal code of ethics doesn't rise to the level of a legal protection like a legal privilege you might have with a doctor or with a lawyer. so it really depends on the state department's relationship with its employees, those interpreters, whether they're independent contractors or actual employees. >> okay. so, are there legal consequences, ashleigh, if the president or anyone close to the president destroyed any of his notes from those meetings? >> there could. there could definitely be legal consequences if the president actually destroyed it or somebody did it at his direction. but the question is whether or not this interpreter is an actual route to go. and we've got some supreme court precedence that says that someone who's actually advising the president, someone who's in a presidential advisory role,

they have a privilege, but an interpreter's an entirely different person, because they're not actually communicating with the president. what this interpreter's doing is interpreting what president putin says and what the president says, and communicating between those two. they don't actually give any advice. they don't actually have the conversation themselves. they are just relaying what's said. so i know that danny mentioned with a criminal defendant that this might set some precedent where we could get notes from a criminal defendant, but the focus would be who that criminal defendant is speaking with. so if they're speaking with their lawyer, they'd never be able to get the notes from the interpreter because there's a privilege between those two parties. so what's relevant is whether or not there is a privilege or confidentiality between the two parties that are actually speaking. and just because there's an interpreter interpreting in the middle, that doesn't change the relationship between those two parties. >> okay. let's move on to paul manafort. i'll start with you, ashleigh, because prosecutors filed a sentencing memo for him. they did not take a position on the sentence, but they cite the

guidelines, which calculates at least 20 years in prison. 20 years, that's essentially a life sense for him because he's 69 years old. how does that weigh into the significance of this? >> i think he is planning on a presidential pardon. i mean, there is no way that a defendant is going to violate a plea agreement when they're facing 20 years, they're facing dying in federal prison, and they don't have some safety valve. and so, normally, a defendant would go in and make a plea deal to try and get a lesser sentence, but he has obviously violated that plea deal and he's violated that plea deal with something in his mind that's going to save him, some safety valve. and unfortunately, i think his safety valve in this case is a presidential pardon. >> okay. danny, i want you to weigh in on all this as well. >> one theory going around is that manafort is protecting the president. another theory, and i think maybe even more viable, is that manafort is protecting his family, possibly he's afraid of what not the president might do but the russians that he may have slighted. >> huh. >> it's an interesting theory and it's something that the u.s.

government in the sentencing guidelines can do little to protect. maybe that's what he's been doing. but in terms of the sentence, you're absolutely right. welcome to federal sentencing in the united states. if you create a loss amount in the magnitude that manafort did in the range of $16 million, talking of millions of dollars, you get very quickly into decades and decades behind bars in federal prison. so, from the outset, manafort's case was different than some of the other characters who merely lied to investigators or did other similar obstruction of justice type crimes. in manafort's case, you create that level, that dollar amount loss, you're always looking at considerable time in prison. >> all right, danny cevallos, ashleigh merchant, good to spend this first half hour with you guys. thanks so much. >> thanks. lawyers for actor jussie smollett says anyone suggesting their client orchestrated the attack on him are lying. the new twist in the investigation, next. and in honor of black

history month, nbc shows "she thrives," celebrating communities and we note brandis daniel. as founder of harlem's fashion row, she showcases multicultural designers. you can read more about brandice and other outstanding women by going to nbc.com/shethrives. going to nbc.com/shethrives. that rocking chair would look great in our new house. ahh, new house, eh? well, you should definitely see how geico could help you save on homeowners insurance. nice tip. i'll give you two bucks for the chair. two?! that's a victorian antique! all right, how much for the recliner, then? wait wait... how did that get out here? that is definitely not for sale! is this a yard sale?

if it's in the yard then it's... for sale. oh, here we go. geico. it's easy to switch and save on homeowners and renters insurance. i'm a fighter. always have been. when i found out i had age-related macular degeneration, amd, i wanted to fight back. my doctor and i came up with a plan. it includes preservision. only preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd. that's why i fight. because it's my vision. preservision. also, in a great-tasting chewable.

[indistinct conversation] [friend] i've never seen that before. ♪ ♪ i have... ♪ i have... i am proud of you, my man. making simple, smart cash back choices... with quicksilver from capital one. you're earning unlimited 1.5% cash back on every purchase, everywhere. like on that new laptop. quicksilver keeps things simple, gary. and smart, like you! and i like that.

i guess i am pretty smart. don't let that go to your head, gary. what's in your wallet?

new today, potentially bombshell allegations rocking the velsion into the attack on jussie smollett. investigators are now looking into whether smollett paid two men to stage the assault. police have been treating the attack as a possible hate crime after smollett filed a report last month in chicago saying two masked men poured bleach on him, put a noose around his neck, and shouted racist and homophobic slurs. officers have arrested two men in the case but released them friday night. and here's how smollett described part of the attack earlier this week. >> it felt like minutes, but it probably was like 30 seconds, honestly. i can't tell you, honestly. i noticed the rope around my neck and i started screaming,

and i said, "there's a [ bleep ] rope around my neck!" i could only go off of their words. i mean, who says [ bleep ] empire [ bleep ] this maga country [ bleep ], ties a noose around your neck, and pours bleach on you? and this is just a friendly fight? i would never be the man that this did not happen to. i am forever changed. >> smollett's attorneys have denied any suggestion that the actor was involved in his own attack. they say he is the victim of a hate crime and has cooperated with police. but joining me now, pop culture expert and tv journalist john murray. john, with a good morning to you. okay, let's get to smollett's latest statement, and it's from his attorney. part of it reads as thus -- "one of these purported suspects was jussie's personal trainer who he hired to ready him physically for a music video. it is impossible to believe that this person could have played a role in the crime against jussie

or would falsely claim jussie's complicity." talk about all of this, the public perception of this probe and what this adds to it, because it seems, john, that this investigation is becoming more confusing to the general public, i mean, by the hour, right? what does this mean for smollett and his public image? >> you know, alex, this whole story has had more twists and turns than an episode of "empire," and i like a lot of people am ready for the season finale. i want answers. i want results, without a cliffhanger. you know, i, like so many people, posted messages of concern and compassion when the story broke of the alleged attack against jussie smollett. and because of his reputation as an inintegrity raleigh person, his work with social justice, lgbt advocacy and all of the other things he did before becoming a household name to many on "empire," many people wanted to believe him, and many of us still hope his account of things is actually true. however, the media reports of this story, the twists and the turns, the speculation, the

innuendo, all of it has created so much doubt and so much scandal. i don't understand what a person would gain from fabricating a story of this magnitude. >> right. >> i mean, it literally would be like the hollywood equivalency of a hybrid between milli vanilli and twanna brav lee and i don't know what anyone would win from that. >> yeah. we had smollett answering questions regarding his phone records on "good morning america." listen to what he said. >> they wanted me to give my phone to the tech for three to four hours. i'm sorry, but i'm not going to do that. >> why? >> because i have privacy pictures and videos and numbers, my partner's number, my family's number, my castmates' numbers, my friends' numbers, my private e-mails, my private songs, my private voice memos. i don't know who that's going to be to hand over my phone for -- and honestly, by then,

inaccurate, false statements had already been put out there. >> joe, what do you think of that as a justification for not just handing over his phone to police to take a look at? >> well, you know, i probably would be apprehensive about just turning my phone over, too. you had an attorney on earlier who also said that her clients often are resistant about turning their phone over and i watched the full robin roberts interview and i had to say, if this interview wasn't real, he deserves an oscar for best tv interview because it was engaging and very believable. when you take jussie on just his reputation and the interview and what we know of him, you know, as crazy as this story is, everybody's rooting for him. everybody believes this story. there have been so many media holes, so much speculation, particularly from the local chicago press that has created doubt. at the end of the day, we need answers, we need it resolved and he needs to get back in and get this settled so we know how to move forward.

>> john, here's the thing, i was having this conversation with my colleagues in the makeup room getting ready for the store. what is at stake for marginalized communities, people who face threats, hate crimes, discrimination, if his story is found to be false? >> alex, unfortunately, if this story is found to be false, i don't know how he could recover professionally. i think this literally would be the end of his career as a thriving actor in hollywood, as an artist who has a top ten recurrent song on r&b radio right now. >> i agree 100% because it's hard to recover from that, and that's a tragedy potentially in the making, but for these communities that he's disparaging. >> absolutely. this is a step backwards for anybody who's advocating for social justice, all the people who support colin kaepernick. everybody who's out here advocating for civil rights, all the other celebrities that are active in the political spectrum. and you know, the people advocating for lgbt rights. this would be a blemish to all of them and would be red meat to every maga supporter from here

to timbuktu. >> john murray, good to talk to you. see me again. >> any time, alex. on the world stage, the trump administration today is getting the cold shoulder, and it's more than an embarrassing rebuke. that is next. an embarrassing rebuke that is next up the years. but what i do count on... is boost® delicious boost® high protein nutritional drink has 20 grams of protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals. boost® high protein. be up for life. every day, people are fighting type 2 diabetes with food,

family and farxiga, the pill that starts with f. farxiga, along with diet and exercise, helps lower a1c in adults with type 2 diabetes. it's one pill a day. and although it's not a weight loss drug, it may help you lose weight. do not take if allergic to farxiga. if you experience symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking and seek medical help right away. do not take farxiga if you have severe kidney problems, are on dialysis, or have bladder cancer. tell your doctor right away if you have blood or red color in your urine or pain while you urinate. farxiga can cause serious side effects, including dehydration, genital yeast infections in women and men, serious urinary tract infections, low blood sugar and kidney problems. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have signs of ketoacidosis, which is serious and may lead to death. ask your doctor about the pill that starts with f and visit farxiga.com for savings. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. we all make excuses for the things we don't want to do.

but when it comes to colon cancer screening... i'm not doin' that. i eat plenty of kale. ahem, as i was saying... ...with cologuard, you don't need an excuse... all that prep? no thanks. that drink tastes horrible! but...there's no prep with cologuard... i can't take the time off work. who has two days? and i feel fine - no symptoms! everybody, listen! all you need is a trip to the bathroom. if you're 50 or older and at average risk, cologuard is the noninvasive option that finds 92% of colon cancers. you just get the kit in the mail, go to the bathroom, collect your sample, then ship it to the lab! this is your year! own it! cologuard is not right for everyone. it is not for high risk individuals, including those with a history of colon cancer or precancer, ibd, certain hereditary cancer syndromes, or a family history of colon cancer. ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers. introducing zero account fees for brokerage accounts.

and zero minimums to open an account. at fidelity, those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win, saved by zero ♪ new today, president trump's foreign policy under fire on the world stage for the fifth consecutive day. this morning the european security conference is wrapping up in munich with more pushback from the iranian foreign

minister. yesterday, eu allies taunted u.s. officials, including vice president mike pence over war rhetoric against iran and shrinking support for nato. here's part of a report from nbc chief foreign affairs correspondent andrea mitchell. >> reporter: it was a chilly reception from the moment he arrived at the munich security conference. >> i bring greetings from the 45th president of the united states of america, president donald trump. >> reporter: the silence was deafening. that's because president trump has split with america's closest allies on nearly every issue. unlike mike pence, germany's chancellor angela merkel got a standing ovation for her speech, warning against recent trump policies. and the conference chairman even suggested president trump, not vladimir putin, is now widely viewed as undermining world order. >> joining me now, matt apuzo, nbc contributor, joining us from brussels, the seat of the eu. matt, when i heard that moment of silence, i was like, youch! that was a massive rebuke,

right? >> yeah. i mean, look, this is angela merkel's last speech to the munich forum, and she's really the leading voice, both for a united europe and also for very strong europe/american relationship. frankly, the way that ronald reagan was once a leading voice of that strong partnership. and trump has really changed that. i know that that's obvious, but it's important to understand that he's both changed the republican line, which was we need this really, really strong, strategic alliance between the european nations and the united states, and we also -- it's now changed the united states' view of this, not just the republican view. it's america first now. and so, he has upended the order in that regard. and so, that's where this tension comes from. >> this angela merkel speech gained quite a lot of traction. in fact, we're going to show video of when she spoke out against the u.s., declaring

german cars a national security threat to impose sanctions, but then you take a look. we're showing ivanka trump's reaction while everybody around her's cheering angela merkel, we see that there. and your paper reports that when merkel got that standing ovation, ivanka, the russian foreign minister, and a chinese official all remained seated. i mean, does that sum up the relationship right now? >> it really does. the european leaders that you talk to here and european officials you talk to here, they really are struggling to understand the u.s. line right now and what the u.s. policy is. the idea that german auto manufacturers are a national security threat to the united states, i mean, it just has people scratching their heads, because they say, look, we understand trade negotiations, if you want to get a better deal, whatever. but to call it a security threat. we're all in this together, or at least we thought we were.

and so, you can tell, we're two years in, and european leaders are still trying to understand the trump doctrine and sort of unpredictable nature of his presidency. >> when you say unpredictable, do you mean it's hard to say where this is going to go next? >> on any given day. >> all right, matt apuzzo, good to see you. thanks very much! >> thanks. despite polls that show the border wall's unpopularity, president trump is banking on the border battle to get him re-elected. so, how is that going to work for him? -elected so, how is that gog into work for him?

♪ raquen... rakutahn... rakooten... ♪ rakuten oh! is this my money? whoaaah! haha! rakuten ♪ ahhh! rakuten!

at outback, your steak & lobster wish is our command. steak & lobster is back by popular demand, starting at only $15.99. hurry in to outback! and try our everyday lunch combos, starting at $7.99. what would it look like [if we listened more?] could the right voice - the right set of words - bring us all just a little closer, get us to open up, even push us further? it could, if we took the time to listen. the most inspiring minds, the most compelling stories. download audible and listen for a change. guys go through a lot to deal with shave irritation. so, we built the new gillette skinguard with a specialized guard designed to reduce it. because we believe all men deserve a razor just for them. the best a man can get. gillette.

new details about the president's risky move, shifting his signature campaign pledge of build that wall to finish that wall, despite nothing being built so far. "the washington post" reporting trump's team is trying to use the new line as a driving theme for his re-election campaign, quote, attempting to turn his failure to build such a project into a combative sales pitch, against the political establishment on immigration. okay, i want to get to a few more details starting with you,

brian, on this article which it reads and faced with the fact that he has yet to build an inch of the concrete or steel wall he promised trump and his campaign have started relying on a rhetoric rhetoric rhetorical sleight of hand. >> if you look at what the president has been saying he's basically already running against congress again and saying paul ryan didn't do his job, didn't give him his wall funding when republicans had control of both the house and senate. hez pitting himself as a change agent and it's very defer from what we've seen in past presidents going into hair second term running on their record, running on how well they've done. he is going to run on the record of the economy, but he's going to run against congress on immigration. >> you think if he throws in the record on taxes that's going to be a good thing to pit on the

economy? >> yes, if the economy is doing well the american people will feel good about the economy and the american president as a steward to the economy. with all the talk about taxes ultimately what people care about is do they have more money in their pockets, do they have a job and is the economy doing well? they will help them unless the economy has a downturn going into the next cycle. >> here's how mark schwartz is talking about this plan. he says the point of the wall is to show how the president is committed to border security and painting democrats into a corner as being against that. what do you make of that? how much of this message is about a wall versus border security? >> thank you for having me. you're not really talking about a metaphor here. we're talking about actual funding that's going to have to

come from somewhere. and really we're talking about american taxpayer funds, which i respectfully disagree with brian. i think people are going to be very upset when they're going thru up until april 15th when they have to pay for their taxes and understand what exactly this tax reform meant for their bottom lean and their pocketbooks. ultimately when you're talking about this metaphor we're talking about $3.5 billion is going to be pulled for medical construction. that's hospitals we're going to help and support military families for active duty members. you're talking about $2.5 billion that's being removed from drug interdiction and the defense department's budget. this is not a metaphor. this is actual operation. these are actual families lives that are going to be greatly affected by this. >> so this line, finish the wall. there's a gop strategist that

told "the washington post" it creates the illusion of success. and then you have speaker nancy pelosi the president is trying to create the illusion of an emergency. are you sensing a theme here? >> i think when you talk about the national declaration emergency there are some conservatives that have some concerns about it. the idea this is an article one power, this is going to be fought out in the courts. it's a complicated question whether the president can do this because has congress sufficiently delegated that power to the president. when you look at finish the wall as a theme, it's a lot better than teardown the walls. i think democrats have overreached a bit, and many have called for all walls immoral, and they're being painted into a situation where if it's finish the wall versess teardown the walls, i think the american people are okay with finish the walls. >> look in terms of national

emergency the big question remains of the president setting a precedent for future democratic presidents with this national emergency declaration, and has he raised the possibility of a future democratic president declaring a national emergency around things like guns or climate change or any other number of issues? >> i absolutely believe he's opened the door to this and rightfully so. we have actual tangible threats to our national security and to our society right now that needs to be addressed. and when you talk about climate change and climate security and energy security, when you talk about health care, gun violence as we saw just this week two mass shootings happened in the united states yet again. my heart goes out to those individuals in illinois and aurora. but for the idea this, the border has been some type of national emergency that requires a presidential executive ord, some type of action is ludicrous. the president is down in florida

yet again playing golf and having brunch literally hours after declaring a national emergency. that is not a serious thing for a president to do in this regard. so i look forward to future democratic presidents taking real action on real emergencies. >> all right, guys, that's a wrap for now. for 2020 presidential candidates social media can be a blessing and perhaps even a curse. you're going to find out. to fit so, i started with the stats regarding my moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. like how humira has been prescribed to over 300,000 patients. and how many patients saw clear or almost clear skin in just 4 months - the kind of clearance that can last. humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to symptoms. numbers are great. and seeing clearer skin is pretty awesome, too. that's what i call a body of proof.

humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. want more proof? ask your dermatologist about humira. this is my body of proof. there's brushing...and there's oral-b power brushing. oral-b just cleans better. even my hygienist said going electric could lead to way cleaner teeth. and unlike sonicare, oral-b is the first electric toothbrush brand accepted by the ada. oral-b. brush like a pro.

you might or joints.hing for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

that's a wrap for me on this hour of weekend with alex witt. stay where you are. it is time for up with david. >> this morning's all the president's men and women withdrawn from consideration. >> heather once upon a time did the headlines, now she's in the headlines. >> state department's spokesperson heather nauert. >> multiple reports this morning she had an issue with a nanny. plus a story on jussie smollett continues to change on suggestions he may have staged that assault. >> i want