that wraps up this hour of "msnbc live." "andrea mitchell reports" starts right now. and right now on "andrea mitchell reports," under fire and fury. an angry president trump accuses house democrats of overreach after three committees broaden the scope of their investigations well beyond the mueller probe. >> there has to be a check on the executive. we have to protect the rule of law. that's what we're here for. coming up, presidential candidate and senate judiciary committee member amy klobuchar. a multimedia dollar merger to punish cnn. >> the president often muses out

loud about the companies he doesn't like and doesn't understand why he can't unilaterally using the power of government to push them. an alabama tragedy. communities coming together after the deadliest tornado outbreak in six years. the father of a 10-year-old girl killed in the storm tells lester holt how police stopped him as he rushed to the scene. >> you told the police, obviously, who you were looking for. >> they were very kind to let me come be with her and helped me carry her out. they had to help a little bit. and good day, everyone, i'm andrea mitchell in washington where president trump is firing back at house democrats spearheading the deep dive into his personal, political, and business background, calling chairmen jerry nadler and adam schiff "stone cold crazy" in his

first tweet of the morning, later writing the investigations are, quote, the greatest overreach in our country and a big fact fishing expedition desperately in search of a crime. joining me now, msnbc correspondent kristen welker, phil rucker, and harry litman, former deputy assistant attorney general. kristen, this is an angry president pushing back. we're hearing from sarah sanders as well. are they going to cooperate, are they going to stonewall? what do you think they're going to do? >> in terms of the strategy, andrea, they are on the same page now when it comes to maevenlg messaging. you read the tweet from president trump and sarah sanders echoed that, calling this disgraceful and a fishing expedition. there's that term again. president trump was asked yesterday by our hans nichols if he would in fact cooperate. he said, look, i always cooperate, at the same time this is a witch hunt. based on my conversations, what's going to happen now is

the requests will be reviewed by the white house counsel. and by the way, there are of course requests for folks outside the white house, so their attorneys are reviewing those requests as well. the question becomes what may be protected by executive privilege, will they claim that. i anticipate, and i wouldn't be surprised, if some of the documents, a number of the documents are in fact, the white house will argue, protected by that. and you might see the outside allies of the president making the same case depending on what specific documents are requested. so there's the messaging and then the legal strategy. they're huddled here behind the scenes trying to determine what the next steps will look like now that they have the specific requests, andrea. >> and the other committees, the other chairs who have gone after the president with a broad request which is to include the translators covering the white house, the translators from the

putin summit and the suggestion that the president may have tried to destroy records, phil, what about that? >> that's an extraordinary request we saw come in from the foreign affairs committee. it's not likely that the white house will cooperate with that. people i talked to yesterday indicated that seemed like a real reach. but it's certainly something that the white house counsel's office will be reviewing. remember, they added more than a dozen lawyers earlier this year to prepare for this very moment, to prepare to fight back against some of these oversight investigations. they're going to be reviewing every request. and by the way, it's not over. my colleagues are reporting that house democrats are preparing, they're in the final stages of preparing to request ten years of the president's tax returns. that could come any day now. and there will be additional investigative inquiries as well. >> we'll see some more explosive tweets. of course this is the only modern president who has not

released his tax returns when he was a candidate, even, so a sensitive subject. ty cobb. harry litman, let's talk about ty cobb, former presidential lawyer, speaking out on a podcast. we wanted you to hear what he had to say about robert mueller. >> what do you think about bob mueller? >> i think bob mueller is an american hear roro. i think the world of bob mueller. he is a very deliberate guy. but he's also a class act. and a very justice-oriented person. i was there for the white house. rudy is there to represent the individual. but keep in mind that you can criticize the strategy, it wouldn't have been my strategy. i don't feel the same way about mueller. i don't feel the investigation is a witch hunt. >> i guess we can understand why ty cobb is no longer working at the white house, harry litman.

>> yeah, well, look, what ty cobb had to say is, the conventional view, the universal view in d.c., and the accurate view. the attempt to try to demonize mueller gets traction only within the trump base. and it's just a political and a false talking point. it's also very bad lawyering. to the extent this winds up in the courts, we've seen from roger stone, from michael cohen, from paul manafort, how judges react to this kind of demonizing of mueller in particular, who everybody regards with the highest respect. so it's merely a political strategy. but of course we're now, especially having moved to congress, in a political sxheetg and it may just get some traction with the people that trump and rude ruy giuliani are playing to, the base and some of the republicans in the senate. >> harry litman, kristen welker,

phil rucker, thanks so much to all of you. minnesota democratic senator and presidential candidate amy klobuchar joins me now, member of the judiciary committee. senator, thank you very much for joining us. william barr has said he's not going to recuse himself. it's one of the questions you asked during his confirmation hearing. and your reaction to that? did you think he should have recused himself? i think it was pretty clear that whoever succeeded jeff sessions was not going to get the job if they didn't answer that question the way the president wanted it. >> i thought he should have recused himself, i made that clear at the hearing. you look at the 19-page memo he wrote which was kind of an application for the job, in which he espoused a very, very large role for executive power, outsized role, not consistent with a lot of the case law. and so i was very concerned, given what he said in that memo about a president and what a president can do and whether a president can basically make the

laws. so that really bothered me. so that's why i asked him that. and i noted that, you know, he had commended others for recusing themselves in the trump justice department, like attorney general sessions. and yet he himself isn't recusing himself. i will say it doesn't surprise me, andrea, at all. i thought that's what he would do. but i don't think it was the right decision. i think the question is what he would do with the advice as well of career justice people. i don't know myself what that advice was in this case. but i asked him if he would also follow that and he wouldn't commit to that. >> now, something else has come up in jane mayer's "new yorker" piece on fox news and the white house. we'll be interviewing her shortly on all of that. but one of the things which came out which surprised a lot of people, evidence she has from her sources that both gary cohn and john kelly when they were in the white house were being

pressed by the president to get the justice department to block the merger, the time warner merger which involves cnn, a frequent target. i want to play this from the confirmation hearing, because you brought this up, because william barr was on the board of at&t. >> you were on the board of time warner and you signed a sworn affidavit questioning whether the justice department's decision to block the merger was politically motivated given the president's private/public animus toward the merger. >> at that meeting i was concerned that the antitrust division was not engaging with some of our arguments. and i got concerned that they weren't taking the merits as seriously as i hoped they would. but i have -- you know, i have no, uh, i'm not sure why they acted the way they did.

>> in your oversight function on judiciary, do you believe the committee should revisit this issue with barr and the justice department as to what kind of pressure they had from the white house, given what jane mayer is reporting about what gary cohn and former chief of staff kelly were told? >> i do. and that's why, andrea, i sent letters to the white house and to the justice department. i never got a straight answer. i have my own issues with this deal. but you have issues with the deal, they should be related to the merits, not because you don't like cnn. that's what the president was focused on. that's wrong. and i'm glad this reporting is coming out now. it's going to give me a second shot at this, to make the point. and as a bigger matter, antitrust is something we should be talking about more. i was with robert reich this morning, and he is appearing before our antitrust subcommittee today for a hearing. you have more and more consolidation in this country. it means prices go up. it means innovation and entrepreneurship go down. we're basically going back to the gilded age in terms of consolidated power.

and this white house talks a game that they want to do something about it but every time they do it it's just a political hit on a certain company or liking a certain company. that's what we're hearing out of the white house. and i think the justice department should be taking this on, have the resources that they need, and do this in the right way, not just because of some kind of political grudge match. >> robert reich, of course, the former labor secretary under bill clinton and a professor of economics. let me also ask you, just to wrap up the questions about the justice department and this attorney general, he gave you a very lawyerly answer at confirmation about whether he will disclose the results of the mueller probe, which we think is immine imminent. how much do you think he should be forced to disclose of the report? >> this is going to be a moment for attorney general barr, because he said at the hearing

that he respected mueller, he wanted the investigation to be completed, and that he would do all that was possible to release the report. now, i didn't like the words he used because i felt that he was kind of hiding behind the rules. and the rules do have some restrictions in them. but there is every reason that he should put the public's interest in mind, the interests of our country as we approach another election in 2020. we saw what russia did last time. we know from intelligence officials that the trump administration, what they may do again. and for the sake of our democracy and our country, he must make this report public. that is what i will be saying, what those of us on the judiciary committee not to see. and otherwise we are never going to what happened. we need to have the facts. >> now, of course you're running for president, we want to ask you about the campaign. hillary clinton has now for the first time on camera ruled out running. this was to bronx news 12. let me play a little bit of

that. >> i'm not running. but i'm going to keep working and speaking and standing up for what i believe. i'm not going anywhere. what's at stake in our country, the kinds of things that are happening right now, are deeply troubling. >> what role should she play as the former nominee? >> well, first of all, this doesn't surprise me. i had a really good meeting with secretary clinton about some of the things that she needs to be taking on in the country. of course foremost is how we're dealing with foreign relations and diplomacy. i think she could be a very strong voice because she understands the need to stand with our allies. you look at what the president just did, coming back from north korea, taking the words of a dictator, kim jong-un, over the hearts and souls of this family, the warmbiers. you look at what he did with

respect to the jamal khashoggi case. all of these things are not standing up for america's democracy and not standing with our allies. that is where i think secretary clinton, among many other ways, can be a strong voice as we head into this election. >> what about joe biden, who is kind of the hamlet of this drama? many people including myself, from my reporting, believe he is going to get into this, perhaps not before april. does he then sort of take over the democratic field? >> i think that -- first of all, i have a lot of respect for vice president biden. i truly enjoyed working with him when i was in the senate. i think we're going to have a lot of competition, that's a good thing. i don't think it's fair to say, when you have so many excellent people running, that any one person will take over the field. it's going to be a long year. >> let me ask you about another big issue, medicare for all.

there's an op-ed by david brooks today in "the new york times" saying medicare for all would be plausible if america were a blank slate, but the easiest way to get health care for all, to go back to 1776 and undo the current system. >> we should be open to ideas. health care premiums are too high. we made strides with the affordable care act to make sure people are covered. but that's just a beginning. what we should be doing is some immediate fixes, reinsurance cost sharing, then go to a public option, something that president obama wanted to see when he passed the affordable care act. you can do it by expanding medicaid and medicare. we can get to universal health

care, which is where we want to get to immediately, because we've just been through the affordable care act. to not mention pharmaceutical prices would be wrong because that's the one area the affordable care act did nothing about and congress has done nothing about. it's finally time to move to take on those pharma prices by bringing less expensive drugs in from other countries or unleashing the power of 43 million seniors to negotiate better prices, lifting that ban on medicare, and then stopping the practice where big pharma pays off generics, a bill i have with senator grassley so we can have true competition. >> one of the results in our new nbc news/"wall street journal" poll that came out sunday is a majority of americans do not like the socialist label. is that a problem for bernie sanders? >> you know, you should talk to bernie about that. he and i have worked together on

a number of issues including these prescription drug issues that i just brought on. i will just speak for myself. i'm not a socialist. i'm a democrat. i'm proud of that. and i work both in the private sector and the public sector. but that doesn't mean that we're not living at a time where you want to have some checks on the private sector. that's why i brought up the antitrust laws earlier, andrea. that is an area where decades of conservative court decisions, inaction by congress, more big companies, sophisticated companies that our government hasn't been able to put any kind of a check on. that's an area where, no, this isn't about socialism, it's republicans. teddy roosevelt, the trust-buster, took this on early on. and it's time to bring this issue back again. >> finally, since you took this on, your opening line at the gridiron where you asked, jokingly, how did everyone like the salad, obviously trying to deal with the "new york times"

story which criticized you for your staff relationships, for an an incident involving salad and your frustration with your staff. do you think that report, that that story is unfair? >> first of all, i was just making fun of myself, it was the gridiron, and that's what you do when you're on that stage. >> understood. >> but i am -- what i can say is this. i have a great staff. i wouldn't have had such a great announcement and town hall, you name it, how we've been getting around the country, both on our political campaign and in our official office. i'm proud of them. we've just had the news which wasn't about me, about our staff, that vanderbilt found that i was the most effective democratic on 15 metrics. the first one since 1994. and john mccain was able to be in the minority party and break in the top five. that's not about me. that is about an incredible staff. >> senator amy klobuchar, candidate for president, senator from minnesota, thank you so much. thanks for being with us. >> thank you, andrea.

and up next, i'll talk to the reporter who broke that news about the president's role in trying to block the at&t/time warner merger, among other big scoops in that "new yorker" piece. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc. ron! soh really? going on at schwab. thank you clients? well jd power did just rank them highest in investor satisfaction with full service brokerage firms...again. and online equity trades are only $4.95... i mean you can't have low cost and be full service. it's impossible. it's like having your cake and eating it too. ask your broker if they offer award-winning full service and low costs. how am i going to explain this? if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab. schwab, a modern approach to wealth management.

in jane mayer's explosive and exclusive "new yorker" article, "the making of the fox news white house," she details the exchange in the summer of

2017 in which president trump reportedly ordered his then director of the economic council, gary cohn, to tell the justice department to kill at&t's acquisition of time warner which owns cnn, a well-informed source telling mayer trump called cohn into the oval office as well as john kelly, the chief of staff, saying, i'm telling them i want the deal blocked and nothing's happened. cohn told kelly, don't call the justice department, we're not going to do business that way. jane mayer joins me now. just another jane mayer exclusive in "the new yorker." you're detailing this relationship with fox news which is significant and only last night the president was doubling down with sean hannity, amid new scrutiny of his ties to fox news in your piece. what is the import here? aside from the fact that i

inappropriately ordered the pressuring of the justice department to block a major merger. >> the question is, is the president -- has he been abusing his power to help his friends rupert murdoch, the mogul over at fox, and to hurt his enemies, the people at cnn. this was an order from the president to his top economic adviser in the white house to block a deal, a very major, multibillion dollar corporate deal. if they blocked the deal it was going to hurt cnn and help fox. it seems like he's trying to punish his enemies and help his friends by using the u.s. justice department. >> another thing you cite in this story is that fox killed the stormy daniels story, that they knew about it before the election, which would be, you know, sort of extraordinary. you write that after getting one

noncommittal answer after another from her editors, the reporter who tried to file the story at fox, last heard from the head of foxnews.com, who said to her, good reporting, kiddo, but rupert murdoch wants trump to win so just let it go. >> can you imagine? if you want evidence that fox was killing stories for political purposes to effect the election, that's about as strong evidence as you can get. you've got an editor saying we're going to kill a story because it's going to hurt trump. and the owner of this company, the mover and shaker, rupert murdoch, wants trump to win, so they killed it. so the stormy daniels story didn't come out until a year and a half later, long after trump was elected. >> and we now know potentially the president was paying illegal hush money to kill the story at the time, he was so worried about its outcome on the election. let me ask you about the first

republican debate where fox, according to your reporting, leaked debate questions that megyn kelly was going to ask. we don't have any idea whether she was aware of this. >> i think she was not aware of it, is my sense. and so megyn kelly asked a famously tough question of trump in the debates. and according to several sources at fox, trump was tipped off in advance to this. and we do know for sure that he called fox the day before the debate and he was agitated and was upset that he heard there was going to be a tough question. he spoke to someone and according to two sources who were fox insiders, one of whom is an eyewitness that ailes tipped off trump. >> the late roger ailes, then in charge. and bill shine from fox, now the white house communications director, they've hired a lot of people from fox, we know his appearances, the president's

appearances on fox, mike pompeo, not known for doing a lot of network interviews, about three fox interviews in one day. >> i think at this point fox has gotten something like 44 presidential interviews. the rest of the networks have gotten ten altogether. i think cnn got none. clearly the president is playing favorites. he's very tight with fox. and the former president of fox who is now his communications director. it's a very close loop that they've got going. and i think, you know, a lot of people i interviewed said it raises questions that are troubling about our democracy, when the number one rated cable news show is -- appears many times to be an arm of the white house. >> and of course sean hannity appearing onstage and at other events. fox news, we should point out, has some great reporters and correspondents. >> they do, and it's a disservice to them in many ways

and i'm sure it's uncomfortable to some of them to have this situation going on. there ought to be a line between politics and news and it seems like it's getting crossed and blurred every day over there. >> jane mayer, great to have you here. >> good to be with you. coming up, why democrats are taking action against a freshman congresswoman from their own party. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports." >> tech: at safelite autoglass,

we really pride ourselves on making it easy to get your windshield fixed. >> teacher: let's turn in your science papers. >> tech vo: this teacher always puts her students first. >> student: i did mine on volcanoes. >> teacher: you did?! oh, i can't wait to read it. >> tech vo: so when she had auto glass damage... she chose safelite. with safelite, she could see exactly when we'd be there. >> teacher: you must be pascal. >> tech: yes ma'am. >> tech vo: saving her time... [honk, honk] >> kids: bye! >> tech vo: ...so she can save the science project. >> kids: whoa! >> kids vo: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪ to severe rheumatoid arthritis was intense. my mom's pain from moderate i wondered if she could do the stuff she does for us... ...which is kind of, a lot. and if that pain... could mean something worse? joint pain could mean joint damage. enbrel helps relieve joint pain... and helps stop irreversible joint damage. enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including... infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system, and blood disorders,

and allergic reactions have occurred. tell your doctor if you've been some place where fungal infections are common... or if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if you have persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. since enbrel... my mom's back to being... my mom. visit enbrel.com... and use the joint damage simulator to see how joint damage could progress. ask about embrel. enbrel.com fda approved for over 19 years.

when it comes to reducing the evsugar in your family's diet,m. coke, dr pepper and pepsi hear you. we're working together to do just that. bringing you more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all. smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels and reminders to think balance. because we know mom wants what's best. more beverage choices, smaller portions, less sugar. balanceus.org ed gets copays as lowlily go to as zero dollars on medicare part d prescriptions. ed gets labels clear as day. and, lily.... lily gets anything she wants. ed knows he could just have us deliver his prescriptions. but what's the fun in that? switch to cvs pharmacy.

the growing firestorm surrounding controversial remarks by freshman democratic congresswoman ilhan omar has prompted her own party to take action. house democrats are poised to vote on a resolution broadly condemning anti-semitism in response to her recent comments including her suggestion that supporters of israel's government have, quote, an allegiance to a foreign country, a comment critics say plays into longstanding attacks that jews the company be considered loyal citizens of their home countries. the resolution does not call omar out by name, who is muslim, but republicans are threatening to pass a censure motion, which would. joining me now is jennifer

palmieri, former white house communications director for the obama administration and former communications director for hillary clinton's campaign. washington post opinion writer and msnbc contributor jonathan capehart. and kimberly atkins, senior washington news correspondent for wbur, also an msnbc contributor. jen palmieri, are the democrats in a bind on this? they have a freshman congresswoman, she is a minority, being a muslim in congress, now she's made these comments. and they feel pressured to take some action. >> i mean, if they were in a bind, being in a bind means they weren't taking action. so i don't think they find themselves in a bind because they are taking action to have a resolution to reaffirm that concern about anti-semitism and beyond this incident, there are a lot of -- you see a lot of examples of it in america today. you know, i go back to the tree of life synagogue massacre.

so there's a lot of reason for concern, beyond representative omar. but if you -- she is a duly elected member of congress who is sitting on the foreign affairs committee. and if she has arguments against policy towards israel, american policy towards israel, she should voice that. what i think is -- where you get into trouble is when you start talking about people's motivations. generally that's true in politics generally and very true here, and start talking about allegiances to other governments, that has a history as anti-semitism. also it's the kind of trope you hear said against muslim-americans as well. so i understand why they're taking that action to affirm that that kind of language is not suitable. and i think that you can have policy disagreements. it's when you get into these motivations and questioning

allegiances that it becomes problematic. >> indeed. she has support today from aoc, alexandria ocasio-cortez, tweeting today that one of the things that is hurtful about the extent to which reprimand is sought of ilhan is that no one seeks this level of reprimand when members make these kind of statements about latinas. she has a point. >> it's not to say it's not legitimate but it seems to be selective outrage. the republican side of the aisle is mute, they don't hold their members accountable for anything. >> belatedly on steve king, much belatedly, years too late. >> decades too late on congressman steve king. so i think we can -- and i think jen is absolutely right, that when you get into the

motivations of people, that's where you get into trouble. i think the other area where congresswoman omar gets into trouble is, remember, she's freshman member of congress, part of this class of activists making the transition from the streets to the inside, to the halls of power. and there's a completely different way of behavior, of ways of doing things. and what we're seeing now in it real time and uncomfortably is she is learning, or at least i hope she's learning, what she's going through and how she can still change her behavior without changing how she thinks or what she believes. >> we saw that, kimberly, last week in the oversight hearing with michael cohen when there was that clash with another one of the freshmen members against mark meadows and realizing that there are congressional rules, that you can actually be brought in front of the ethics committee if you attack another member.

>> yes, rashida tlaib and her comments about the act by mark meadows of bringing a black woman to use as a prop, essentially. and she used the word "racist." he returned the term "racist" back at her and it turned into a thing until the next day when they hugged it out. you have the censure, not censure but a resolution that really doesn't do anything except condemn anti-semitism, i think we can universally agree anti-semitism is bad. are we talking about what the difference is between criticizing israeli policy and anti-semitic tropes? something that could lead to some understanding? no. i feel like certainly on the republican side there's a race to equate what she did to what steve king did, and there's not, it's completely different. but there's no advancing the cause of fighting anti-semitism

or in talking about u.s./israeli relations. it's just an impasse. >> let me switch topics and talk about gender equity in women's athletics in this white house. jen palmieri, the white house hosted a team, searching them fast food at the white house. still, to this point, christine brennan, the great sports writer, has pointed out, there has not been a women's sports team individually celebrated at the white house, despite the wnba champs coming to washington year after year, they've done days of service but they've never been invited the way the men's teams are invited by this white house. >> least surprising news of the day. and i don't know, obviously, why they haven't. i fear it may not have even occurred to them.

i can imagine them having the strategy to say we're not going to do this, we're not bringing women athletes here. but i bet it didn't even occur to them that that is something that they're supposed to do. it's not something, women's performance and excelling in sports, not a priority. >> david nakamura has written in "the washington post" that not a single women's championship team has made a solo visit to the white house under trump although several women's teams participated in an event in 2017 during which the president celebrated numerous men's and women's college championships. kimberly? >> you would think, as many sports teams that have boycotted going to the white house under the trump administration, he would want to bring as many as he could into the white house at this time. it's really un e e-- inexplicab why women would be left off. >> maybe david nakamura's piece and christine brennan's writing will wake them up.

coming up, the otto warmbier sanctions legislation proposed by congress, not the president. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" only on msnbc. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" only on msnbc rich, creamy cheesecake with real strawberries. find them with the refrigerated desserts. my dbut now, i take used tometamucil every day.sh it traps and removes the waste that weighs me down, so i feel lighter. try metamucil, and begin to feel what lighter feels like.

i'm a dancer. i live in new york city. casting directors will send me a video of choreography and say, "if you can be here in a couple hours, the job is yours." and then, i need my phone to work while i'm on the subway or streaming the video they sent me while i learn the choreography as best i can. the key is to hold the bar up top and not the pole, so that you have full range of motion. it's a little kooky. (vo) there for you when it matters most. unlimited on the best network now includes apple music and a samsung galaxy, on us. all starting at $40. only on verizon.

important thing our le i think it increases thegi regime. on this it strengthens the hand of u.s. negotiators if there are meaningful negotiations under way.r this is a really malign actor and i want to put maximum possible pressure on them. >> have you go toen any reaction, senator, since you're in the majority and probably have better contacts with the white house than your colleague, senator van hollen, have you gotten any reaction from the national security adviser john bolton or any others whether they think this would help or hurt futured negotiations with north korea? >> let me just say, we have had ongoing discussions with the folks at treasury who have the expertise and the responsibility for implementing this. they have been constructive and helpful c in guiding -- resolvi technical issues. you know, there have been some recent developments, as you know very well. i think it's after these developments that we'll have this conversation about how they

feel about this. but i will say, they understand the need for having a really tough sanctions regime. >> senator van hollen, what do you think about this, your approach is a tough approach, obviously you think that china is lettingat money get through d is propping up the regime. what do you think about the approach now that the summit has failed? >> i think it's especially important now, andrea, because these talks have continued. but while the talks have continued, we just learned from the international atomic energy agency, the iaea, that north korea is proceeding with its nuclear programs. and so it's especially important that we i send a signal. you can't just sort of talk and talk and talk. you need to actually see results. and this is a tightening of the sanctions. this is modelled after the iran sanctions. we're sending a signal to not just north korea but, more importantly, all the financial institutions, the banks around

the world, especially in china, that if they do business with north korea, they can't do business with the united states or with the international banking system.na we need to tighten these sanctions up. there have been lots of holes sprouting through the existing sanctions regime. we need maximum pressure at this time. >> senator van hollen, there's also been reporting by "the new york times" that north korea was continuing its hacking of our banking institutions and our utilitiesns during the summit. what does that say to all of the president's talkof about friendship and praising kim jong-un? >> well, as senator toomey indicated, this is a malign actor in many different spheres, right? so they continued hacking even though they were at the negotiating table, at least pretending to be willing to do a deal. they of course backed out of a deal. and so we think that the best way toth achieve our goals, the u.s. goals of denuclearization

on the korean peninsula is to exert maximum pressure. and to do that you've got to plug the'v holes in the economi sanctions regime. >> and senator toomey, what did you think of the president accepting kim jong-un's denial of any knowledge of the torture of otto warmbier? >> look, i don't know, you would have to ask the president why he takes that view. my own view is kim is certainly responsible for that atrocity, as he is for the entire evil regime, really. whether or not he gave an explicit order or whether or not someone called him and asked permission before they tortured to death this innocent american is really beside the point. the fact is he has set up the police state, the apparatus, the appalling repression that makes that sort of thing possible. he's responsible. >> and very briefly, before i let you go, senator toomey, have you decided whether to join four other declared republicans in voting to block the emergency

declaration? >> soge andrea, you know, the question before us at the moment is actually what is the legislation that is going to be on the floor of the senate. and that'sth still an open question. the legislation that contemplates a resolution of disapproval is a little r vague. and there's a big question that many ofa us are discussing amo ourselves about what actually will be in that. so i don't want to tell you what my decision is about legislation that i haven'tbo seen yet and w don't know the content of. >> understood. we'll talk to you again, i hope, soon. thank you so much, senator toomey, senator van hollen, thanks for being with us today.w >> thanks, andrea. coming up, the devastation in alabama. the toll from tornadoes that ripped through the nation. the southeast part of the nation. new details, next. stay with us.e so if your cousin's wife's sister's husband isn't a lawyer, call legalzoom and we'll connect you with an attorney. legalzoom. where life meets legal.

[indistinct conversation] [friend] i've never seen that before. ♪

♪ i have... ♪ about medicare and supplemental insurance. medicare is great, but it doesn't cover everything - only about 80% of your part b medicare costs, which means you may have to pay for the rest. that's where medicare supplement insurance comes in: to help pay for some of what medicare doesn't. learn how an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by united healthcare insurance company might be the right choice for you. a free decision guide is a great place to start. call today to request yours. so what makes an aarp medicare supplement plan unique? well, these are the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp and that's because they meet aarp's high standards

of quality and service. you're also getting the great features that any medicare supplement plan provides. for example, with any medicare supplement plan you may choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you can even visit a specialist. with this type of plan, there are no networks or referrals needed. also, a medicare supplement plan goes with you when you travel anywhere in the u.s. a free decision guide will provide a breakdown of aarp medicare supplement plans, and help you determine the plan that works best for your needs and budget. call today to request yours. let's recap. there are 3 key things you should keep in mind. one: if you're turning 65, you may be eligible for medicare - but it only covers about 80% of your medicare part b costs. a medicare supplement plan may help pay for some of the rest. two: this type of plan allows you to keep your doctor - as long as he or she accepts medicare patients.

and three: these are the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. learn more about why you should choose an aarp medicare supplement plan. call today for a free guide. . the desperate search for survivors is under way in alabama after a string of deadly tornadoes. the national weather service says that the twister ripped through the area with winds as strong as 170 miles an hour. 23 people are dead, including three children. authorities saying now that seven or eight people still are not accounted for.

along the child victims, ten-year-old taylor thornton who was staying overnight at a friend's house. her parents spoke to nbc news' leicester holt about their daughter. >> reporter: what do you want us to know about your little girl? >> she was perfect s. she didn't cause us no problems. >> she did not have a mean bone in her body. >> she was the -- >> it's just heart breaking. nbc news' tally lightner is in salem, alabama. the scene behind you tells the story. >> reporter: yeah. andrea, it's hard to imagine the devastation until you see it up close. the power of this tornado able to mangle a dryer like this these families coming home to find all of their worldly possessions spread all over the street, a high chair overturned. furniture in the trees. we now know that a state trooper lived in the house behind me,

sergeant robert burrows. he was home with his wife and two young kids when this tornado hit. we have a shot from overhead to give you an idea of this destruction to his house. it was completely flattened. we notice now know he was in the icu. they are pulling for him as this community is pulling for everybody involved in this tornado. they are using helicopters, drones and dogs, but at some point, andrea, this will turn into a recovery mission. >> tammy, thank you so much for your reporting. we have amazing news from the world of medicine. researchers in london say a man appears to be free of the aids virus following a stem cell trance plant. he has not been identified. he agreed to a risky procedure to complete the procedure if

2016. doctors found a donor that has a natural resistance to hiv. this marks the second time the process has been successful in treating aids. even thought it had failed in other patients, toempb even though it had failed in other patients. so once a big success. we'll be right back. patients so once a big success. we'll be right back. on time. then i found aleve pm. .on

and before we go, a word about a veteran secret service agent, who revamped secret

service procedures afteren the attempted assassination against ronald reagan and led the team protecting five presidents. he died at the age of 80. he was known as mr. d to his agents, dr. snow to white house staff. he was responsible for mag ne to him -- magnetometers at each event. a great man, a silent man. our wishes to his family. >> that discuss it for us. >> andrea, have yourself an excellent. afternoon, hello, i'm alex velshi. it's tuesday, march 5th. let's get smarter. >> another investigation surrounding the president, pro cussing on corruption and abuse of power. the white house calling the house judiciary document's request disgraceful and abusive. >> we have to look at the three major threats of the rule of law that we have seen and that is corruption, personal enrichment and violation of the