we will keep a close eye and i will take you through it next week. don't be alarmed just yet. but it's something to think about. that brings this hour to a close for me. i will see you back here again at 10:00 p.m. eastern. you can find me on social media, facebook, instagram, snapchat and even linked-in. "deadline: white house" with nicolle wallace starts now. hi, everyone, it's 4:00 in washington, d.c., where before departing for mar-a-lago with his top lawyer and top spokeswoman in toe, donald trump seemed to fess up to conduct that could be viewed as obstructing justice. >> for two years we've gone through this nonsense. there's no collusion with russia. you know that better than anybody. and there's no obstruction. they will say oh, wait, there was no collusion, that was a hoax, but he obstructed in fighting against the hoax. >> it's a uniquely trumpian spin.

no collusion but they might say i obstructed justice when i fought back, but it also suggests a fascinating dynamic under way at the trump white house. could someone have cautioned the president that special counsel robert mueller might find the president's con instant attack into the investigation into himself and his campaign, as well as efforts to fire mueller and sessions to recuse himself from overseeing the investigation could be described as obstruction of justice in any report delivered to attorney general barr? when that report goes to barr is anyone's guess and when we learn what's in it, the other big guessing game in washington today, what we do know, rudy giuliani is going to be ready. giuliani telling "the washington post" reporter robert costa the trump side is preparing its own report to rebut the one done by the former fbi director. quote, i'm not sure we have to use it. we don't know how detailed their report will be. if they report with facts, we'll

say something right away and write something over the weekend. if there are no facts, i'm sure we'll put out a report. interesting twist on which side will have to do with facts. and that's where we start. ashley parker, white house reporter from "the washington post." frank figliuzzi, former saecht director for counterintelligence at the fbi. from "the new york times" mike schmidt and here at the table former u.s. attorney and former senior fbi official chuck rosenberg. matt miller, former chief spokesman at the department of justice and former cia director john brennan joins us. let me start with you, chuck, we are in this sort of -- let's just fess up. we've all got our phones in front of us because we really are in this moment where anything can happen at any time. our viewers are i think growing impatient with this idea that we're all on mueller alert. but we are on mueller alert because the white house is on mueller alert because the attorney general is on mueller alert. >> that's right. we're all on mueller alert. to tamp it down just a little

bit, what mueller is doing is really important. that report matters a lot but that report is not the whole ball game. by the way. when that report is transmitted to bill barr, bill barr has a tough call to make, which is what do i do with this thing? what do i do with all of the stuff in this report that's classified or protected by grand jury secrecy rules or that concern ongoing investigations. i would love to read the mueller report. i'd like to read it tonight. i'd read it this weekend if i had it. but i don't think we're going to have the full thing all that quickly. >> look, we don't have any russian. can we go through all of that? and it was described to me today by a former senior intelligence official that attorney general barr is about to become the most important man in the country. that more pressure will bear on him and a few things there, this is probably not the person donald trump thought he was when he picked him. he is someone who believes in

the integrity of the department of justice. >> he's an institutionalist, i do believe that. i believe too he was well received at the department, and i don't mean that to be damning with faint praise simply because his following matt whitaker and jeff sessions. bill barr came from that institution, he knows that institution and that institution knows him. i agree. >> whenever this happens, when they get the report, you seem to be suggesting that there will be different sections, that maybe some sections have to be declassified, that way the counterintelligence investigation, one section that might be the information we would learn about first may be any reporting on obstruction of justice. >> that's right. let me give you an example, when the mueller team indicted the russian intelligence military officials, the gru, and john brennan knows this as well as anybody on the planet, a report like that doesn't become public until the intelligence committee had a chance to review it, to make sure there's nothing in

there to give away sources and methods, we're not giving away too much stuff. it was a remarkable indictment but also remarkable because it went through that process. ky imagine pieces of this report, if not large pieces of this report, are going to have to go through a similar process. yes, nicolle, a lot of report needs to be done. there can be classified and unclassified version. maybe that was already taken care of. but these are not things we can just easily dump into the public domain. >> what's your sense into how much robert mueller would have had to rely on incredibly sensitive classified information for big chunks of this investigation? >> well, i think it's been demonstrated he already has with the indictment. gru officials. i'm sure a lot of that was based on classified material. but the intel committee view the information to classify it so it could be put into a document. whatever robert mueller decided to put in the report, either

he's gone through a classification view already to make sure what he's providing is not classified or is going to subsequently be reviewed. now, in addition to the grand jury information or thing that's might be pardon of ongoing investigations is also the issue of executive privilege, which i think can be a very hotly debated and contested one. what the white house might claim for executive appreciate lidge might not in fact be what others would see as protected by executive privilege. i think chuck is exactly right. i wouldn't be surprised at all if bob mueller and william barr have had discussions about what is in the report, how it should be handled, how it can be provided to congress and the american public. i don't know william barr. i might have met him once. i do believe he's going to do the right thing. i believe he's going to be as transparent, as he said in his confirmation hearings, as transparent as possible with the american pull. what robert mueller has been involved with for two years is extremely important to this

country's future. >> can you put it in layman's terms, what the range of possibilities in terms of what barr will get? can he get something that confirms the suspicions andy mccabe had when he opened a full-field investigation into the president because he was concerned the president might be a russian agent? is that on the menu? is it everything from that to nothing? former national security official said to me today, it's not nothing. >> i agree, it's not nothing so it is something. the question that i always had is we've seen things emerge above the surface of the water like an iceberg but i don't know how much of that iceberg has remained submerged and hidden from view. there could be a lot there. so i think we have to sort of wait to see, but the mueller investigative team has been so, so scrupulous as far as maintaining a very tight control of the information and rightly so. so is that iceberg three times as much as already been revealed? maybe. but i do think it is important for us to understand as much of

that as possible so we can put some of these issues to rest. >> mike schmidt, if we keep the iceberg analogy going, some of what has been revealed, the part that's above water, is the conduct that could be construed as obstruction of justice. you and your colleagues reported on director mueller looking at the tweets, stitching together the tweets and the public comments. you and your colleagues also reported on other flash points, the attempted firing of mueller, which was ultimately unsuccessful, the attempt to have sessions recused. are there any explanations for all of those actions? >> i think you started to see a hint of it today where the president was saying it was such a witch-hunt or hoax, maybe he had no choice but to obstruct. he wasn't admitting to that. i think he was turning a hypothetical and the president speaks sort of in an unusual

back-an back-and-forth way but i can hear the arguments coming out. that comes back to the basic question about all of this, if there's a problem on obstruction, it will be decided by public opinion, the house. and the house will have to decide whether they think that's an impeachable offense or not. and that has been the calculation from the beginning, from the trump team, when rudy giuliani came on, they were trying to push public opinion. look, you see that in what trump is saying today, look, there was nothing on this russia stuff. i had to defend myself. what else was i going to do? i think you will see more of that. if there is a problem with the mueller report, if there's a problem for the president, it will be on that thing and you will see giuliani and the president out there beating the drum on this to say look, this is not a big deal. >> ashley parker, we see them putting some of the personnel in place to launch that kind of defense, if that's what they decide to do, the top attorney white house counsel traveling

with the president, his spokesperson, sarah huckabee sanders traveling with the president. what is the mood and tempo and temperament at the white house today? >> so everyone at the white house is just as curious as we are about when this report will come out. and what it's going to say. but in reporting in the past week or so, one thing that's been interesting is there isn't this crazy sense of anxiety. the white house on the one hand sort of believes -- and this is a dope, open question, but the mueller report will not be explosive, an explosively bad and damning for the president. whether that's correct or not, again, we don't know. but the sense then is they will prosecute the case in public and they will actually use this on the offensive to say look, we gave mueller two years. the report turned up nothing. and use it as sort of a cad ril to get democrats in congress to stop their investigations or at least discredit them in the eyes of 2020 voters. >> frank figliuzzi, can you jump in on just what the president

spoke to today, what mike and ashley have alluded to, the president is seemingly trying to soften the ground or perhaps give us a window into something he's been cautioned might be a possibility that on the obstruction front, on the obstruction channel, if you will, there could be conduct that is clearly in the vain of trying to obstruct the investigation to himself and his campaign. >> we're now getting more than a glimpse of what this defense strategy's going to be, particularly with regard to obstructi obstruction allegations is i'm not a obstructionist, i'm a fighter. i'm a fighter, that's who i am. i'm not violating any laws. and then with regards to impeachment and other charges, he's saying you can't do that. you shouldn't do it because i won an election. and i'm doing a really good job. but what's most disturbing to me that's come out in the last 24 hours, nicolle, is this notion from him that the, quote, the american people won't accept this, unquote. what that means is we're going to see a president pitting the

american people against the justice system. the american people or his base against the rule of law and the constitution. that's the most troubling thing. and we need to call that out every time he does it. >> let me -- you make a great point, and i was remiss in not showing that to our viewers. let me play that and we will talk about it on the other side. >> as far as i know, she is cooperating. she's someone who i interviewed with our interview team when she came before the house intelligence committee. i found that she had a deep knowledge of -- >> sorry, sorry. we will look for that for you. the president this morning in an icht vi interview with fox news -- here it is. >> we now have a man because we have an attorney general who -- nobody can even believe that he didn't tell me, but he recused himself, the type of man who is a deputy, who i didn't know at all, and he appoints a man who

had just left my office, i didn't give him the job at the fbi. comey's his best friend. i have a deputy, appoints a man to write a report on me to make a determination of my presidency? people will not stand for it. >> mike schmidt, he doesn't use names there but take us through that. i think he's talking about robert s. mueller, rod rosenstein, some folks you're pretty familiar with. >> yes, despite the fact that's been proven false, comey and mueller are best friends, it's something he continues to repeat. it's the same argument he's made since sessions recused himself, sort of the original sin in his eyes, back all the way in march 2017, sessions stepping aside, allowing for rosenstein to take over the investigation and trump blaming sessions when rosenstein appoints mueller in may of that year. these are similar things he's said. but the president has a mega phone in ways no one else in the country has and he's being

forced to defend himself and will be forced, if there are issues with the report. and these are the refrains, comey, mueller was comey's best friend. they just aren't true. i think mueller is closer to bill barr than he ever was with comey. >> matt miller, these are the flash points. mike ashley's reporting on what the defense will be i'm sure is 100% correct. but we're all dancing around the very real possibility the mueller report, whenever it comes out, could detail in excruciating and devastating specificity a very clear and concerted effort to obstruct justice, possibly tamper with witnesses, and if you were anyone but the president, if you were scooter libby and in the white house and investigated and prosecuted, could be facing jail time. >> i think the questionp 0 the side of the report is does the special counsel include one that the president committed a crime that rose to the obstruction of

justice statutes? two, if he doesn't go that far but nevertheless his actions constitute an abuse of power. they essentially violate the oath of office and that's something congress should consider. when you see his response, it's a culmination of the effort he's trying to make for two years. if you go back to the beginning, he very rarely fought this on facts. you can see the legal defense, the president has the authority to ask the justice department to back off investigations. the president has the legal authority to fire the fbi director, even if it's for a corrupt purpose. but you can make an argument based on the facts and the law. that's not been his main argument. his main argument has been from the begin trying to undermine the institution and conducting the investigation. if we get to this point and the results are damning, if we find he somehow abused this office, he's laid it from the beginning as being a deep state conspiracy from comey and lisa page and you

can go down the list of boogiemen he and his allies have been describing to the american people for two years, they have been out to get me. that's why you can't trust anything laid out, even if the facts are clear. >> frank figliuzzi to hear the deep state theory -- and i'm sure matt is like this, the deep state threat goes lifelong republican jim comey, lifelong republican andy mccabe, got into a treehouse and hatched some deep state to do what? it's so illogical sort of the like the flashing red light on how far from normal this draft drifted. >> it fits his personality and his base eats it up but the deep state would have to now include the attorney general in new york, manhattan district attorney, southern district of new york and the entire intelligence committee where he continues to ignore their reporting and analysis, all of

them essentially headed by people he's selected. so this falls in the face of reason. the other thing that's not normal, nicolle, to go back to this notion and clip of him saying the american people won't accept this because these are people who were not elected. let's focus on that. do you know what that sounds a lot like to me law enforcement officers, the notion you can't abide by anyone who's not elected? it's the sovereign citizen's movement. cops out there know -- and i dealt with the sovereign citizens when i was in the fbi, these are people who when they get pulled over by police shoot the police officer. why? police officers were not elected. they recognize only the sheriff. they don't pay taxes. we essentially are seeing a president as a sovereign citizen not recognizing the authority of anyone who wasn't elected. it's a dangerous philosophy. >> frank, i can't move on from that because it's an incredibly productive thought but play that threat out.

say the mueller report does include crimes as matt miller is suggesting, maybe a possibility, what would happen next? >> we're going to hear a drum beat that this is an invalid finding because these people were not representing the american people, because they are -- they aren't elected. and he is elected. and by the way, the senate has been elected. so he's going to go with that theme that only elected officials can decide his fate. and there's going to be a substantial part of the american public that's going to buy into that. >> chuck, this seems to be at the heart of the president's -- we see the symptoms of the war on the rule of law. i know a lot of republicans have peeled away from this president because of that. this seems to be sort of the beating heart to borrow a special counsel refrain. this seems to be at its center, this sort of aversion to an evidence-based practice like law enforcement. it seems very dangerous as frank is saying. >> it is. what's interesting to me, when i

hear bob mueller or jim comey or andy mccabe described as republicans, it sort of makes me pause. i have worked with all of them, and i've got to tell you, not only did i not know what their politics were, i couldn't imagine having that conversation with them. that is something we leave at the doorstep always. >> it's a great point. i just meant they had been appointed by republicans as well as democrats for their high-level positions. >> right, and they served in many different administrations. the article jim comey wrote in "the new york times" is interesting because he says -- i think properly so -- it's not about the outcome, it's about the process. if the process is fair, if it's not obstructed, if the prosecutors and agents have access to witnesses and documents and if robert mueller is left to do his work, then whatever the outcome is the outcome is. that's the way we always think about our cases. it's not we're trying to get nicolle wallace.

we're trying to get the truth. if the truth exonerates her, as of course it would, that's great. >> concerning my colleague year college years. i get your point. mike s. there any indication the white house is prepared to accept this process the way chuck described it as normal and fact based? >> no, but at the end of the day this is a president that controls the executive branch and this is an investigation that's been done by his own justice department into his own conduct. if he wanted to see the fruits of this investigation and what mueller produced, can he call his own justice department and ask him. it's just a highly, highly unusual situation, now bill barr, who's appoint theed by the president, has to decide what to do with this investigation of the person who put him there. it's very, very, very difficult. my guess is when barr gets that report, he's going to take a fair amount of time to look at it and think about all of the possibilities here. you have to remember, he hasn't been around like rod rosenstein

since the beginning. he's only been around for a few months and he will have to get his head around all of this and figure out what to do. it's very treacherous. i don't think he will get a chance to come out of the gate and do a do-over. if he comes out and wants to give it to somebody in congress or wants to say something, he has to get it right. that's obviously crucially important to the end here. >> ashley parker, he also has probably one shot here with the president before the president adds his current attorney general to the long list of justice department officials who have been on the receiving end of cold pricklies from his twitter feed. any insight into how the white house is watching barr and the justice department at this very, very pins and needles moment? >> generally there's a certain ieny we talked about before, the president and his team and lawyers are sort of going after the deep state against mueller, against comey. and there's a world in which depending on what this report says and what barr chooses to

make public, where the president may suddenly find himself wanting to undo all of that. if this is an exonerating report, we will hear a lot about mueller's sterling character and what a thorough investigation he conducted. so the president will be using that twitter megaphone, the powers of the presidency, but we sort of don't know which way he will be pushing public opinion or disparaging his own attorney general. >> ashley parker, mike schmidt, i know you have to both run. promise you will come back if anything breaks in the hour. after the break, three southern prosecutors from the southern district of new york where donald trump is thought to face the greatest legal peril say a president can indeed be indicted. we will pri you that story. and what's that about whatsapp? donald trump plays dumb about the use of a private messaging system to conduct foreign policy work. this as congress digs in on that growing scandal. it looks like the love letters to donald trump did the

trick. the president today reversing course on sanctions for the brutal regime because, quote, he likes kim. that really happened. stay with us. itso chantix can help you quit "slow turkey." along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix. you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life- threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. talk to your doctor about chantix. uh uh, i deliver the news around here....

sources say liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. over to you, logo. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ smile dad. i take medication for high blood pressure and cholesterol. but they might not be enough to protect my heart. adding bayer aspirin can further reduce the risk of another heart attack. because my second chance matters. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. hi, what's this social security alert? it's a free alert if we find your social

security number on the dark web. good, cuz i'm a little worried about my information getting out. why's that? [bird speaking] my social is 8- 7- 5 dash okay, i see. [bird laughing] somebody thinks it's hilarious. free social security alerts from discover. somebody thinks it's hilarious. want more from your entejust say teach me more. into your xfinice remote to discover all sorts of tips and tricks in x1. can i find my wifi password? just ask. [ ding ] show me my wifi password. hey now! [ ding ] you can even troubleshoot, learn new voice commands and much more. clean my daughter's room. [ ding ]

oh, it won't do that. welp, someone should. just say "teach me more" into your voice remote and see how you can have an even better x1 experience. simple. easy. awesome. report, the southern district is on you, there are a lot of investigations by the democrats -- >> they say there are a lot of things but i don't know about these things. they say this one -- i don't know, i call, i say to my lawyers are we being looked at here? they don't even know what people are talking about. there's so much fake news out

there, it's a disgrace. if you look over the past two years, how many breaking news stories was there about me that turned out to be none existent? so many of them. >> not that many and it seems hard to believe president trump and his allies wouldn't be laser focused on the more than half a dozen federal and state investigations that have spun off robert mueller's investigation, including a probe off the legal campaign finance violations in the southern district of new york, which has been called a greater existential threat to trump's presidency than even the mueller probe, as well as investigations into a pro trump super pac, trump private businesses, the trump family taxes, the trump foundation, emollients violations and allegations of insurance fraud. we don't know what we don't know about the scope of the legal danger for trump, his family and closest allies but we do know rick gates, who's been called a tour guide through the

president's inaugural committee and all of the suspicion ties to russians is still very actively cooperating in one or more federal investigations. and we do know 18 1/2 pages of material related to the illegal campaign contribution scheme still needed to be redacted from documents in cohen's case to protect ongoing investigations. so it remains very likely that pr president trump and his children are nowhere near out of the woods legally speaking, no matter what mueller's investigation may yield. frank and the table are all back. this seems like, what was this, the season of wishful thinking. oh, it's all make believe, as people get trotted off to their sentencing hearings. >> unfortunately donald trump is a master manipulator of perceptions. he gaslights this country repeatedly. he's pathologically dishonest. so he takes issues and will represent them the way he sees fit and unfortunately, there are too many people who just take what he says as whole truth and as gospel. that is why i think he hedges his bets in terms what he says

about things but particularly in the mueller report, he doesn't know how they will come out. but there's still a lot to come that i think he will continue to attack depending on what the facts lay out. >> someone said to me at the end of the year, they were sort of trying to cajole the president out of the government shutdown, and this person is still an ally, and he said, he lies so much, he doesn't even know when he's lying. when you see that, is he lying or is he delusional? >> i think c, both of the above. from the standpoint he knows things he says are wrong but he intentionally does it. i think his mantra is never acknowledge any type of mistake, always go on the offensive, don't be on the defensive, and undercut your opponents any way you request. that was his modus operandi when he was in business, lie, cheat and steal. and he's brought those attributes and tactics to the oval office. >> a former intelligence official analyzes human behavior

described the last six days of behavior from the president as reeking of fear. there is this sense that with not just mueller ending but sdny entering its new phase, with gates we know now very much cooperating in whatever is ongoing, that there is this sense that even he can't believe what he said there to maria bartiromo. >> if you have ever known anyone who is the subject of a federal criminal investigation, one, federal criminal investigations, let alone one, it's an extremely nerve-racking thing. there's a lot of pressure to bear. this isn't the first time you have seen him when he wakes up on saturday mornings when he has twitter sprees where it's clear he's kind of melting down. i don't know which part he believes and which part is delusion. remember the george constanza line from "seinfeld" i don't know, jerry, whatever you believe is true. but it does drive home that

whatever mueller comes up with, the president's known criminal exposure -- not necessarily known political exposure, but his criminal exposure has always been higher in the southern district of new york, because that's where the statue said he did commit a crime. the statute of that crime runs until after the end of his first term. he's going to face some kind of jeopardy at that point you have to believe. >> chuck, three former prosecutors from sdny said the president can certainly be indicted, even if you're on the other side of that question. people have run the numbers on sol, which means sat out of limitations. if you never worked in the justice department or know a lawyer, that was a new term to me. talk about the president taking away this veil, this protection he has as president, i asked jim comey and you were there, if he wasn't the president would he be

facing or imminently charged in this hush money case? talk as if he were like us. >> if he were like all of us, to matt's point, he would have to worry about immediately. not when he was a former president but immediately. the southern district of new york, federal prosecutors in manhattan made it clear individual one directed an illegal campaign finance payment, payments, an escape. that's the problem because it's a crime. what's so interesting to me is we know exactly what mueller was asked to do because it's in a public order and fairly well cabined, the russian interference in the 2016 election in accordance with the trump campaign. to use a march madness basketball analogy, the court on which the southern district of new york is playing is longer and wider. and we don't know everything that's there. we have a list. i'm sure you're right. i also could imagine there's other stuff. but they have much more freedom,

much more room to roam than mueller did. that if i were president trump or one of his kid or somebody who worked in the trump organization writing checks so they can be cashed by stormy daniels and karen mcdougal, i would be worried right now. >> frank, i need to hear your thoughts on all of this but also weigh in on what former prosecutors from sdny have said about this not being rock solid, that perhaps the southern district will press the justice department to take another look at this idea, this policy. it's not a law, it's a policy ha you can't indict a sitting president. >> yeah, let's tackle some of this business first with regard to -- you mentioned fear and his actions reflecting fear, and his former intel officials who study behavior. here's the problem many of us are having, this is not a normal human being.

and by that i mean, i've been involved in cases in my career where behavioral profilers came in and said this behavior describes this kind of person, this is the guy you're looking for. then when we catch the guy, in bonl of t both of the cases i'm thinking about happened to be serial bombers. it turns out when you sit this guy down, you get bizarre notions that don't attach to reality, and none of the rules apply to behavioral assessment. here's why i'm saying this. when he with see the president act out and we think this is the act of a guilty man or these are the acts of a fearful man, only if that person is normal. i'm telling you, i can't figure out if he's acting this way because he's guilty or fearful or what's going to come out or it's simply because he's an angry man who as john brennan said, has a life philosophy of attacking and denying no matter whether he's telling the truth or not. with regard to re-examining law, policy, this is the case of

first impression as to whether a state or southern district of new york or state attorney general or the manhattan d.a. can actually indict a sitting president, but i believe we're headed towards certainly an appellate court level f. not supreme court level decision making on whether this can happen particularly if it comes from a state level. >> norm-busting on every front. no one's going anywhere. after the break, whether it comes to the u.s. treasury department versus a murderous dictator kim jong-un, guess which side donald trump's on? you'll have to wait until after the break for the answer. us as people. they see us as profits. we're paying the highest prescription drug prices in the world so they can make billions? americans shouldn't have to choose between buying medication and buying food for our families. it's time for someone to look out for us.

congress, stop the greed. cut drug prices now. when did you see the sign? when i needed to create a better visitor experience. improve our workflow. attract new customers. that's when fastsigns recommended fleet graphics. yeah! now business is rolling in. get started at fastsigns.com. your daily dashboard from fidelity. a visual snapshot of your investments. key portfolio events. all in one place. because when it's decision time... you need decision tech. only from fidelity.

you need decision tech. a lot will happen in your life. wrinkles just won't. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. neutrogena® this and even this.hark, i deep clean messes like this. but i don't have to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll removes hair, while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans, now cleans itself.

in times of trouble or extreme stress, we all lean on our friends. so it makes sense that as trump anxiously awaits the mueller report, he cozies up to his buddies. and who else than the man who wrote him beautiful love

letters, north korean dictator kim jong-un. backtrack a few steps yesterday, the u.s. treasury department announced sanctions on two north korean shipling companies which trump's national security adviser john bolton said were, quote, important actions by the treasury department because, quote, maritime industry must do more to stop north korea's elicit shipping practices. flash to today, just a few hours ago, when the president scrapped those sanctions in a single tweet saying this, it was announced today by the u.s. treasury that additional large-scale sanctions would be added to the existing sanctions on north korea. i have today ordered the withdrawal of those sanctions. when asked the reason behind trump's turnaround, the white house press secretary said this -- president trump lines chairman kim, and he doesn't think these sanctions will be necessary. senior adviser to move on.org, karine joins our conversation. karine, go. >> yes, we're all in that space

today, and always constantly. look, i think donald trump is being played by kim jong-un and not just kim jong-un but these other dictators. and it begs the question of what's happening here, is it he wants to be like them? or do they have something on him? or is he just weak? and it just doesn't make sense at all. it's been clear his own administration said we need these sanctions in order to get to denuclearizing north korea. so why would you do this? and that's why, mike, there's more questions than answers in all of this. >> the smart man said to me at a table on the other side of this town you thought he had been duped by kim jong-un. is this more evidence of that or something more sinister? >> absolutely, i think he's been duped over the last two years when it comes to north korea. but the decision to impose sanctions on the country, which will increase as a result of an interagency process so the departments of treasury, state, defense, congress, the intelligence community and the

white house to decide what is in the best interest of the u.s. national security. so a decision was made. now mr. trump today arbitrarily, unilaterally and i would argue mindlessly decides to relax the pressure on kim jong-un, who hasn't done a single thing to move down the road of denuclearization. so i think it just demonstrates once and again he's willing to give up a lot of things. he stops exercises with our partners in the region, he does all of these things and there's been nothing at all that comes back from kim jong-un. >> but is it -- so the reason he gave is because he likes him. does that suggest that he doesn't share the goal of a denuclearized north korea? or does it suggest that he's so feeble, he's so lame that all you have to do is tell him his hair looks nice and you get what you want? >> well, i don't know what he was thinking of but if it was part of a package that, okay, we're not going to impose additional sanctions because north korea has decided to allow international inspectors to go to a facility, or decided to

take some sort of positive step, that is rational. that makes sense. but to say he's doing this because he likes him, how does that stand up to any type of logical argument or debate about what mr. trump's lack of understanding is. if he's supposed to be the world's best negotiating, i must tell you he's being played over and over again, whether it's by kim jong-un, putin, mohammad bin salman of saudi arabia and others. he's just drinking in what it is they're giving him. >> you used the word rational and george conway has been a senior adviser, kellyanne conway, has really been pushing the envelope on this set of questions, mr. he's a rational actor or whether there's something wrong with him. james clapper, your former colleague, has questioned it at various points in the presidency whether he should have access to the nuclear codes. former republican senator bob corker suggest the he's not fit for the office he holds. does this conduct not -- this is back to flynn, who had the right and the authority to negotiate

sanctions with the russians but he lied about it. this is different because the question -- the why question is slightly different. he has the authority to ease sanctions but you're calling it irrational. there's no why. we didn't get anything. what kinds of questions are in your mind about the president? >> well, i think as frank figliuzzi said, it's very abnormal behavior, it's bizarre. it's demonstrating his assertiveness that he wants to be just impetuous and make decisions without the understanding of how this is going to reverberate as far as the impact on u.s. national security. so whether we're talking about domestic politics, or whether we're talking about the international world stage, i think donald trump just decides to do what he wants to do. it might be based on the last conversation he had with somebody. i think he throws a lot of things out just to see what the reaction is, but to demonstrate he's in control. and that's very, very dangerous for this country that one person can do these things. certainly he has the authority to do these things but a president of the united states

is vested with so much authority and rightly so, he or she can deal with national security challenges. but if they are just going to exercise this without any real thinking or logic or rationality, that is deeply disturbing not just to this country and our citizens but when i talked to people from around the globe, they're looking at what's happening in washington and saying what is up with the united states? what is up with this guy who's in the oval office? this is not good, not just for the united states, but for the world. >> frank figliuzzi, smart man named frank figliuzzi said something on this show this week about early warning signals. with you were talki you were talking about the president. i thought of you when i saw this reversal of the own administration's policy. is this the kind of behavior you were worried about? >> i think it's behavior that says it's me against the world and i'm the only one who can get this right. i don't trust anything else, including the intelligence community. and john mentioned or you mentioned this as a thing of optics.

does my hair look good? yes, it does. great, we're friends. optics are really important with regard to north korea. he keeps saying they haven't tested -- they haven't fired a missile since we started talking. but he seems not to want to grasp is that they may not need to fire and test fire missiles anymore because they've got that down. but as long as he has some sort of agreement with kim jong-un don't make me look bad, don't fire any missiles that can be on the news, we're going to be good. the other thing, nicolle, as best as anyone can tell and it's still confusing what he's talking about, has to do with easing up on sanctions on chinese shipping companies that were helping north korea get their parts for their nuclear program. so he's not just easing up on north korea, he's sending a message if countries like china want to continue to circumvent sanctions on north korea, it's okay. so he's just in one fell swoop he may have helped china economically, and he may have helped north korea return to the missile program.

>> it suggests to me, chuck, behavior that must be under scrutiny by be rot mueller. i was reminded today of three individuals who may or may not have been helpful or shared their experiences with robert mueller. hr mcmaster, jim madison, rex tillerson. people who have seen him conduct foreign policy up close may very well be the most alarmed of all. >> sure. one of the questions we ask when prosecutors talking to witnesses, someone investigating, tell me about him. how does he behave? you want to understand the subject p. t subject, the target of the investigation. would i tell you there's a couple of things i desperately want to read. one is the classified, unabridged version of the mueller report, which i probably will never see. the other which fascinates me would be the profiles that countries around the world deem of our president. they do that and john knows that well. things have got to be really interesting documents, don't you

think, john? >> let's say, dear, dear president of the whatever, you're going to meet donald trump. but what would you write if you were helping him write one? >> they would address the psychological profile that he's been able to develop. >> to say what? >> to talk about how erratic he is, to talk about his narcissism, i believe they will put that in there, how about he does things to advance himself personally or politically. and it's unpredictable in some respects but predictable in other things. you can always expect donald trump to do whatever is going to advance his interests, irrespective -- and he's going to lie and cheat about it. >> which country wrote the best dossier on donald trump? it would seem russia's gotten the most. so maybe putin's people wrote the best one, right? he wants to build a tower here. he likes whatever. -- who has game penned the best? >> i would like to read the

british intellif him because british intelligence is very good. i think they're very perceptive on it. i do think all of these leaders, authoritarian leaders have been able to take advantage of his being prone to flattery. but i think a lot of the leaders of the liberal western democracies are really quite unsettled because they there used to be strength in washington in the sense you can count on the united states to support what you're trying to do in terms of, you know, regional or international politics. and the strategic objectives. but this individual in the oval office, donald trump, is somebody that is so different from anything we've experienced in the past, and that's why our friends and partners, i believe, are worried and the autocrats and autoauthoritarians around the world are gleefully taking advantage of the ability to manipulate and exploit donald trump's failures and failings.

>> thank you for spending time with us. after the break, between the mueller probe and southern district of new york, donald trump's legal bills are growing as quickly as the national debt but they won't stop there. federal investigations gaining steam and focus. that's next. s. that's next.

i thought i married an italian. did the ancestrydna to find out i'm only 16% italian. so i went onto ancestry, soon learned that one of our ancestors was eastern european. this is my ancestor who i didn't know about.

we're back making a little cable news history here, chuck todd is joining the table. we don't know what is going to happen, but we're all waiting for the possibility that mueller is perhaps completed his work. >> i should steal dave ebolsa's line, he said today or tomorrow, and tomorrow he will say the same thing. i say any month now. something is up, we heard after the markets closed, we heard 5:00 p.m., a lot of people are preparing for a lot of things. >> and it is not just us, it's

not just people that cover the white house. it is -- you know i -- >> donald trump has been preparing, it seems like for months. >> and no one knows anything, we're in a bizarre moment where everyone is telling everyone nothing. we're all trafficking in the same speculation. >> what is it right now in the white house? >> i have a feeling that people watch and they wonder why are people speculating about this? it is for a reason. it's because of the way that the justice department behaves. sometimes you can tell reporter there is are things coming, more likely they'll say nothing is happening today. and then friday they shut up and they don't say anything and reporters can read that. don't go home. and around 6:00 tomorrow they might say nothing is happening today, you can go. not just at this network. people are getting signals they ought to be anxious. >> and the kinds of signals that

we got, again, not leaks, but be on alert. there is a process that will follow, and that will be notifying congress and then notifying the public. those systems seem to be in place. >> i completely agree. and i agree, you did this at a high level at important places in government. there is a relationship with journalists where you can say don't go home without leaking anything bhap is going on at the justice department, and i have fwhn this situation too, but not in matt's shoes, they know all of the attention will swivel to him. today or tomorrow, or the day

after that -- >> give create to dan balls. >> they have to say something, they have to figure out what can be made public. i believe bill barr said he will be as transparent as possible. i also believe him when he says i will adhere closely to the regulations and guidelines regarding the transmission of this report. this is a difficult call for the department of justice, there is cross currents at work here and the department will soon be standing in that vor text. >> what is it? >> the need to protect classified information from public disclosure with the fact that this is an enormous public interest to your viewers and people that hold hearings. we want to know what happened. and we may not get to see all of

it or we may not get to see all of it as quickly as we might like nap is the cross current right now. >> frank, how much of the fbi's work do they want to be seen. especially you know jump promised carnage. there has been a little bit. they have become jum in the water since the trump presidency, what is the bureau -- what is the skin in the game from the fbi's point of view? >> first this is an opportunity for them to surely shine and show what they're capability is and aligned with our allies and the entire u.s. intelligence community, but they must be hunkered down for what could be a greater barrage of attacks by trump, his base, and others on the methodology they used. it is solid methodology, some

people screwed up. this is an opportunity for the public to see what public can do with the intelligence community can do. we had 12 russian gru intelligence officers indicted with dates and times of where they were sitting and what they did. if that top secret level went into that indictment can be declassified, we can see it being declassified for something this important. >> i was involved in the declassification about bin laden. if something like that can be declassified, and gone pretty good speed, i can't imagine there is anything around russian meddling that could not be december classified and shared with congress and the public. >> yeah, when it comes to singular human sources, right?

when you put something in there that is recruitment in place, you can mask that. the same goes for highly technical resources. >> i keep coming back to the 2020 -- please understand that the kind of intel that went into naming them by name, describing their key strokes, that is as secret as you get. >> it is so amazing to be at this moment where the scrutiny of law enforcement, the war on justice in the white house's perspective, is probably some regard -- only the end. if there is incriminating evidence, the president is about to turn you have the rhetoric. >> my fear is this is changing nothing, we're trying to figure

out what will change if the mueller report hits. what if it is nothing, what if the president has successfully polarized everybody enough and everybody just reads into it what they want to read into it. it would talk something monumental to breakthrough. he created a fog machine. i am curious, when the president declassified all of those devin nunes memos, doesn't that basically open the door for a much easier declassification process for this report? >> it is the ultimate classification or declassificationed, while it seems like everything could be declassified because we so

easi easily. i completely agree on the delassification like that. >> the sources and that set a new precedent. it will be different for the investigation, turning over materials to congress. you turned over thousands of pages, in the middle of the investigation, now that it is closed you can't tell me you have any reason to hang on to that similar information. >> so good news and bad news for you. we're not going anywhere. that's the bad news, the good news is it is your table now. >> well, is that what happens? 30 seconds, now i'm supposed to throw "mtp daily." >> all right, so this is