"deadline: white house" with nicolle wallace starts right now. ♪ hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. blo blockbuster reporting from "the washington post" has triggened one of the highest stake standoffs yet between the trump administration and congress. new "washington post" reporting reveals for the very first time that the whistle blower complaint involves an alleged presidential promise to a foreign leader from that stunning account in "the washington post." quote, the whistleblower complaint that has triggered a tense showdown between the u.s. intel community and congress involves president trump's communications with the foreign leader. that's according to two former u.s. officials. trump's interaction with the foreign leader included a, quote, promise that was regarded as so troubling that it prompted an official in the u.s. intel community to file a formal whistleblower complaint with the inspector general for the intelligence community. congressman adam schiff on the

stakes of the crisis said this. >> we do know that the department of justice has been involved in the decision to withhold that information from congress. we do not know because we cannot get an answer to the question about whether the white house is also involved in preventing this information from coming to congress. we do not have the complaint. we do not know whether the press reports are accurate or inaccurate about the contents of that complaint. but what i do know is this. if in a matter within the jurisdiction of the director of national intelligence you have an employee of that community or a contractor who follows the law and makes a complaint and it is possible for the subject of that complaint to essentially quash the complaint or keep it from congress, then this system is badly broken.

>> before we dive into the specifics of this whistleblower's case, let's put this latest national security flash point in its proper context. in conversations with two former senior intelligence officials, it's been pointed out to me today that this is another call from inside the trump administration, put another way, it's another fire alarm pulled from inside a house on fire with presidential conduct so alarming that multiple national security officials have sounded similar alarms before this whistleblower case came to light. and donald trump is a threat to u.s. national security or is an impediment to protecting u.s. national security is a theme that is run through many of the high-profile departures and conflicts trump has waged with law enforcement and national security advisers. it's also among the concerns first articulated in an anonymous op ed placed in the new york times a year ago. anonymous wrote this, quote, take foreign policy and public and private president trump

shows a preference for autocrats and dictators such as president vladimir putin of russia. north korea's kim jong-un and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allies like-minded nations. the following individuals have nothing much in common other than the fact that a great risk to their careers and their reputations they sounded an alarm. obviously the press are in testimony before congress about donald trump's congress. take jim comey and his decision to share his personal memos about the loyalty oath donald trump asked him to take or andrew mccabe's decision to open a full investigation into donald trump's ties with russia. dan coates, former dni's estrangement about disagreements about russia, north korea, and iran. former nsa head admiral mike rogers that the u.s. wasn't being tough enough on russia. former secretary of defense jim mattis' resignation letter citing disagreements over trump's policies when it comes

to dealing with adversaries. chris wray's disclosure that he had never been directed by the president to strengthen our defenses against russian meddling. former deputy dni sue gordon's resignation. she wrote that she was going to allow donald trump to appoint a member of his own team. john bolton's departure following a dispute over inviting the taliban to camp david. and of course robert mueller's two-year investigation that found 150 contacts between trump's team in russia and at least a half a dozen acts of obstruction of justice as detailed in his report. and now the whistleblower. and that is where we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. ell ellen nakeshima. former assistant director for counter intelligence with the fbi, frank figliuzzi. plus former deputy assistant attorney general harry litman,

and sam stein and political reporter for the new york times nick. ellen, let me ask you to take us through your reporting. >> we are not hearing you, ellen. let us fix your mic and we'll start with frank figliuzzi. ellen, can you hear us? >> go ahead and take us through what your colleagues are reporting. >> so last night we reported that a whistleblower had lodged a complaint with the inspector general of the intelligence community that had to do with a phone call that the president -- president trump had with a foreign leader in which he made some sort of promise. and the nature of this conversation or discussion was indeed so troubling or alarming that this intelligence officer official felt compelled to make a complaint to the i.g. which

the i.g. then investigated and found to be credible and indeed found to be an urgent concern both in terms of the statute which has a definition of what an urgent concern must be and also a more layman's sense of just something that is really of tremendous importance to the american public. and the i.g. then submitted that complaint to the director of national intelligence, his boss, as is required by law faechbds this complaint to be credible. and at that point dni had seven days to transmit the complaint to congress. however, the dni did not submit it to congress. instead he consulted the justice department and was advised that there was no statute that compelled him to submit the complaint because they found that the complaint did not meet the statutory definition of

urgent concern. largely along jurisdictional lines meaning that they found that the intelligence activity in question wasn't under the responsibility or authority of the dni. and i think that's where you have a disagreement between the dni and the inspector general. and the inspector general was on the hill today talking, testifying behind closed doors to members of the house intelligence committee. and he, over three hours repeatedly refused or declined to discuss the substance of the complaint because he was not authorized to do so. but he did explain the law and how he followed the law and how he believed he had a credible complaint before him and that there was a disagreement between himself and the dni. so that's where we are. >> ellen, let me read to you donald trump's response to your story. said no one in the era before trump but here we go.

>> another fake news story out there. it never ends. virtually any time i speak on the phone to a foreign leader, i understand that there may be people listening from various u.s. agencies not to mention those from the other country itself. no problem. another exclamation point. he continues. knowing all this, if anybody dumb enough to believe that i would say something inappropriate with a foreign leader while on such a potentially heavily populated call i would only do what is right anyway and only do good for the usa, one final exclamation point. his response wasn't that he was talking to foreign leaders. he seems to confirm the idea too that this is about a phone call. it's that he conducts himself, i guess, in a way that he expects people to be monitoring him. it doesn't really speak to an exoneration on the premise of what the whistleblower contends that he made a promise that was so alarming that the i.g. passed it onto his boss the dni.

>> yeah, that's right. he did not address the substance of the complaint or of the story. and that's just to be expected i guess from this president. >> it's hugely confirmation judging from the kinds of stories that you and your colleagues -- let me ask you one more question. i read your stories when i worked in the government. i sometimes feared your stories. have you ever seen an example where someone seeks out through the i.g. protections and through whistleblower protections which, as you said, are all set in law. a concern about a president's conduct. >> i have not. and i've spoken to whistleblower attorneys, lawyers, who represent these whistleblowers. and they really can't think of such a case. this is fairly unprecedented. in fact, the whistleblower protection law itself for intelligence community officials doesn't really contemplate this sort of scenario. and that's actually part of the

issue here, that's part of the problem in which, you know, we find ourselves where the i.g. feels that this complaint should have been transmitted to congress. but the dni is saying no, it doesn't need to be because it doesn't involve an activity under my purview. but there's no, nothing in the law that accounts for such a scenario where you have the possible involvement of a president and possible, you know, implication of executive privilege and the possible intervention of the white house or in trying to stop this complaint from being submitted to congress. >> frank figliuzzi, therein to me lies one of the most extraordinary facets of an extraordinary piece of reporting by ellen and her colleagues that the systems are not set up for a president who causes such alarm over those who come in contact with him. >> it was pointed out to me by two former senior intelligence officials that this is another call from inside the house.

and there's nothing else that ties the whistleblower. and jim comey and andrew mccabe and sally yates and all the other people who either through congressional testimony or through disclosures that jeopardized their careers, their legal standing and their reputations have been sounding for two and a half years now. >> yeah. the whole notion of this fragile experiment called american democracy makes certain assumptions. our founding fathers didn't envision this level of corruption and obstruction even when they gave us an impeachment option they assumed that people would cooperate with congress and impeachment proceedings. we are seeing a complete obstruction of processes here. and with regard to what's going on with this whistleblower, i say this to the dni who says, well, you know, the president's activities and phone calls aren't part of my intelligence purview. this whistleblower came to the wrong place.

where should this whistleblower go, the department of agriculture, the department of housing and urban development? if the president's promises and unlawful conversations allegedly with world leaders don't fall into the intelligence and national security realm, i don't know what does. and so if this continues to keep failing, if this system keeps breaking down, i would say this to the whistleblower if he or she is watching. there's one more week, one week from today where the dni, the acting dni claims he is going to testify. if at that point next week this whistleblower complaint doesn't substantively be conveyed to the house or senate intelligence community, it's time for you to come forward directly to those committees. that's what i would advise. and what i would advise to the people who are obstructing attorney general barr, the acting dni. and by the way i will also count amongst them this inspector general who may be trying to do the right thing but has failed

in his mandate because he has actually refused to do what his mandate requires to do. >> harry litman, let me go to you on the record about what this whistleblower, this is another human being, another witness to conduct on the part of the president of the united states that was so alarming, he or she went to an inspector -- i worked in the government for six years. going to the inspector general isn't like walking into the counselor's room at school. it is a terrifying prospect to go and try to sound an alarm about the most powerful person in the country who sits atop your chain of command. talk about this from a whistleblower's standpoint. >> yeah. i am a whistleblower lawyer. but look at the tableau you put up and try to think if you're trying to do the right thing basically that trump has vilified anyone who's come forward with bad information. look, i take frank's point. but in the absence of this protective scheme, we could be

talking about serious criminal liability under the espionage act. all the scheme does is protect the whistleblower against reprisal. it doesn't give money, doesn't give glory. this, to all appearances, is a hard-working patriotic person in the intelligence community who just wants to put the information out there. and for all the high-falutin constitutional arguments of the white house now that might apply in different times and with different presidents we are only talking about giving the information to the intelligence committee something that happens all the time. so to the extent there are disputes isn't, the law is crystal clear that is the i.g.'s call, the i.g. has made the call. there are ways that the administration could try to contest it in court. but for now it should absolutely just go forward. the whistleblower shouldn't be put to this impossible choice of coming forward and possibly

facing criminal liability, not to mention professional jeopardy. >> ellen, let me put this back to you. the story and your reporting, one of the hallmarks of your reporting is the care with which everything is described and written for us, the readers. but i wonder if you can tell us if this whistleblower ever intended or desired for any of this to become public. usually they do not. >> yes. usually they do not. i believe the whistleblower did want this to eventually get to the congress. but the whistleblower's main goal was to follow the procedures, report the potential wrongdoing or serious or flagrant abuse problem and let the process play out. let those who are empowered or whose job it is to adjudicate this problem or this issue

determine whether someone needed to be held accountable. this whistleblower mainly wanted, as harry said, to wring the problem to light, not be put in the light himself or herself. >> that is another thing that to me ties all these individuals together. the op ed in the new york times was submitted by anonymous. jim comey ultimately shared those memos because there is no more referee on the field. you can't go to the nation's attorney general who prejudged and prespun and made decisions about the mueller report. you can't go to the white house chief of staff because he's got three gigs and he doesn't seem to have much standing even with the president. there isn't -- the white house counsel who was the witness to mueller is gone. it would appear the whistleblower protections are one of the only outlets left for anyone inside the house that wants to pull an alarm. >> and that's why they must be preserved at all costs because

it's essentially what we're left with. and, you know, i have been remiss and hesitant over the past couple of years to use the phrase "constitutional crisis." i was waiting for that moment where the light bulb would go on over my head and i'd say, okay, the three branches of government can't solve the dilemma, can't solve the challenges. we are so close to that right now with regard to even the whistleblower provisions failing us. >> all right. on that note, let me raise another issue. donald trump's well-established history of exposing the u.s. to potential intelligence breaches began early in his presidency when he revealed highly classified information to russian officials during an oval office meeting. that's according to reporting in "the washington post" at the time. trump went on to conceal the details of his face-to-face encounters with vladimir putin including from members of his own senior staff meaning even today there is no detailed record even in classified files of at least five in-person

interactions between donald trump and putin in the two plus years of his presidency that includes one meeting that raised particular red flags for security experts because the only person present besides trump and putin was putin's translator. trump also recently tweeted a classified photo of iranian facilities. he's conducted open-air war room meetings at mar-a-lago practically inviting foreign spies to listen in. and his administration has granted at least 25 security clearances over the objections of intelligence officials. nick, let me get you in on this. you and your colleagues have reported on a lot of this. this does paint a picture that makes frank's assessment far short of hyperbolic but perhaps we've been reluctant to call this what it is. >> well, here is the problem. there are all these safeguards and guardrails that were built into our american political system that weren't intended to apply when the problem is the president him or herself and their actions that are at issue.

what we know is that the president often conducts policy and foreign policy by whim by personal preference not necessarily the national interest as we usually think about it. and he hides things from the app rat russ. and it's very possible that he has the right to do this. but it does underscore the problem that come the call is coming from inside the house we do not have a lot of mechanisms to correct it. >> ellen, i hear you need to go get to your typewriter. any last thoughts? >> no. just we'll have to see how this all plays out. chairman schiff today said that he's not ruling out the option of taking this issue to court, but stay tuned. >> we will. and we always are everything you and your colleagues report. thank you so much for your reporting on this and for spending some time on us. sam stein, just picking up on nick's point and once made by harry and frank, the system isn't designed for the president but neither was the system

designed for a congress that at least on the republican side is asleep at the switch. the. >> yeah. i mean, that's valid here, it's certainly valid in prior oversight efforts where administration officials are not cooperating in the slightest and taking almost glee in their noncooperation and republicans seemed perfectly content to let their institution of congress crumble. in response to that but just to piggyback a little bit, not only was this not designed for a president who acts in this way but also for a president who has such foreign entanglements. this is a unique case where we have a president who has businesses, business interests overseas that entangle him in foreign policy ventures and has been up front about taking government assistance from a foreign adversary from his own partisan political purposes. the context is important which is for the past couple weeks and months the president and his team have been talking to officials in ukraine looking for

dirt in ukraine on joe biden's son. this is just something that has happened in the open. the president's even been asked about whether he would accept assistance from russia again even after all of the controversy that happened in 2016. he said why not. so, this adds another dimension, another layer of intrigue and potentially scandal to a story that we're all trying to figure out what is actually going on. >> and i don't know why we're shy to not connect the dots. those are the dots. whether we connect them or not. >> i think it's context. we need to know more information about what this complaint is. but i think it's fair to point out that trump has been up front about his desire to work with foreign governments in order to get dirt on his domestic political opponents. it creates an incentive. it creates a potential quid pro quo. >> president's tweet about "the washington post" story was a classic nondenial. he didn't say it didn't happen. he said it shouldn't have

happened or it wouldn't have made no sense to do it. >> he was saying -- >> why would i do this? and if i did do this, it was great. >> you know what it is? it's back to the mueller defense when he obstructed justice on his twitter feed. he intimidated witnesses on his twitter feed. harry litman, let me get you in on just this broader picture stepping back from the specifics of the whistleblower case. i'm encouraged that "the washington post" had to leave our program and go do some more reporting. maybe there is another development. but just speak to what is available, you know, i hear from people on the street and i see some of the feedback, this despair that this president is so unchecked, that there are no checks on it that congress refuses to do their job. what are sort of the switches that can be flipped if this really is the emergency that it appears to be described by what

we know the dni's whistleblower complaint? >> right. look, i think that's wrong. to nick's point, nobody expects donald trump, nobody ever has. but the law still replies and the law replies in the case of a president, and the president could make certain constitutional claims even if it weren't he who were under suspicion. the point is people rightly see this through the prism of what about a good honest president of the future. we want to apply the law there. but the law does apply there. that's what the whistleblower act says, whether it's the president or not. it gives it to the political process of the intelligence chief of the judiciary committee. and they can then deal with it, and it's not hermediccaly sealed. it might turn out not, you know, to fizzle. and there is a way for the executive to make the claims in court. but right now they are just saying these vague things to keep the law from operating.

ultimately if it were some terrible manchurian candidate scenario, you'd be looking at impeachment. but again now it's a very discreet thing. can this be shared with the responsible people in congressional oversight? the law is clear, and there's been no concrete opposition offered by the white house too. just vague notions about the presidency. >> all right. and if you're working on a legal degree online, that counted. after the break, donald trump should be 50,000 feet under water by now, we'll show you his long record of saying strange things to world leaders on phone lines that are less than secure. also ahead, donald trump is a qbc salesman, "the washington post" with some stek tack larreporting at the salesman in chief at the border. and the ultimate troll from former president obama. all those stories coming up. this is the story of john smith. not this john smith

or this john smith. or any of the other hundreds of john smiths that are humana medicare advantage members. 's this john smith, who met with humana to create a personalized care plan. at humana, we have more ways to care for your health, and we find one that works just for you. no matter what your name is.

panera's new warm grain full of flavor, color,. full of- woo! full of good. so you can be too. try our new warm grain bowls today. panera. food as it should be.

juul record. they took $12.8 billion from big tobacco. juul marketed mango, mint, and menthol flavors, addicting kids to nicotine. five million kids now using e-cigarettes. the fda said juul ignored the law with misleading health claims. now juul is pushing prop c, to overturn san francisco's e-cigarette protections. say no to juul, no to big tobacco, no to prop c.

part of our ongoing discussion about a reported presidential promise to a foreign leader. it's worth remembering tracing back to a series of leaks in the very early days of the administration fraught with embarrassing details about what exactly trump was saying. in 2017 "the washington post" published separate transcripts he had of calls between mexico and australia. he insisted mexico as having trouble with some pretty tough

hombres. trump tried to convince him not to say mexico wouldn't pay for the wall because, quote, the press is going to go with that, and i cannot live with that. then on his call with former australian prime minister following the conversation about a deal with refugees trump insisted, quote, i've been making these calls all day and this is the most unpleasant call all day. putin was a pleasant call. this is ridiculous. do not congratulate quick and simple advice given to him by his national security advisers ignored by donald trump when he called putin after the russian president's clearly rigged re-election and congratulated him. frank, harry and the table are back. i don't even know what to say. >> well, you know, it goes to the standard or the fact pattern that is probably on the whistleblower's mind. i am imagining here i am speculating but this is somebody who knows that the president is

often at war with or superseding the interest of his own bureaucracy. we don't know what the activity is yet that is being alleged. what we do know is that the i.g. has said and met the threshold for reporting to congress. that's got to be pretty serious. there is now a debate over whether this law really replies to the president the whistle's being blown on. but still if the i.g. thought it was serious enough, that is worrying to everybody, i should shink. think. >> it's important to know, i mean, from our vantage point obviously but for the public's too what the president is saying. i mean, the president does deserve the right to have privacy when he is communicating with foreign leaders, especially if it's about classified information. >> i mean, i think the people that are most invested in protecting the privacy of these

conversations are the -- are usually in the intelligence community. what former intelligence officials said to me is that's how high the bar. >> correct. but you can -- >> but they didn't intend for us to be having this conversation. >> no. but you can also see a future. maybe not. but you can see an instance down the road where a bureaucrat who is privy to these calls feels like it's an urgent critical matter and then you have a much more complicated decision to make about whether to blow the whistle. that's why you have these processes. what i am talking about is mostly to frank's point which is does the whistleblower feel like he or she has to take the next step forward and go public with this information. maybe. but that does set a potentially damage press sent for future presidents where you have a bureaucrat who is in the intelligence community, privy to this information. and it might not rise to that level. >> frank figliuzzi, what is your sense to sam's point about whether or not we'll ultimately

learn what this conduct was. obviously there was someone on the other end of these calls, the foreign leaders with whom he spoke and this period of time. i think we have a list of them, not that the white house tells us everyone who donald trump spoke to. but kim jong-un, apparently they talk too and a few others. what's your sense about what we'll ultimately learn what the conduct was that was so alarming to this whistleblower? >> i'm not optimistic that we will learn within a time frame that matters, that we'll learn within a time frame where we can do something about this. i see as we see with everything involving a challenge to this president, a protacted battle may go to the court. maybe, you know, we need to consider contempt of congress. but i'm telling you, if the i.g. has said this is credible and urgent that sense of urgency is being lost every minute that ticks by. if a career intelligence professional and that's what we think has happened here has gone

through his entire career-ending decision to come forward with this, he thinks it's got a timeliness factor to it. it's got a national security and/or criminal factor to it. and if we don't get to it soon, we have further national security interests. and we're left really for people to take matters into their own hands, meaning the institutions are failing us and the only thing left is the people's vote come the next election. >> harry litman, why was attorney general barr consulted and with the way he's conducted himself in that job, what concerns arise from that wrinkle to this story? >> yeah. i've never heard of it before. and he has been an olc and steve engel have been in general the apologists and constructors of sort of far-fetched arguments on behalf of really aggressive and even stonewalling executive behavior. so it's not at all contemplated in the statute. the statute again totally clear. the inspector general makes a

call and it goes forward to the judiciary committee. but somebody -- i expect from the white house said, well, can we run this by olc and who's to say no at that point, and yet the outcome seemed to us to be kind of pre-ordained. but, you know, again, i think your point is the big one. no one is contemplating that we around the table will know this tomorrow. but that's different from saying that the chair of the intelligence committee doesn't know it. there are all kinds of things that are revealed to them. there has to be some break, somebody outside the administration who can put eyes on this just for the national security of the country. it's just not the same thing as saying, you know, it's put up on times square. >> and you know i'm just teasing you about making us all smart legals, right? harry litman, frank figliuzzi, thank you so much for starting

us off. when we come back, donald trump tried to spill secrets at the border too until he was stopped by an army general. that story next. through the at&t network, edge-to-edge intelligence gives you the power to see every corner of your growing business. from managing inventory... to detecting and preventing threats... to scaling up your production. giving you a nice big edge over your competition.

that's the power of edge-to-edge intelligence.

with time, comes change that's for sure... and when those changes might help more people, especially those in retirement, i think it's worth talking about! so, aag is introducing a new jumbo reverse mortgage loan so you can now access as much as $4 million dollars in cash, tax free, from your home's equity. aag's new jumbo reverse mortgage loan can give you more tax-free cash than ever before. if you've had your home for a while, it's probably worth a lot more today. so why not use that appreciation for anything you need maybe it's some home repairs, or updates to make it more comfortable so you can stay in the place you love. it's a viable effective way to support your other investments long into the future, and another way aag is working to make your retireme... better.

don't wait. get your info kit now! one thing we haven't mentioned is technology. they're wired so that we will know if somebody's trying to break through. you may want to discuss that a little bit, general. >> sir, there could be some merit to not discussing that. >> i like that. that was a great answer. [ laughter ] >> maybe you should try it on your calls, mr. president, when it comes to donald trump's promise of a wall he simply can't stop talking. "washington post" phil rucker was there and described it like this. the scene played out like a segment on the qvc shopping channel. no expense was spared. >> it was crafted from the finest natural steel. this was the rolls-royce version so strong, so imposing that no human being could scale it. not even a champion mountain

climber. 20 have tried and failed he claimed. it's one thing to read about his visit but it's another thing to hear it. >> it's hardened concrete, very powerful concrete. dependant concrete is poured after it's up. they pour it through funnels. and a lot of technological advances have been made with concrete. so if you think you're going to cut it with a blow torch, that doesn't work because you hit concrete. i said, fellows, how about doing a less expensive version. they said this is the version that works. this is the rolls-royce version. it's an anti-climb device if you look at the steel on top. we actually built prototypes and we have -- i guess you could say world class mountain climbers. this wall can't be climbed. this is very, very hard. we have climbers. we had 20 mountain climbers. that's all they do. they love to climb mountains. me, i don't want to climb mountains. plus, it's designed to absorb heat so it's extremely hot. you can fry an egg on that wall.

so if they're going to climb it, they are going to have to bring hoses and water, and we don't know where they're going to hook it up because there's not a lot of water out here. nobody is going over the wall. but going over it is virtually impossible. i guess maybe one of the greatest pole vaulters in history can get over the low one, but it's going to be very painful when they land. [ laughter ] >> joining our conversation mara gay, plus the rev al sharpton, president of the national action network, and phil rucker the aforementioned is back with his trip with the president. phil rucker, i mean, maybe there is a job for him somewhere in the government where he's in charge of concrete and rebar. the. >> well, nicole, this was like trump's baby, the wall. and he was so proud of it taking the press corps down that dusty road to see the construction site. he showed it off as if he were pitching a new condo building or

some of these skills he had as a real estate developer and promoter. he wanted more than anything i think for the journalists with him to be impressed because when he got back on air force one for the flight home he came back to us. we were all in the middle of eating our dinner, and he just wanted to know what we thought of the wall and kept asking did you like it, did you like it? what'd you think? was it serious? so he's very proud of this achievement obviously. >> but is it true, i think i saw it in your story. let me just say you and your colleagues are on a tear, unbelievable reporting coming out of that. i don't know what you all are eating for breakfast. >> thank you. >> did i read in your piece that he had to acknowledge at some point that it was more of a remodel than actual construction of a wall? >> well, that's right. it's not new. i mean, it's just not new fencing exactly. it places where there were existing border barriers that have been replaced. and of course it's this enormous steel structure 30 feet high, and it clearly does not cover

the entire border obviously. in fact there were gaps in the very area in san diego that we were visiting. but he proclaimed that he hopes that there will be 400 miles of it built by the end of next year which coincidentally enough is the election. >> rev, this is trumpian in every way as phil rucker describes. but also in the fact that one of the boast points is sort of the cruelty of the wall that it's too hot to the touch. >> he clearly wanted to make an emphasis on how cruel it could be. but what he's also playing to, he is not only trying to impress the media. he is trying to deal with potential voters next year that he in fact has this infallible wall. what he's not talking about is what happened to the fact that he promised mexico was going to pay for it. so he's selling us some real estate which has been his life's work though he doesn't do it that well. but he's not telling us, but you are going to pay the tab, not

the people that i promised you were coming in with the investment which makes it all a con job in many ways because he's showing us a product that he told us somebody else was giving us as a gift. and, in fact, he's got his hand in our pocket. >> mara, i don't want to go there, but donald trump i think makes us all go there. he's obsessed with the size of things. he couldn't say in more different ways it's so tall, you couldn't climb it with the pole vaulter. it's so big you couldn't get over it with a mountain climber. it's so -- i mean, it's a pathology. and you guys can put on ear muffs. but i'm sorry. any man talking about the size of anything usually has deep concerns about said size. >> oh, i would say so. it's definitely a my wall is bigger than your wall. >> it is pathetic. it's like he's there to brag. and even in bragging he's pathetic. >> it's embarrassing but i would

say we have at the editorial board invited him to come to new york and rebuild our infrastructure from the subway to actually just last weekend we suggested that we would name the gateway tunnel project which is this tunnel that's falling apart between new york and new jersey the donald trump, you know, gateway tunnel if he would come and actually invest in it. >> make it bigger than any tunnel? [ laughter ] >> but there is something dark here. you know, we're actually building essentially a monument to hatred for his election rather than investing in the country and in infrastructure that we need. and that just is depressing. i was at the hoover dam this summer. that was actually an amazing marvel of modern engineering. and here we are talking about, you know, the size of his wall. i'd rather he go to therapy. >> me too. >> that is therapy for him. that was the happiest i've seen. [ laughter ] if i'm white house chief of staff i am going to send donald

to the wall once a week. he was in such a good mood, he was loving it. >> i mean, that's a good point. but i guess why does the whole country have to be part of that therapy? >> because he's our president. >> well, for a very simple reason. it's easier to defend a wall than kids in cages. and the irony of what the president is doing on the wall is that he actually has succeeded in cutting back some of that -- migrants over the border through a series of punitive and harsh penalties. the wall is not the reason it's working for him. but he wants to give credit to the physical manifestation of his policies and not defend the harsher policies that are less popular. >> the freudian elements of the wall. you know, his whole political premise, the election campaign he's set to run is on -- >> let me just put up while you are talking the poll numbers because i think if we're going to politics. these are the head to heads as

fox news has them which may explain if there is a weekly trip to the wall, biden's at 52, trump 38, bernie sanders at 48, trump at 40, and senator harris at 42 and trump at 40. >> so, you know, his mo is to do immigrant fear. he did it in 2016. he did it in 2018, caravans that type of stuff. it's going to be interesting to me about what he wants to say is the completion or the near completion of this wall which is supposed to be a deterrent with also playing the immigrant fear card. because on one hand you are supposed to say my policy'sla out in the months ahead, especially if he stays at 40% because that means that he's going to have to really drive down a democrat's numbers and doing that is -- to do that he's going to play the same cards he's used in the past. >> phil rucker, we also played at the top of the segment the

sound byte of him spilling secrets about the technology behind the wall. any point you make about donald trump, donald trump usually confirms it or affirms it in some regard himself. >> yeah. that was a pretty incredible moment during that entire presentation at the walleye when he actually volunteered that the steel slats in the wall are wired with advanced technology in order to detect when people might be attempting to breach the wall. he invited the army corps of engineer general to explain in detail how that technology worked. obviously the general said that would not be a wise thing to do publicly and the president moved on. but clearly there is not that filter there that you would normally have with a commander in chief. >> it is amazing. phil rucker, thank you for going on that trip, for writing that story and for spending some time with us. after the break former president obama with an epic diss of president trump's addiction to

cable news. cable news mom! maria! maria ramirez... mcdonald's is committing 150 million dollars in tuition assistance, education, and career advising programs... prof: maria ramirez mom and dad: maria ramirez!!! to help more employees achieve their dreams. mom and dad: maria ramirez!!!

man 1 vo: proof of less joint pain woman 1 oc: this is my body of proof. and clearer skin. man 2 vo: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 2 vo: ...with humira. woman 3 vo: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. avo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. man 3 vo: ask your rheumatologist about humira. woman 4 vo: go to humira.com to see proof in action.

the amount of student loan debt i have i'm embarrassed to even say i felt like i was going to spend my whole adult life paying this off thanks to sofi, i can see the light at the end of the tunnel as of 12pm today, i am debt free ♪ not owing anyone anything is the best feeling in the world, i cannot stop smiling about it ♪

does anyone really believe that by who spent his years on this earth show nothing regard for working people will suddenly be your champion? i think the republican nominee is unfit to serve as president. i said so last week. and he keeps on proving it. is this a candidate who has said things that just four years ago, just eight years ago, 12 -- we would have considered completely disqualifying. he saw america as a shining city on a hill. donald trump calls it a divided crime scene. he is not offering any real policies or plans. just offering division. and offering fear. >> he told us so and yesterday at a private event in san francisco, the target of obama's job was not hard to figure out. "washington post" writes this, obama explained how he had approached the job including

some 3,000 political appointments before offering this advice. quote, the other thing is that it is not helpful to watch tv or read social media. those are two things that i would advise if you are our president not to do. it creates a lot of noise and clouds your judgment. and obama didn't stop there. he adds, quote, i'm proud of the fact we didn't have indictments during his two terms in office he said. i've said that before but that is pretty rare in modern day. these guys sort of keep their mouth shuts as long as they can and then whatever comes out is usually profound and pent up. seems like insults he has been waiting to make. >> clearly when you look at the four areas that the former president now hit him on, the fact that he has not filled many of the government appointments that he should have filled and president obama did, it shows an indication of how seriously he

takes his job. then when you compound that when he is particularly cable tv addict and listens and watches what people are saying rather than guiding the country in dealing with the crisis it faces, you can see why he can't make appointments because he has his tv appointments that he has to fulfill. and then when you go from there to the president raising the question, former president, of indictments, we have gone to how many scandals a day to whether or not there was a scandal in someone's term of office. so i think that it was a well found attack even though he never called donald trump's name. you are in real political trouble when people can give your characteristics and the whole country can fill in the blank of who you are talking about. >> can you imagine for a moment being president obama and having to sit day in and day out and

watch this, you know, guy who took over your position kind of trash the white house and the country? so you know, just getting a glimpse of what president obama might be thinking is i think for a lot of americans almost like red meat. but we kind of want to know more. i mean, i think so many of us have often said gosh, you know, i wish we could run into him and ask him what he really thinks. and so i'm sure this is just as usual with barack obama just the tip of the iceberg that we're seeing. he is a pretty measured guy. >> and trump is obsessed with him. yesterday trump was going on about his netflix deal. >> we're trying to figure out how obsessed trump is with that netflix deal. he seems to bring it up a lot. but let me say this about what obama said. as someone who is hearing on tv and has tweeted during the commercial breaks, obama is wrong.

these are useful shows, you have to watch tv. >> especially at 4:00 p.m. every day. great hour. >> yeah, just follow me on twitter. >> thank you for that. >> i think that president obama is giving pretty good advice to president trump. he has created his own filter bubble around himself. he judges his own policies and their success based on how well they play on fox or twitter. fox is watched by 2 million people plus or minus each day. twitter is a medium for activists and journalist s s a eloets. so not a great way to assess how you are doing. >> and what i thought in looking at those clips from the election, obama did take this message about fitness and about divisions and he was the victim of one of the most racist campaigns ever run in american

time. i mean, he did take -- and i know people -- people ask about my old boss, why he doesn't do more. he did take one of the sharpest cases directly to donald trump during the 2016 campaign. do you think that he will do it again in 2020? >> i think that he will once there is a nominee be forced to come out. and i don't see how you could discuss donald trump's presidency without taking sharp attack particularly when you saw the incoming fire that president obama took with relative calm. and without exacerbating and dividing the country us against them when he was subjected to some very bigoted racist and unfair attacks. he never played into it. trump is not a target of them, he is the one that is targeting people and trying to play up on divisions and play up on all kinds of biases. and i think that when the president does come out for the nominee to campaign, he will

have to deal with that. >> it will be interesting. we'll sneak in our last break. r. we'll sneak in our last break. and we switched to geico; saved money on our boat insurance. how could it get any better than this? dad, i just caught a goldfish! there's no goldfish in this lake. whoa! it's pure gold. we're gonna be rich... we're gonna be rich! it only gets better when you switch and save with geico.

spending time together, sometimes means doing nothing at all. holiday inn. we're there. so you can be too. you get more than yourfree shipping.ir, you get everything you need for your home at a great price, the way it works best for you, i'll take that. wait honey, no. when you want it. you get a delivery experience you can always count on. you get your perfect find at a price to match, on your own schedule. you get fast and free shipping on the things that make your home feel like you. that's what you get

when you've got wayfair. so shop now! we're out of time but i want to thank the rev, al, sam, and most of all you for watching. "mtp daily" starts now. ♪ welcome to thursday, it is meet the press daily. i'm chuck todd here in washington. we begin with a story that has all of washington talking or more correctly whispering at the water cooler. and it do be a story that everyone everywhere is talking about for a long time. but we just don't know because there is so much we still don't know. and it is all about the unknown contents of a whistleblower complaint deemed urgent and credible by the