>> one more reason as to whether to keep iowa and new hampshire still the first two states in the primary season. thanks very much. we're going to be reading axios in a little bit. you too can sign up at signup.axios.com. "morning joe" starts right now. the next one was 5%, 4%, 3%, 2%, 2%, 1%, 1%, and zero. 3%, 5%, 11%, 14, 4, 3, 2.8, 2.54, 7, 4, 3, 3, 3, 2, 1, 1, 1. oh, let's get back to business. now i feel good. now i feel good. [ cheers and applause ] >> what was that? that was his most interesting

part of his speech. bing bong bing bong bing bong. >> apparently someone on fox crit siresed his poll numbers which inspired that last night in colorado. >> wait, wait, is that where he was talking about the rigged call-in polls that he rigged and that i guess michael cohen said that he was working with other people to rig? oh, back in 2016? oh, this is about how lousy he's been in debates. and then had rigged the polls, so he's still upset about the fact that people on fox news and everywhere are saying he actually is horrible in debates? >> well. >> because he is. >> i think there's a lot of other stuff that's going on that might be distracting him. welcome to "morning joe," friday february 21st. we have columnist and editor for "the washington post," david i go naishus, and former c.i.a.

and department of defense employee, jeremy bash. >> we've got fallout from the las vegas debate. great ratings for that debate. i will tell you people that don't usually come up to me, members of my family and others, and talk about political events, wanted to talk about that debate. >> yeah. >> specifically wanted to talk about mike bloomberg and why he couldn't answer basic questions. so there's still a fallout from that debate. we're going to be hearing about that for the next couple of days. of course we've got nevada going to the polls to vote tomorrow. we should know the results by around 5:00 p.m. eastern. that's going to be fascinating to see what happens and how that shapes the race. i think this is going to be the most significant nevada caucus ever. we have mick mulvaney once again reaffirming the meaning of a gaffe in washington, d.c., where somebody accidentally tells the

truth. well, mick committed two gaffes while speaking in oxford accidentally admitting that republicans are raging when it comes to small government, they only care about those things when a democrat is in the white house. and then admitting out loud what ever economist knows, ands that for an economy to grow, for an economy to thrive, you need an immigrant workforce. he admitted that. it will be very interesting to see what happens when he comes back home. also, of course, sort of a shock poll out of wisconsin, a real wake-up call for democrats. while democrats are doing well in head-to-head matchups against donald trump for the trent trent race in pennsylvania and michigan, donald trump walking away with it right now in wisconsin. you know what a wisconsin win

for donald trump does while democrats win michigan and pennsylvania? it leads and most scenarios to donald trump getting 270 electoral votes and democrats getting 268 electoral votes. so not a lot of wiggle room there. and finally, mika, the russians are coming. >> yes, they are. >> and they're coming again for their main man, donald j. trump. our intel community actually did their job, told the intelligence community that they had information that once again the russians were trying to interfere with america's democratic process in 2020, and that they were going to interfere with america's democratic process in 2020 for the benefit of one man, donald trump. donald trump didn't like that, immediately fired his acting director of national intelligence, and talked about

hiring and hired probably the least qualified person ever to occupy a spot in an important national security role in the history of washington, d.c. ands that saying quite a lot. that just, he's extraordinarily incompetent, and it puts america's national security at risk. fortunately, mika, we also heard yesterday that that may be a temporary position. >> well, yeah. well, let's just back up here and lay it out. we'll begin with that very big news on why the president forced out the nation's top spy chief. a former intel official tells nbc news that acting director of national intelligence joseph mcguire who was under consideration to be permanent was pushed aside because the president was angry that lawmakers were briefed on russia's plan to help him get re-elected. news of the briefing, which was held last thursday, was first

reported by "the new york times." sources tell both "the times" and "the washington post" that the president erupted at mcguire the very next day, concern that democrats would use the information against him. a former official tells nbc news at the office that the director of national intelligence is quote, nearing a meltdown over mcguire's removal and the reason behind it. as our colleagues, ken dillainian and andrea mitchell report the episode -- providing accurate intelligence to members of congress who are cleared to receive it. this is how the system is supposed to work. we should also note that mcguire's testimony back in september when he told lawmakers that the whistle-blower, quote, did the right thing and followed the law every step of the way, by reporting concerns over the president's phone call with ukraine's president.

trump sent shock waves through the intelligence committee when he told that one of his allies that richard grenell would replace mcguire as acting dni despite having no experience. >> he's a partisan hack, not an ally. everybody that's phone him says he's a partisan hack and is ill equipped. whether he holds the job for one week or one day. >> however last night the president tweeted his intention to nominate someone else for the job, quote, soon, perhaps responding to the pushback to this. willy? >> let's bring in nbc correspondent hans nichols with more on this. also covering national security and intelligence, ken dillainian. as mika mentioned you and andrea spoke to several different sources for this story. it looks clear.

you fill in the blanks. the director of national intelligence, mr. mcguire, went over, talked to the house intelligence committee and said the russians are coming for the 2020 election. they want donald trump to win again. donald trump catches wind of this briefing. dni doing its job, berates him, and announces that he's out and richard grenell is in. how did this all go down? >> reporter: willie, my intelligence sources are aghast over this. what you're describing here is the behavior of an autocrat. up until now, we all know that donald trump has never been interested in this question of foreign election interference has not chaired meetings about it, said anything publicly, but he has allowed his government to do some things. there's not really a unified effort. but the fbi, dhs and the intelligence community are taking steps to try to protect the 2020 election. one of the things they did was

apointed an election security czar in the intelligence community, shelby pierson, who had been a top analyst over maugs matters at the dni and her job it to look at the threats and brief lawmakers. that's what she did last week. lawmakers on the house intelligence of both parties, whose job is to hear this information, they're cleared to hear this. and she told them, our sources tell us, that there is evidence that russia has developed a preference for donald trump, wants to see him re-elected, and that russia is continuing to meddle in our politics. she said that before, the russians are back at it, and we're not very clear on exactly the classified details of what they think the russians are up to specifically. although we are told that it's really the same playbook from 2016, particular the disinformation and social media manipulation. but here's what happened. after donald trump heard about this briefing from devon nunes

his ally the ranking republican on the house intelligence committee, he hit the roof. and in the next day in a meeting with dni joe mcguire, he berated him about why this took place at all and why he had to hear about this from nunes and why was he hearing this information about the russians with adam schiff, trump's nemesis? and he's -- trump was worried that this could be used against him. so mcguire is out now. so the specter of intelligence officials speaking truth to power, which is their job, and they are being punished for it, willy. >> so again, the director of national intelligence, does its job, briefs the intelligence community, devon nunes tells the president, they're telling on you, and adam schiff is in the room. that upsets the president of the united states. he berates joseph mcguire, kicks him out of his job. hans nichols, if in fact richard

grenell is temporary, a placeholder, there's talk already about who might take that position, another trump defender. >> doug collins also thinking about running for the senate. the president mentioned last night he's thinking about doug collins for that position. it's not final. he said there are other names he's considering. but the clock is ticking here. i don't mean to bore anyone but there's something called the vacancy act. that only allows richard grenell to be acting through mid-march. if he does not make someone else then, he can make richard grene grenell stay there longer as the senate fights this out. one person we haven't heard from all of this, senator richard burr from north carolina. remember last time when the president nominated john ratcliff before the mcguire got

the position. burr made it overly known that he's not excited. we still need the senate. we'll see to what extent doug collins passes muster there. >> thank you. david ignatius, this is a president who of course in the past has taken the word of vladimir putin and an exkgb agent over his own intel agency when it comes to russian's election interference. but he's backed down and allowed the intelligence community to do their jobs, they've reported to congress that the russians are still trying to interfere. most of them call it the greatest threat to american democracy that we have. but we've definitely crossed the rubicon this week where the president fires an intel chief and completely disrupts the intel community for simply

telling the truth. i remember reading a column of yours once back during the obama administration where you said the shock waves after an obama speech through the intel community was akin to a car bomb going off in the parking lot. i would guess this would be something far more significant this week. >> joe, intelligence officials i talked to yesterday were shocked. more to the point, they were worried about the implications of what president trump has done for two reasons. first, the effect on the workforce in our intelligence agencies of watching as effectively one acting director is fired and replaced by someone who's so political you can almost call him a comeisar intimidates the workforce, and increasingly i hear that people are reluctant to share products

that may be controversial, to issue reports that may get them in trouble with the white house. the intelligence agencies have asked not to give my public briefing this year on their assessment of threats to the united states, for fear that president trump might take exception to some things they might say about north korea, about china, about other issues. so there is a palpable sense of anxiety about their product. the second thing that people should worry about is what intelligence services overseas, which are our crucial partners, which form with us a web of collection, surveillance, that helps keep americans safe, will think as they see these changes at the top of the director of national enter jens, the british, the french, the australians, all the services around the world. and i think they're increasingly anxious that president trump is putting in political people and threatening the professionalism

of these services. >> so, jeremy, as ken reported in his piece for nbc news, he quote, odni is nearing a meltdown, that's the second official they quote in their story. you've worked in the intelligence agencies, know a lot of people in and around this story. what is the state of affairs? what's the i mpact of this? >> there's dire concern. i've talked to folks inside the intelligence community over the last 24 hours. first of all, not only is grenell in and mcguire out but they're cleaning house. andrew hulman who's been serving as the principle deputy dni, a career professional, he was also shown the door and told today would be his last day. you have the entire leadership of the director of national intelligence decapitated. and there was word last night that a devin nunes staffer

potentially coming over to take a leadership role in the office. this is all an effort to squash any information at all about a russian cyber attack on our 2020 election, because if the russians are attacking our election processes and doing so to benefit donald trump, i think frankly the president welcomes is it. he wants it. he doesn't want his intelligence community defending us. he doesn't want the intelligence warning against us. he certainly doesn't want congress understanding it, because heaven forbid, they might actually help protect our democracy against this attack. he welcomes it. last time he welcomed it, he rewarded it, vladimir putin. this is nothing short of the president of the united states wanting, wanting this attack to occur. >> no question about it. and, hans, jeremy raised the name cash patel, an aide to devin nunes, an official to worked to discredit the russia

probe over the last couple of years. now appears he will be working with richard grenell, who will be acting dni at least for awhile. >> this is according to "politico." he was the ranking staffer on house intel, worked closely with kevin nunes and traveled abroad to try to discredit the entire russia investigation. he was front and center in all of that. then he went from the house side over here to national security committee and there where he works on counterterrorism. he's going to be in some unspecified role working for the odni with richard grenell. of course there's a nunes connection. one thing when you talk to people close to the president, even his supporters, one thing they worry about is which aides, which associates close to the president can spin him up, can get him to air his grievances and act on his grievances. he's very aggrieved.

what we saw is devin nunes spinning the president up and joe mcguire shown the door, and richard grenell is going to continue in his position as ambassador to germany. that's a heck of a commute, especially whethn you're thinki about what you have to do at odni, oversee those 17 different intelligence agencies. >> let's go to ken dillainian, you were in the courtroom for the sentencing of roger stone yesterday, another big story plague out, and the president hinting at maybe pardoning him. tell us what happened? >> it's been a dizzying day of news. i was out in the cold giving updates to msnbc viewers. the sentence was about what legal experts expected. 40 months in prison, 3 and a third years, $20,000 fine. much less than the maximum guidelines would have called for

in any of the various memos written. what happened was the prosecutor went into court and essentially reputiated that cleanup memo that attorney general william barr be required to get rid of the first one calling for the seven to nine year guideline that led 4 prosecutors on the case to resign and one to quit all together. why did barr feel the need to do that? the judge evaluated the case. yes, she agreed that some of these so-called enhancements that roger stone's crimes -- she found he's jechl years old and a first offender, so he gets the three and a third years. she made it clear that would have been the result regardless of what william barr did to intervene. why did he feel compelled to do this and bring all this on his head, all this criticism about political interference in the

justice department and perhaps the answer is he did it because donald trump wanted it done. and then the second thing was the -- what the judge said. the judge had a lengthy allocution about roger stone's comment and spoke to the larger issue and seemed to be speaking to donald trump. she made it clear that roger stone was not prosecuted for speaking up for donald trump. he was prosecuted for covering up for donald trump and convicted of lying to congress to hide from the public and the congress very unflattering behavior by the trump campaign to try to get those hacked emails from wikileaks. and she also indirectly reputiated the president for tweeting about the case and politicizing the case. she made it clear, this wasn't about politics. the jurors, prosecutors, judge, were acting on the merits of what they thought was happening here, and that roger stone committed serious crimes, and that justice was served, guys. >> so ken, somebody could read the headlines and see that he

got 40 months instead of the seven to nine years recommended by those prosecutors who ended up getting, and might think that donald trump actually got his way, that he did get a reduced sentence by pressuring the judge. explain the divergence between the three and a half years and the seven to nine years that were recommended by the u.s. attorneys? >> you're right that people might think that, and that would be an incorrect reading of the situation. but that impression has been created by all this political interference. the guidelines in this case were always seen by legal experts including our own chuck rosernberg as unduly harsh. but the prosecutors argued them because that's their job. there's a policy of the justice department that jeff sessions initiated that said you should argue for the max unless there's a good reason. the prosecutors looked at the

facts of the case, said these are serious, the federal guidelines call for seven to nine years. the judge always has the discretion to depart from that and every legal expert believed he was never going to get seven to nine years. the fact that william barr chose to interfooernen vooen and require prosecutors file a second memo saying we don't mean seven to nine years, that was unnecessary, and it raced questions about political interference. now you're right, the public is going to think that he got less because trump put his thumb on the scale when that's actually probably not what happened. >> nbc's ken dillainian, thank you very much and our thanks to nbc's hans nichols at the white house. all right, so still ahead on "morning joe," breaking news, a senior state department official confirms that the u.s. military and the taliban will begin a reduxtion in violence starting tonight in afghanistan in what could lead to the signing of a

political settlement later this month to end the war in afghanistan. david ignatius will weigh in on that and how the rest of the world is preparing for four more years of trump. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. ♪ huh, fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. everybody knows that. well, did you know pinocchio was a bad motivational speaker? i look around this room and i see nothing

but untapped potential. you have potential. you have-oh boy. geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. with tender crisp technology. the best of pressure cooking and air frying are now in one pot. and only the ninja foodi has tender crisp technology, so you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. you may never need another appliance ever again. the ninja foodi pressure cooker. the pressure cooker that crisps.

sales tax, real estate credits, solar incentives... and we have no way to integrate all that? no...but bdo does. (announcer) people who know, know bdo. it's got all my favorite shows. i wish my trading platform worked like that. have you tried thinkorswim? this is totally customizable. now this is what i'm talking about. focus on what matters to you with thinkorswim. ♪ and with the sxfinity stream app, screen is your big screen. which is free with your service, you can take a spin through on demand shows, or stream live tv. download your dvr'd shows and movies on the fly. even record from right where you are. whether you're travelling around the country

or around the house, keep what you watch with you. download the xfinity stream app and watch all the shows you love.

♪ ♪ welcome back to "morning joe." breaking news, coming out of the state department, mike pompeo announcing that a major agreement has been entered into or agreed to between the taliban and the united states to significantly reduce violence in afghanistan. of course the country where u.s. troops have been now for 19 years. president trump, his goal has long been to reduce the number of forces there for quite some time, and there have been some

negotiations that have stopped and started. but david ignatius, it appears that those negotiation rds are actually moving forward in a way they haven't in the past. what can you tell us about this breaking news? >> yjoe, a week ago we were on the edge of this deal. i was talking with our negotiators who were in munich meeting with other u.s. officials, the commanding general, general miller came from kabul also to brief officials. essentially what we're going to have is an introductory seven-day period in which there will be a reduction in vinyls and a way to measure that, to decide whether it's sufficient across the country. and then it's expected to be on february 29, there will be a signing between the u.s. and taliban with a series of secret

annexes that provide additional details explaining how the agreement will be carried out, and then talks between the taliban and the president there will begin. obviously they want u.s. troops out, which is part of this deal. but are they really ready to begin working with the afghans for this? over this period there will be significant u.s. troop reductiontions, come down from 13,000 to a little over 8,000. we'll have a real sense to test whether the taliban is willing to and can deliver the reduction in violence. here's the final key point. this is an election year. president trump wants to deliver on his promise to get u.s. troops out of the longest war in america's history. and god bless him for that.

but is he going to rush for the exit when afghanistan is not stable, when the government is in danger of collapsing, when there's a real risk that civil war will resume? that's the question that the military commanders i talked to, the senior politicians, really are focused on, and there's surprising agreement between democrats and republicans that we ought to be sure that things are stable in afghanistan before we move to the exit. >> so, jeremy, any talk of peace is welcome. but after 18 years many are skeptical there will be peace there because of the taliban, because of our presence there. do you believe this is something different? people should look to this as maybe this war could wind up somewhere in the near future? >> i share david's concern about an election-year promise to rush for the exit. look, we've been talking to the taliban for about ten years going back to all the way to

2010 when richard holbrook kicked off the process. it had been the talk. they were going to be coming into the government, plague a political role under any scenario, i think having 8,500 troops in afghanistan is a good number. it's not too low so that we can't support the afghan government and keep it stable. it's not too high where it's draining resources from other commitments. my concern if the freds president goes far lower, wants only 2,000 troops or a security force around our embassy, i worry that's going to be his instichlkt. i hope folks on capitol hill talk to the president, our national security leaders about this. i think peace, dialogue, diplomacy is the only future for afghanistan, but we have to keep some presence there to keep the peace. >> jeremy bash, thank you very much. david ignatius, i want to turn to your column and how the rest

of the world is preparing for four more years of donald trump. tell us about it. >> well, mika, i was trying to think of how leaders around the world, focusing on the wednesday night debate, are reacting. certainly i heard a lot last weekend in munich, comments that suggested that people are getting ready for the possibility that the democrats simply won't be able to unify around a candidate that can beat donald trump and that they have -- the world has to get ready for the prospect of four more years. we already begin to get a sense of that, to hear it in comments that people make, a sense of the united states moving away from its traditional positions, not likely to come back anytime soon. you see people hedging their bets. i see that among european countries. i see it with the saudis and the emiraty's in the gulf, talk more to moscow, to china, get ready for a different world.

you can sense french president macron thinking, gosh, with the americans leaving and every likelihood that the president will be there for another term, how do i make a bigger impact in a europe looking for leadership? all these changes in motion obviously we're early in the election campaign, we don't know who the democrats will pick. too early to make final judgments. i want to note that the rest of the world is already beginning to think about this, mika, and beginning to make decisions. >> all right. coming up, with the state of his campaign in question, joe biden launches a new attack against bernie sanders, targeting his record on guns. we'll get a live report on that. plus mike bloomberg isn't the one democrats should be going after. our reporter will explain the candidates who they should focus on, next on "morning joe." ♪ vo: a great president and an effective mayor.

leadership that makes a difference. obama: he's been a leader throughout the country for the past twelve years, mr. michael bloomberg is here. vo: together they worked to combat gun violence, and again to improve education for every child. obama: i want to thank the mayor of this great city, mayor bloomberg, for his extraordinary leadership. i share your determination to bring this country together to finally make progress for the american people. bloomberg: i'm mike bloomberg, and i approve this message.

she is on her way to our house. what? i got it. alexa, start roomba. the lexus es. eagerly prepared for the unexpected. lease the 2020 es 350 for $389 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

lease the 2020 es 350 for $389 a moit's our mostnths. dangerous addiction. so we took our worst vice, and turned it into the dna for a better system. we created bionic and put the word out with godaddy. what will you change? make the world you want.

the real winner in the debate last night was donald trump because i worry we are on the way to nominating somebody who cannot win in november, and if we choose a candidate who appeals to a small base like senator sanders, it will be a fatal error. >> i get real stuff done. i have rock solid values and get stuff done. i get hard stuff done. i fought for the consumer protection financial bureau, got that thing enacted, and set it up over the space of a year. i can work across the aisle when i need to. i've got a big hearing aid bill that i got through while donald trump was president, got it through on a bipartisan basis. and next year people are going to be able to buy hearing aid over the counter saving millions of dollars. i want to be president just to yell at people. i want to change things.

>> a rare slight going out to draw a difference between her and the vermont senator. mike memoli, editor for "the washington post" post and political analyst eugene robinson, and mike allen is with us. mike memoli, we'll start with you. set the scene for us out in nevada a day before the caucus there. >> reporter: yeah w. this is getting close to make-or-break for joe biden. he needs a strong finish here, one or two to set up an evening stronger performance he has to win in his firewall of south carolina. we've seen biden over the last week amplify one issue in taking on bernie sanders, and that is gun safety. he started his week with issues

like the brady background check bill, gun liable shields for gun manufacturers. we heard him at an event yesterday raise the ante yesterday talking about the fact that he said cowardice among politicians in washington, and he included bernie sanders among that list, is what has allowed the nra to gain influencep he carried that into a cnn town hall last night. >> guess what, the only industry in america that is not able to be sued are the gun manufacturers. now, bernie talks about my record. it's appropriate. i'm not being mean. he voted to exempt gun manufacturers from any liability. zero. they can't be sued. >> this is an attack hillary clinton tried to raise against bernie sanders in 2016. for joe biden, this is something he hopes can resuscitate his

candidacy with an eye towards getting momentum back before super tuesday when mike bloomberg will be on the ballot as well. >> all right, mike, thank you very much. a week from tomorrow it is south carolina's turn, and joe biden seemingly insurmount anl lead. and that state has dwindled after dropping 13 points since september. a new poll from winthrop university finds the former vice president still topping the field with 24%. bernie sanders and tom steyer are tied for second with 19% and 15% respecktively. pete buttigieg, elizabeth warren and aimo klobuchar are tied for fourth within the margin of error. when it comes to black voters, biden holds the lead despite dropping 15 points in december. tom steyer and bernie sanders are in a statistcal tie for second with 18% and 17%, elizabeth warren and pete buttigieg also statistically

tied in fourth with 5% and 1% aren'tively. >> jean robinson, let's talk about your home state. joe biden still holding up well enough there, but you almost get the sense that nevada is extraordinarily important because of south carolina, that joe biden can't afford another third or fourth place finish, because he'll bleed additional support, especially from black voters there, who are the base of his entire campaign. but again, the crazy thing is, and you talked about this, it's bernie sanders who's running away fromw this nomination fight right now in the early stages, and nobody on the debate stage seemed to notice that the other night. >> no, they didn't. they all went after bloomberg and they beat him up, pretty good. but meanwhile, bernie sanders got away basically unscathed.

i mean, the, you know, bloomberg did hit him for having three houses, and then they got him -- they criticized him on a couple of issues on medicare for all. but he was not the focus of the attacks coming from warren and buttigieg and biden and klobuchar. and i'm wondering why, not because i'm not -- i'm not picking a horse in this fight. i'm just saying i think it seems to me you'd want to take down the guy who's threatening to run away with this nomination. everyone can read the polls, and the polls show or predict that bernie sanders could emerge from super tuesday with a substantial delegate lead. and the kind of dolegat lead that it will be very, very difficult for anybody to claw back in the success of primaries, including michael bloomberg with his -- with all his billions.

it's just -- just look at the math. we know how it works. and in the democratic race where everything is proportional, if you get a big lead, it's really hard for anybody else to catch you. so i just wondered why more fire wasn't trained against the guy who is threatening to just run away. >> willie, nicole wallace yesterday was talking about -- she was having these terrible flashbacks of 2016. this is just like the republican nomination fight in 2016, you had donald trump who was obviously the person everybody needed to worry about, but you had marco and jeb going after each other. you had chris christy attacking marco. you had ted cruz going after jeb. remember, there was a long period of time when ted cruz refused to attack donald trump. and it wasn't until they were two of the last people in the field that they finally started

to do that. but you look at a spate of polls that came out yid, and it's still not too late. california, there's a california poll that showed biden and bloomberg and sanders bunched up near the top. you had a texas poll that came out that showed about the same thing. obviously sanders more comably ahead there. but biden still getting some points in in texas, the same thing, it was a closer matchup. and south carolina is still pretty tight. so there's still a window for all these candidates to challenge bernie sanders. but elizabeth warren especially doesn't seem to want to take him on. it's just all the fire is aimed at moderates and the moderates are shooting at each other as well. >> it does feel a little like 2016, nikkole is right where you have people trying to vank wish

each other thinking they'll be the ones to get to that matchup. by the time you wank wish everybody who's not bernie sanders, he's the nominee. we should look closely at the afternoon american vote. there's a new "wall street journal" nbc poll out this morning that shows bernie sanders has caught joe biden among black voters. remember, that spread was 30 points at some point last year. when you look inside that, joe and mika just read that number, he's creeping up there too. those voters in south carolina are watching what's happening as many people knew what would take place. they weren't going to be static voters for joe biden. they're watching nevada and say, i don't want to back a losing horse. so you've seen bernie sanders now climb steadily among those all-important african-american voters as well. >> yeah. and this was sort of predictable. this is what we've seen from

african-american voters in south carolina and elsewhere historically. i think they're being very sort of pragmatic and tactical, strategic, about this election. they want the democratic party to nominate somebody who can beat donald trump. and with joe biden's poor finishes in the first couple primaries and some of his poor debate performances, he was much better the other night, but he's had some pretty awful ones. and people just started taking another look around, and then you've got bernie sanders. meanwhile there is a generational divide among african-american voters. you have a lot of young african-americans just like a lot of young people in general who are bernie sanders supporters. they are, you know, when we look way ahead to the fall, one of the problems, they're not necessarily the most reliable

voters. they don't come out in such large numbers. and bernie sanders' claim to radically enlarge the electorate by bringing all these young and first-time voters out as the way he's going to beat donald trump, we haven't seen that in the numbers yet. and so that's got to be worrying for the democratic party. theory of the case, so far, he does haven't a lot of evidence to show that it will work. >> mike allen, let's begin with you, where we always need to begin. you lead it. >> happy friday. >> there it is. >> there we go, baby. there we go. now that we have those formalties -- what a week. what -- >> is it a happy friday? >> what a friday. so mike, let's talk about bloomberg. we're going to be talking to jeremy in a little bit. jeremy peters for "the new york times" who reported on the fact, something you've been talking

about, that bloomberg's people prepared him for this debate. he just didn't execute. they were really rattled by how poorly he performed. i'm just wondering, what happens if michael bloomberg is suddenly not the great capitalist hope that many democrats, moderate democrats, hoped he was going to be? what happens if he just can't produce? >> joe, you're exactly right. and a great debate performance -- an okay debate performance, the one thing he couldn't buy. he could buy the prep, the advisers, the air cover. but he had to go out and deliver. now they have a plan for south carolina coming up fast this tuesday. that debate, their recovery plan is doing well in that debate. but, joe, that window that you were talking about, where lots of people see a chance, is the exact reason that bernie sanders is more likely to be the

nominee. and here's why. people are not going to get out. there's no sign of people getting out, even people who don't have what in any normal year would be a clear path to the nomination. so the headline that we have at the top got in to stop sanders. he got in because he didn't think that biden was going to last. he got in to stop democratic socialism. now you have a situation where so many democrats say they don't see how you stop sanders now. and that's so many people staying in and exactly what the bloomberg camp has forecast, that you keep splitting it. after super tuesday, you get that insurmountable delegate lead. >> david ignatius, i'd be interested to hear your thoughts on bloomberg and the debate the other night. >> joe, i thought bloomberg underperformed, even given fairly low expectations. he is rusty as a debater. i'm not sure he'd be a good

debater in the best situation. he is a good manager. he is going to have to have answers for the questions that people put to him. or he is just going to sink lower and lower. the theory, joe, that i'm hearing about bernie sanders is so similar to 2016 on the republican side. voters are angry that an insurgent who is unconventional, doesn't look like any politician, who shouts at you, just has got a certain charisma and keeps rolling through this field is now emerging as the front runner, much as donald trump did, to everybody's astonishment. nobody thought that would happen, but it did. maybe that's the bernie scenario. just one more point. i'm hearing a little bit in the last 24 hours as people react to that debate and what we'll call the circular firing squad, people wondering, is there some way that people in the wings who

might unite the democrats, might roll over trump, just be such strong candidates that they could do the thing people once imagined bloomberg could, is there still a way for them to get involved in this? i'm hearing more of that. so i think the basic point is this race is still fluid. we'll see after super tuesday. has bernie got it? if bloomberg man aged to hold in terms of his vote total, it is still pretty wide open. >> david, what are you talking about? are you talking about if they move towards a convention, you're talking about -- for instance, i've heard john kerry, people keep talking about the possibility of john kerry jumping into the race. >> so john kerry is an obvious possibility, joe. imagine a convention tied up in knots. bernie can't get it. other people are competing, but there's not really coalesce around them. those are situations in the past where a figure like dwight d. eisenhower, a military commander, somebody who has that

national stature suddenly looks like an attractive candidate. i'm hearing a little of that. there are various people you can think of who might be probab appropriate for that. prominent generals who have some credibility in the democratic party. but my only point is in a brokered convention scenario, who can say how that might play? >> yeah. mike allen -- >> it's wide open. >> -- how surreal it is. let's follow up on what david said, about a democratic candidate who is yelling all the time. i was watching bernie on stage the other night. his volume actually increased. it was louder. and he always is yelling on stage. but he has this strange mag magnati magnatimagn magnetism. he is a socialist. he had a heart attack a couple

months ago. he is running away with this race right now in the early stages. boy, it certainly does remind you of 2016, doesn't it, with donald trump on the republican side. >> it really does. here are two reasons why. one is his consistencconsistenc. people know what they're getting. it isn't substantive. i had to smile when i heard that elizabeth warren bite where she said, i don't want to become president to shout at people. that's as biting as she's been without giving his name. but here's the other reason it is so reminiscent of 2016 and why it could be such a powerful general election. what we're seeing there is bernie sanders as a cultural phenomenon. just as donald trump isn't really a republican, took over the republican party, the hostile takeover that you've talked about. bernie sanders, not technically

a democrat. also, this incredible cultural phenomenon for people who don't trust the system, don't trust us, don't trust anything big. it is an exact mirror of 2016. >> we're going to be reading ax i don't s axios am. happy friday. eugene robinson, we'll be reading your column in the "post." still ahead, john brennan says the u.s. is in a, quote, full-blown national security crisis. the former chief joins us to discuss the concerns the president is punishing officials for telling the truth. plus, roger stone gets sentenced to 40 months behind bars. the president says he has a good chance of exoneration. but does he mean pardoned? also ahead, the president's acting chief of staff mick mulvaney made remarks about immigration this week that seemed to directly contradict what other members of the administration have been pushing

for. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. ♪ a bottle of red ♪ a bottle of white ♪ it all depends upon [ applause ] thank you.

it's an honor to tell you that liberty mutual customizes your car insurance

so you only pay for what you need. i love you! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

by the way, how bad were the academy awards this year? did you see it? and the winner is a movie from south korea. what the hell was that all about? we got enough problems with south korea, with trade. on top of it, they gave them the best movie of the year. was it good? i don't know. i'm looking for, like, let's get "gone with the wind." can we get "gone with the wind" back, please? "sunset boulevard." so many great movies. the winner is from south korea. i thought it was best foreign film, right? best foreign movie. no. it was the -- did this ever happen before? then you have brad pitt.

i was never a big fan of his. he got up and said a little wise guy statement. little wise guy. >> that's just -- willie, that was just achingly stupid. i mean, just achingly stupid. i don't even -- >> crowd loved it. >> i don't even know what that was all about. then the crowd booing brad pitt, when you know they're all big brad pitt fans. >> they all have posters in their rooms. >> every one of them have posters in their rooms of brad pitt standing on top of sharon tate's house, fixing her tv antenna. >> i don't think they do. >> i know you put that one -- >> i have the thelma and louise poster in my room, but that's just me. >> that is something. >> okay. >> brad pitt, when he was accepting his oscar, made a comment about john bolton not testifying. he was referring to that. what has he got against

"parasite"? did the director or producers of "parasite" do something to donald trump? >> they're not americans. >> there was the undertone of making america great again. if we could go back to "gone with the wind," a 1939 movie. i'd love to ask the president his favorite scene or a plot detail from "gone with the wind." >> also, the president is trying to whip up a crowd in 2020 talking about a 1939 film. why didn't he just -- well, i guess "wizard of oz" would have been better. they don't -- >> that would have been too true. >> -- make movies like they used to. it was really bizarre. but i guess anything goes in the rallies. even if it makes absolutely no sense. they're just there now. he's just phoning it in. >> well, people line up for it. it's worth taking note. joining joe, willie, and me, we have politics editor for the daily beast, sam stein. chief white house correspondent

for the "new york times," peter baker. and nbc news and msnbc contributor shanna thomas. we're going to begin with the new information and why the president forced out the nation's top spy chief. a former intel official tells nbc news that acting director of national intelligence, joseph maguire, who was under considering to be permanent dni, was pushed aside because the president was angry lawmakers were briefed on russia's plans to help him get re-elected. news of the briefing, which was held last thursday, was first reported by the "new york times." sources tell both the "times" and the "washington post" that the president erupted at maguire the very next day. concerns that democrats would use the information against him. a former official tells nbc news that the office of the director of national intelligence is, quote, nearing a meltdown over magui maguire's removal and the reason behind it. as our colleagues, ken dilanian

and andrea mitchell report, the episode has raised a specter that trump is punishing officials for providing accurate intelligence to members of congress cleared to receive it. we should also note, maguire's testimony back in september, when he told lawmakers the whistleblower, quote, did the right thing and followed the law every step of the way by reporting concerns over the president's phone call with ukraine's president. trump sent shock waves through the intelligence community when he announced on wednesday that one of his partisan allies, the u.s. ambassador to germany, richard grenell, would replace maguire as acting dni despite having not just some or little but no intelligence experience. last night, the president tweeted his intention to nominate someone else for the job. quote, soon. >> the story broke in the "new

york times." put it into perspective for us, if you will. >> here we are, heading into an election with the russians meddling. our domestic affairs and a president who sees it through a partisan lens that we're no longer united and how to respond to an outside threat, right? to talk about russian interference, even though it happens to be on his behalf is to question his legitimacy. therefore, it shouldn't be passed along to congress because adam schiff is in the room. adam schiff, of course, was the lead house manager during the impeachment trial. he sees adam schiff as an implaquable enemy. to give schiff the information is to weaponize it, give him something to use against the president. rather than it being an opportunity for the two parties to come together on something that poses a threat to the country as a whole. it is a telling moment. at this point, things are seen through such a partisan lens, particularly in this white house, that there's so little opportunity, so little, you know, prospect for coming

together, even on things where the two parties, you would think, would have a mutual interest and collaboration. >> yeah. sam stein, you broke it down in real time yesterday with this tweet. i liked it. so the sequence here appears to be, one, dni gets intel that russia is interfering again in america's elections. two, acting dni briefs lawmakers about the threat to our democracy. three, trump finds out. four, trump berates acting dni. five, trump replaces acting dni with political stooge. did i leave anything out? >> well, one thing that we discovered in our reporting that i think peter alluded to, which i think is one of the more al m alarming elements here, is there were congressional republicans at the briefing, along with adam schiff. from our reporting, they objected to the suggestion that russia was going to interfere on trump's behalf. they made the argument that trump had been tough on russia and, therefore, russia would

never want to re-elect trump. to me, that underscores the degree to which the republican party has bought into what is really a myth about trump being tough on russia. used it for their own political benefit, as well. somehow, this information on the briefing got back to the white house. that is sort of the unknown question, is how did it get back to the white house, and what'd the president hear and what'd he say? it is alarming, i think, the degree to which trump is willing to subject actual intelligence for political gain. we talked to a former top intelligence official who was crest fallen over this. the person said essentially, we all took an oath of office, so help me god. the oath didn't include we should lie to the president to make him feel good. that's essentially what's happening here. trump is sticking his head in the sand either deliberately or non-deliberately because he bleblef believes it is in his political gain. >> peter baker, sam is right, it is extraordinarily disturbing that intel chiefs come and they

give their assessment. you have republican members pushing back. although it is not relevant for that briefing, because intelligence is intelligence, where do you come down on donald trump being tougher on russia? i know in terms of his interactions with vladimir putin, he has kowtowed more often than not. he has embarrassed himself, at least in my opinion, on the world stage. but you took at the sanctions against the russians. you look at the defensive weapons that finally did make their way to ukraine. you look at the actions where congress forced his hand. actually, the united states has taken a tougher position as far as policy goes on russia over the past three years than they had previously. is that fair to say? >> yeah, it's true. there's certainly an interesting dichotomy right now when it comes to russia. in washington, the president of the united states presides over a policy that's different than the one he, himself,

articulates. he, himself, points out again and again how much he wants to be friends with vladimir putin. he never challenges vladimir putin particularly to his face. he brushes off the 2016 interference as if it was no big deal. yet, policy of the administration itself at times has been much more conventional in the sense of applying sanctions, kicking out diplomats, sending weapons to ukraine and so forth. i think, you know, we're confused a little bit by that. vladimir putin and russia, what he looks and sees is a president who wants to be friends and is stymied by the people around him. he sees trump as being frustrated by the deep state. remember that concept? it's something vladimir putin sees, as well. from their point of view, trump is still potentially reliable dlo diplomatic partner. would people want trump over bernie sanders? sanders, of course, democratic

socialist, has more idealogically in tune with the old russia anyway. the russians did favor bernie sanders in the primary in 2016 over hillary clinton. that's an interesting question. of course, bernie sanders is not the nominee right now. what the russians see in front of them is an incumbent president who speaks in tones that they would like to hear from an american president. >> the idea that russia is interfering in the 2020 election is not exactly breaking news overnight. this is something intelligence agencies have been warning about since 2016. say the russians are going to do it again. you would think a reaction from a president would be, how do we stop this? how do we stop it from happening, rather than stop telling people about it on the intel committee. >> the president is basically saying, stop doing your job. the thing i keep wondering, this story, attorney general barr and the issues with roger stone's prosecution and that kind of thing, when you look at the state department and questions around whether secretary pompeo is supporting his staff, is who is going to do these jobs in the

future? i have friends who are foreign service officers. i know lots of people who work in the so-called deep state. if your president, everybody else is saying, you're not doing your job correctly, when all you're trying to do is do your job correctly, who is going to want to work for the federal government? there is a brain drain. it doesn't pay that well. sometimes you have good health insurance. you work many, many hours. you don't know how you're going to rise up in the ranks. these people actually try to protect us, for the most part. especially if there is a second term of the president. you look up at the guy you're following, and he is basically saying, don't spread this information to the lawmakers whose job is oversight. why do you want to do this anymore? that is what really worries me. >> all right. now this. acting white house chief of staff mick mulvaney says the u.s. economy, quote, needs more immigrants to continue growing. according to an audio recording

of mulvaney's remarks at a private gathering in england on wednesday night, obtained by the "washington post," mulvaney said, quote, we are desperate. desperate for more people. we are running out of people to fuel the economic growth that we've had in our nation over the last four years. we need more immigrants. adding that the trump administration wants those immigrants to come in legal fashion. the "post" points out that mulvaney's remarks appears to contrast the public position of several top figures in trump's white house, especially that of senior policy adviser steven miller, who had been working to slash legal and illegal immigration through a slew of policies that aim to close off the u.s. border to foreigners as well as the president himself. during a visit to the border last year, amid a record surge of central american families and children crossing into the united states, the president said the country could not

absorb more newcomers. our country is full, trump said. can't take you anymore, so turn around. white house officials have insisted that the steady arrival of newcomers depresses wages for the blue collar u.s. workers whose votes helped lift trump to the presidency in 2016. meanwhile, in that same speech, mulvaney called the republican party hypocritical when it comes to the growing deficit. mulvaney said, quote, my party is very interested in deficits when there is a democrat in the who white house. the worst thing in the whole world is deficits when barack obama was the president. then donald trump became president, and we're less interested as a party. mulvaney wept nt on to say he fd it extraordinarily depressing the deficit reached $20 trillion, but neither party nor voters cared much about it.

before serving as acting chief of staff to the trump presidency, mulvaney ran the office of management and budget. nbc news has not obtained a copy of the audio recording. >> peter baker, if i didn't know better, i would say that mick mulvaney is interviewing, like an exit interview or something. it makes no sense that, in the same speech, he trashes the central tenant of not only trump's immigration policy but of his time at the white house. then, of course, goes after the real weakness for real conservatives. that is the massive spending, the runaway deficits, and the uncontrollable debt. >> well, i think he just highlights in that talk the very, very stark conundrum of donald trump's republican party. donald trump has, you know, as mike allen said earlier on the program, taken over this republican party and imposed his ideology on it.

it doesn't fit comfortably with traditional republicans. they've been in favor of reducing the deficit and fiscal responsibility, even if they haven't always practiced it. that has been, of course, something that has been pushed aside under this particular president. i think mulvaney, you're right, he's been on the way out for a long time. he has been a survivor in a way that people hadn't expected. he's been acting choef ining c now for 14 months. how are you acting in anything for 14 months? he doesn't require senate confirmation. it's not that. it's because the president won't give him the title and keeps him on the hook like that. it is quite a, you know, humiliation on the part of the president to do it that way. mick mulvaney may be feeling a little antsy at this point, trying to figure out what the future holds for him. >> sam, on the rare occasion when somebody in the trump white house speaks the truth like this, it is usually after they've left. or if they're about to write a book or leak it anonymously to someone. this is mick mulvaney saying out

lud a loud all the things that conservatives on this show have been saying about the debt and deficits, the hypocrisy of republicans in the trump era. the question is, what's he doing? >> he's had, like, bizarre episodes like this before. remember, he did the press conference where he said, of course it was a quid pro quo. get over it. >> get over it, yeah. >> just a point of clarification. he is not the former obm, chair. i think i'm correct. he still is head of the budget office, which means that he is running the budget at the time he is complaining about record deficits. to their credit, they've proposed budgets that are looking for cuts, but the president hasn't passed it. they do have some blame here. it is just weird. the whole situation is very weird. it is another instance in which, you know, you get a window into how people in trump world really, really believe and what they say. then they go out and have a public posture that is dramatically at odds. it is the same thing as peter was talking about with respect to russia. you don't know what script

you're supposed to follow. i'll say on a substantial level, there is a solution to the things mulvaney was talking about on both these fronts. comprehensive immigration reform. you get more workers through legal means. it is proven to be a help with deficit because more immigrants pay taxes. this will never happen. there's not a prayer for it happening, but it's right there if they want to do it. i can't imagine it'll ever be pushed. >> you and i were listening to mika read the quote, describing the hypocrisy of the republican party. you looked at me and said, is he trying to be fired? >> what is he setting himself up for? is it a book? it seems maybe he knows there's some writing on the wall. i was also curious as to whether, does mick mulvaney want to run for office again? that was the question as she was reading it. he used to be a member of the house of representatives. he used to be a conservative freedom tea party type who believed in lowering the deficit.

>> that was his issue. >> what that sounded like to me was maybe i want to run for office again, and i'm testing this kind of water out. this is just me speculating. that being said, the party mick mulvaney used to be a part of in the house of representatives, that's not the republican party anymore. it is trump's republican party. we keep immigrants out of the country, and we don't think about deficits. so he is going to have to figure out what his actual message is if that is where he is going, trying to set up his next job. >> yeah. i thought the same thing when i was listening, reading about what he said. this is a guy who understands his political career was defined by his self-righteousness over balanced budgets, over deficits, over runaway spending. yet, he, for himself, unfortunately, he's the guy most responsible in the federal government for the largest national debt ever. he's the guy in the national

government most responsible for record deficits in prosperous times. nobody has a worse fiscal record in the history of the republic, as certainly his own beat director, than mick mulvaney. you're right. this guy who was seen as being too self-righteous on ball laan budgets, now if he is talking this way, it is not because he is thinking about being a lobbyist. that certainly sounds like somebody considering another run at public office at some point and understands he's got a lot of cleaning up to do. >> yeah, i agree. i also -- but the cleaning up is cleaning up to what? this is not the same republican party that he was a part of when he was in the house. so i don't know how this necessarily sets you up. this is why we see senators, even from states that have -- where they could lose, like tom

tillis or someone like that, towing the line of president trump. this is his party. i guess, good luck, mick mulvaney? >> oh, my lord. he needs that. peter baker, thank you. still ahead on "morning joe," few people in or out of government have more experience with national intelligence than our next guest. former cia director john brennan joins us next on "morning joe." unpredictable crohn's symptoms following you? for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease, stelara® works differently. studies showed relief and remission, with dosing every 8 weeks. stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection or flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems.

these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions and lung inflammation can occur. talk to your doctor today, and learn how janssen can help you explore cost support options. remission can start with stelara®. the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. try to win by attacking, now, we know the trump strategy- distorting, dividing. mr. president: it. won't. work. newspapers report bloomberg is the democrat trump fears most. as president, universal healthcare that lets people keep their coverage if they like it. a record on job creation. a doable plan to combat climate change. i led a complex, diverse city through 9-11 and i have common sense plans to move america away from chaos to progress! i'm mike bloomberg and i approve this message.

garcy young woman: yeah, thanks mom mother: of course and i love these flowers young woman whispering: hey, did you bring the... the condoms? young man whispering: what's up? young woman whispering: condoms young man whispering: what? young woman whispering: condom father: condoms charlie. she wants to know if you brought any condoms. young man: yeah i brought some. announcer: eargo, a virtually invisible hearing loss solution with high quality sound and lifetime support.

the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. no. uh uh, no way. ♪ come on. no. no. n... ni ni, no no! only discover has no annual fee on any card. can you help keep these iguys protected online?? easy, connect to the xfi gateway. what about internet speeds that keep up with my gaming? let's hook you up with the fastest internet from xfinity. what about wireless data options for the family? of course, you can customize and save. can you save me from this conversation? that we can't do, but come in and see what we can do. we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. ask. shop. discover. at your local xfinity store today.

♪ welcome back to "morning joe" on a friday morning. joining us, former cia director john brennan. he is a senior national security and intelligence analyst for nbc news. also with us, nbc news and msnbc news senior foreign affairs director who served on the global coalition to defeat isis at the state department.

now a distinguished lecturer. dr. brennan, i'll start with you. you tweeted yesterday, quote, we are now in a full-blown national security crisis, in reaction to the news that donald trump got rid of his acting director of national intelligence and replaced him because the odni actually went and did its job, briefing the house intelligence committee. what are you hearing from your friends, from your former colleagues inside the intelligence services today? >> well, i think there is tremendous concern that this just is a continuation of the trend that they have seen for quite some time. donald trump has been very dismissive and even disparaging of the intelligence profession and intelligence professionals and their products. it's one thing for him to ignore it. it is another thing for him to actively try to prevent the congress from gaining access to the intelligence that is so necessary for the congress to be able to do its job. so i think they see this as pretending even greater efforts on the part of trump to put his

loyalists in positions so they can squelch the intelligence necessary for national security. this is a crisis. >> you've worked for six presidents, three republicans, three democrats. >> that's correct. >> have you ever seen anything like this? >> never, ever. i didn't agree with a lot of the presidents' decisions throughout the course of the six administrations, but i never got the sense that they didn't want the intelligence community to do its work. to the executive branch as well as to the legislative brancbran. what we're seeing now is an ano anomaly from the past, the independence and importance of the intelligence community. two non-partisan officials have been removed at the helm of the intelligence community. maguire and then a senior cia officer who was his deputy. it is a decapitation of the intelligence community. who is going in there? someone who has no experience, no credentials as far as the intelligence community is concerned, richard grenell. they can only -- intelligence

professionals can only see this as one more example they are not being allowed to do their job. >> we've talked a lot over the last three years, director brennan, about the institutions, the institutions holding in the face of president trump. what does that look like right now as we talk specifically about the intelligence services? if there is this, as you put it, decapitation at the top of these organizations, how does that institution hold? >> it is a good question, willie. i'm hoping the intelligence professionals are going to continue to do their best to provide the intelligence and the analysis that the executive branch, as well as legislative branch, needs. they need to try to do it despite the headwinds they're feeling coming from the white house. a lot of these individuals, i'm sure, are being intimidated and now will be pulling punches. they don't want to be shown the door. it is one thing for the senior profession until als to be axed. will the white house now remove professionals trying to do their job but will face the wrath of a

vindictive donald trump? >> what is your message then to your former colleagues who are still fighting the fight inside the intelligence services? >> carry out those responsibilities that you swore an oath to do. because they have that very solemn responsibility, whether you're intelligence or a diplomat or in law enforcement. you need to carry out your responsibilities with the great egreate se greatest integrity. i would say, don't leave, but do your job to the best they can. >> what is your take on all of this? specifically a precedent, have you seen anything like this from a president, a white house, as it relates to the intelligence services? >> i very much agree with john. of course, i've been in the situation room with him a number of times. it is important for viewers to recognize, the intelligence community is the first line of defense for our nation. intelligence analysts, it's their job to tell the hard truth to policymakers, especially the president. what the president is doing here

is creating a culture of shoot the messenger. if intelligence analysts are -- there is a chilling effect from telling the truth, our country is at risk. we have an odni, director of national intelligence, because of the attacks of 9/11. out of the 9/11 commission, it was determined we needed this integration function across the 17 intelligence agencies to collect information, analyze it, and give decision-makers like the president the best information he can to help protest the country. in terms of hiding information not only from congress -- you know, something else is going on. one of the best documents that came out of the trump administration was a worldwide threat assessment from dan coats, from the dni about a year ago. the trend lines in that document, you talk about separating signal from noise, were a lot of trend lines in the world are running against us. china and russia working closer together than any time in 50 years. iran is more likely to move toward a nuclear weapon because we got out of the deal rather than had we stayed in it.

a lot of things president trump didn't like to hear. this yeerar, there will not be worldwide threat assessment the american people will see. that's another piece of this. it is quite troubling because the american people have a right to see what is obviously protecting all sources and methods, but what our intelligence agency is seeing in terms of the future and direction of the country. if you are a deputy secretary, you have analysts in your office. i had them. i needed those men and women to tell me the truth every morning and if the culture is, i don't want to hear it and i can fire you if i don't like it, it is a chilling effect across the community. it'll impact the ability of our men and women to protect the country. >> director, would you tell people that you know, or their kids, to go into the intelligence service the way you went into it at this point? would you tell them to have a government job with the way

things are going right now? >> absolutely. i speak to a lot of college students. i tell them to disregard this political, you know -- >> how do you -- >> disregard what's going on in washington. this country needs fbi agents and cia officers and diplomats around the world. donald trump is in a painful phase that we're going through right now. we will get through this. we need to have americans with great skill and talent to be able to dedicate themselves to public service. so i encourage people who are currently in the government to stay there. do the best they can. push back against any type of political pressure they might be feeling. but for young americans, take this, in fact, as a rallying cry. you need to be able to go into the government in order to carry out the duties of law enforcement, intelligence, and diplomacy. >> that is an important message. i want to get to another topic, brett mcgurk, and you, director brennan. a week-long truce to reduce violence with the taliban. what is the prospect for peace, and what does peace look like in

afghanistan? >> well, i think the key step, i think david ignatius said it earlier on the show, is inter-afghan talks between the afghan government and the taliban. that's something they've never been able to have in 19 years. i want to see if that happens. that's critical. the taliban just put out a statement this morning, too, and said the end game here is all foreign forces leaving the country. that seems to be different than what the u.s. officials are saying about having a residual force to maintain pressure on al qaeda networks and counterterrorism. i think there's a lot to still come out here. we'll see. i think we should be hopeful. i think one of the great diplomats i had the pleasure to work with has done a great job under difficult circumstances in working were the trump administration. we need to be hopeful. the key step will be the inter-afghan talks. we have to support the afghan government to make sure those gain some traction. >> director brennan, relatively small step. taliban says, we won't commit violence for a one-week period,

but it is a step. what does peace look like to you vis-a-vis united states and afghanistan? >> i think it is going to be a phased process. you'll have the first week. interesting to see whether the taliban can control some of the more radical elements in the organization. it is not a monolift. we'll have to go into this with eyes wide open. as brett said, there needs to be inter-afghan talks to push this forward. it is not just the military issue but a political situation. getting back to what trump is doing to the intelligence community, the intelligence community is necessary for the lawmakers and the legislative branch to understand what is going on. i have in hundreds of meetings about afghanistan. the intelligent communice commu essential to provide that intelligence perspective that the policymakers can take and move forward. if the community is kowtowed to not do anything that the trump

administration doesn't want to hear, we can have a serious problem as we go down the peace process pass. >> director brennan, i'm curious about the growing void, obviously, in the state department and the intelligence community. i've heard from day one that there has been jobs that just never got filled. any idea how deep the untilled positions go, and what's the impact on our national security? >> well, i think those appointments that have not been made and positions are filled by actings, a number are filled by professionals, whether in the state department or other places, department of defense. i'm hoping the professionals will carry out duties and responsibilities ably. it sends a signal to the ranks that their jobs and their work is not important enough to get the selection and nominations that are necessary to put people in there with senate confirmation. so, therefore, i think it is rather pervasive, and i think it undermines the ability of these organizations to carry out their responsibilities the way they

are supposed to. >> former cia director john brennan, thank you very much. and former state department official brett mcgurk, thank you, as well. >> thanks, guys. coming up, tuesday's debate in south carolina gives mike bloomberg just four more days to step up his game. we're already getting a glimpse into what he might do differently. we'll have the new reporting ahead on "morning joe." - [spokeswoman] meet the ninja foodi pressure cooker,

the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps.

you're stronger than you know. so strong. you power through chronic migraine, 15 or more headache or migraine days a month. one tough mother. you're bad enough for botox®. botox® has been preventing headaches and migraines before they even start for almost 10 years, and is the #1 prescribed branded chronic migraine treatment. botox® is for adults with chronic migraine, 15 or more headache days a month, each lasting 4 hours or more. effects of botox® may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of a life-threatening condition. side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. don't receive botox® if there's a skin infection. tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins, as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. go on with your bad self. you may pay as little as zero dollars for botox®. ask your doctor about botox® for chronic migraine.

you got this.

♪ joining us now, associate editor of commentary magazine and msnbc contributor, noah. also, senior editor of "the national review," richard bro brookheizer. his book, "give me liberty."

it traces the evolution of american nationalism and liberty through the examination of 13 historic documents, from the declaration of independence to ronald reagan's "tear down this wall" speech. >> thank you so much for being with us. you talk about how there have been many dark chapters in american history. as you say, the light of liberty was lost. you talk about responses, whether it's from abraham lincoln or from anti-slavery forces. talk about that, and talk about how that inspired you to write this book. >> well, i was inspired to write this book because i think we're in a period of not paying enough attention to liberty. i just wanted to draw people's attention to it. i think there's a lot to be inspired by. i think that our record is pretty good, and it doesn't start with the declaration of independence. it goes back to the jamestown

colony. my first document is the minutes of the first meeting of the general assembly of jamestown, 1619. that was the first legislature or parliament-like meeting in british north america. then it goes up through ronald reagan in 1987, the "tear down this wall" speech. but some of these documents were written by famous people, written or signed by famous people, people on mt. rushmore. some were written and signed by people we know nothing about, except that at a certain moment they stood up. they stood up for some principle of liberty or freedom. i just wanted to celebrate these instances. >> talk about, if you will, because 1619 is obviously a year that has been talked about a good bit over the past year with the "new york times" project.

there have been pulitzer prize winniers who say thit was compeg with some of the darker instincts of the settlers. do you talk about that in this book? >> yes. it begins long before the civil war. one of my chapters is on the new york manumission society. it held its first meeting in 1785, right after the revolutionary war. i wanted to put this in the book to remind people that slavery was not just a southern thing in this country. new york was a big slave state. new york city had more slaves than any city in america, except for charleston, south carolina. so this was a problem that was widespread. after the revolution, a group of

new yorks ers -- and it was th elite of the state, people like the governor, george clinton, alexander hamilton, jon jay, and also a group of quakers who were always outsiders, always pursuing their own agenda. but these two groups got together to try and set new york state on a path towards manumission. to free its enslaved people, to help free blacks in the state, to make sure they weren't kidnapped by slave catchers, to educate free blacks so they'd be better able to resist ruses and wiles laid for them. by 1827, there were no more slaves in new york. now, you can look at that and say, well, 42 years, that's a pretty slow pace. on the other hand, it worked. if more states had done that, we might not have had a civil war. >> yeah. you know, noah, we're talking

about nationalism, of course. you look at the nationalism in hungary. you look at even a renewed sense of nationalism from china, russia. there's just such an anti-democratic strain to all of those nationalistic urges. then you look at what's happening in the united states. you have a president that, like hungary, has absolute contempt for the media, and is doing everything to undermine the rule of law. we don't have to look much past the last week or two to see where it's happened in the roger stone case. what is the prescription for that? what is the prescription as we move forward through this election year? >> there's good nationalism and bad nationalism. in this book, i'm saying, here

is our nationalism. what makes america unique and distinctive is our concern for liberty over the years. i want people to just recognize that. >> i agree with richard. the american ethos, its commitment to national liber liberalism has faced challenges. populism can take the form of thicker ideologies, like nationalism. but it is an assault on the american ethos. but that ethos is quite durable. richard, i want to know your perspective on whether or not you believe this, being one of those periods in which classical liberalism is facing challenges from the political class, if it is as durable, kdo you think it'll last through this moment? >> it has for 400 years, but it is not a perpetual motion machine.

it has to be defended in every generation. that's why i took examples from over four centuries of american history, and different sort of examples. elitists stepping up. ordinary people stepping up. obscure people. some of them people we know nothing about. they put their names to documents or to movements that were critical at certain times. >> as richard says, the term nationalism in recent years has been sort of hijacked and meant something different over time than it means right now. the quote in the book is, the unique feature of american nationalism is its concern for liberty. that's a common thread that may not always be there as the term is used right now. >> yeah. i think the question that i have for you is, is the definition of liberty the same for everybody? i think joe was getting at the point, at some of this, that people look at this different and asked you about documents relating back to the 1619 project that the "new york times" did. but is part of our problem that

we have different definitions of nationalism? like you said, there's good nationalism and bad nationalism. what actually is your definition of liberty in the case of this book? >> liberty is liberty of the person. you know, you could say it's liberty of a country. declaration of independence, we're independent from britain. but our declaration was more than that. it was saying the reason we're doing this is because our liberties are being tlehreatene. it is liberty of the person, and then it is also plural. it can't just be mine. my liberty is yours. our liberty is theirs. you can't be like the only free person in the country. that would be an impossibility. so it is liberty of the person, but then it has to be extended to all your fellow persons. it's something that people are entitled to by nature of who they are. you know, it wasn't thomas jefferson who invented it, or the continental congress, or any

congress or body of persons. it is something we have because of our nature. we have it at birth. it can't be -- it can be oppressed. it can be suppressed. but the right to it cannot be taken away from us. >> how do you convince people then that their liberty is also my liberty? that we do this all together? because i think someone could hear, on a very base level, what you are saying and think, okay, i am at liberty because of this great nation to say and do whatever i want. whether that offends someone because we live in kind of a bas baser society than it feels we did 25 years ago. how do you make sure they don't twist that definition, to kind of do whatever they want? >> well, first, i want them to read my book. >> good plug. >> i'm serious about this. i show different examples of things. i show specific liberties, like liberty of worship, freedom of the press, self-rule. then i also show people who are looking at the whole concept

simultaneously, men like jefferson, men like lincoln. you always have to be mindful of all these aspects of liberty. i just want this book as a refresher course and as an inspiration to americans, to think about this. >> interesting. >> all right. the new book is "give me liberty," a history of america's exceptional idea. fascinating conversation. richard brookhiser, thank you very much for being on this morning. >> thanks for having me. >> shawna thomas, thank you so much, as well. noah, stay with us. coming up, during this week's democratic debate, the word "billionaire" came up more often than the words "china," "immigration," or even "klei . "climate." one of our next guests says this is the billionaire referendum, and we'll all have to take a stand. that conversation is ahead on "morning joe." [sfx: doorbell]

hello, i saw you move in, and i wanted to welcome you to the neighborhood with some homemade biscuits! >>oh, that's so nice! and a little tip, geico could help you save on homeowners insurance. >>hmm! >>cookies! uhh, biscuits. >>mmmm, is there a little nutmeg in there? oh it's my mum's secret recipe. >>you can tell me. it's a secret. >>is it cinnamon? it's my mum's secret recipe. call geico and see how easy

saving on homeowners and condo insurance can be. i'll come back for the plate. saving on homeowners aveeno® with prebiotic can be. striple oat complex balances skin's microbiome. so skin looks like this and you feel like this.

aveeno® skin relief. get skin healthy™ the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. and i don't count the wrinkles. but what i do count on is boost high protein. and now, introducing new boost women... with key nutrients to help support thyroid, bone, hair and skin health. all with great taste. new, boost women. designed just for you.

you know, willie, the biggest interview i can ever hope for, i want pat rocket and bill murphy to talk about the 1977 plan of praise. that's as good -- >> where does he get this? >> i know. i -- i don't think i ever get it, but you, my man, you get a -- >> not those guys. >> yeah. i think i've got him lined up. he hasn't had work in a couple of years. but you, you -- >> nailed it. >> you had a big one weekend on sunday today. tell us about it. >> very exciting. we have a special two parter extend interview with the great al pachino. al pachino doesn't do a lot of interviews, hasn't done

interviews over the years, but invited me out to beverly hills. we cruised around beverly hills in a 1976 cadillac el dorado. he has this new series out on amazon. we sat and he took the time to walk through his entire career. all these great movies that he's been in and we talked about godfather and the fact that the studio, because he was a relative unknown back then in '72 wanted nothing to do with him, didn't want him or a lot of the other people who went on to become stars to be in that movie. here is what he said. >> i know there were some skeptics about whether or not francis should have hired you for the role. >> oh, skeptics. they all had the hook. they didn't want a lot of us. they didn't want brando, for sure. but what happens with me, they moved the -- so i could do that. and if they saw me do that, they

would keep me. >> and, of course, they did keep him. and as a fan of movies, it was a brivenlg to sit in the booth and throw out a movie and let al pachino go and give you back story and behind the scenes conversation about it. a wonderful guy, just a great, friendly guy who was happy to sit as long as we wanted to sit and go for a drive around his neighborhood. so i think people are going to enjoy it. coming up this weekend on "sunday today. >> it looks very exciting. and how exciting to have him talk about his movie career, you're right. he doesn't do a lot of interviews. "hunters" looks fascinating. i know a lot of people will be talking about that. not as much as my biff bcarba interview, but they will be talking about it. >> sam stein, do you have

anything brewing? >> i've never heard of that al pachino guy. sounds like it could be a good interview. nothing as cool as that, but honestly, i think we need to know what it was in the -- about the russian intelligence issue. >> what were they doing, yeah. thank you so much. still ahead, the president dismisses the nation's top spy chief. not because he did something wrong, but because he did something right. we'll have the new reporting on that and the implications, as well. bernlie sanders is rising i nevada, but mike bloomberg is not far behind. they answered 410 questions in 8 categories about vehicle quality. and when they were done, chevy earned more j.d. power quality awards across

cars, trucks and suvs than any other brand over the last four years. so on behalf of chevrolet, i want to say "thank you, real people." you're welcome. we're gonna need a bigger room. i need all the breaks, that i can get. at liberty butchumal- cut. liberty biberty- cut. we'll dub it. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower my blood sugar and a1c. because i can still make my own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it like it's supposed to. trulicity is for people with type 2 diabetes.

it's not insulin. i take it once a week. it starts acting in my body from the first dose. trulicity isn't for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, belly pain, and decreased appetite, which lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity. the next one was 5%, 4%, 3%, 2%, 2 ber%, 1%, and zero.

9%, 5%, 11%, 14, 4, 3, 2, 2.8, 2.54. 1.9, 7, 4, 3, 3, 3, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1. okay. let's get back to business now i feel good. now i feel good. >> what was that? that was his most interesting part of his speech since he does -- that was that? >> apparently someone on fox news criticized the president's poll numbers which inspired that rant last night in colorado. >> oh, wait, wait, is that where he was talking about the rigged call in polls that he rigged and that i guess michael cohen said that he was working with other people to rig? oh, back in 2016.

oh, think about how lousy he did in debates and then rigged the polls. so he's still upset about the fact that people on fox news and everywhere are saying he actually is -- because he is. >> i think there's a lot of other stuff going on that might be distracting him. welcome to "morning joe." it is friday, february 21st. along with joe, willie and me, we have david ignatius and former chief of staff at the cia and department of defense, nbc news national security analyst jeremy bash. good to have you with us. >> we have fallout still from the las vegas debate. great ratings for that debate. and i will tell you people that don't usually come up to me, members of my families and others, and talk about political events wanted to talk about that debate, specifically wanted to talk about mike bloomberg and

why he couldn't answer basic questions. there is still fallout from that debate. we have nevadans going to the polls tomorrow. we should know the results around 5:00 p.m. eastern. i think this is going to be the most significant nevada caucus ever. we have mick mulvaney once again reaffirming the meaning of a gap in washington, d.c. where somebody accidentally tells the truth. mick committed two gaffes while speaking out while republicans are raging hypocrites when it comes to deficits and debt. and then admitting out lawsuit what every economist knows and that is for an economy to grow, for an economy to thrive, you need an immigrant workforce.

he admitted that. it will be very interesting to see what happens when he comes back home. also, of course, sort of a shock poll out of wisconsin. a real wake up call for democrats. while democrats are doing well in head to head matchups against donald trump for the 2020 race in pennsylvania and michigan, donald trump walking away with it right now in wisconsin. you know what a wisconsin win for donald trump does while democracy win michigan and pennsylvania? it leads, in most scenarios, to donald trump getting 270 electoral votes and democrats getting 268 electoral votes. so not a lot of wiggle room there. and finally, mika, the russians are coming. >> yes, they are. >> and they're coming again for their main man, donald j. trump.

our intel community actually did their job, told the intelligence community that they had information, that once again the russians were trying to interfere with america's democratic process in 2020 and that they were going to interfere with america's democratic process in 2020 for the benefit of one man, donald trump. donald trump didn't like that, immediately fired his acting director of national intelligence and talked about hiring and hired probably the least qualified person ever to occupy a spot in an important national security role in the history of washington, d.c. that is saying quite a lot. he's extraordinarily incompetent and it puts america's national security at risk. we also heard yesterday that that may be a temporary position. >> well, yeah.

let's just back up here and lay out out. we will begin with that very big news. the acting director of national intelligence joseph mcguire who was under consideration to be permanent dni was pushed aside because the president was angry that he reported on russia's plans to help him get re-elected. news of the briefing, which was held last thursday, was first reported by the "new york times." sources tell both the times and the "washington post" that the president erupted at mcguire the very next day. concerned that democrats would use the information against him. a former official tells nbc news the intelligence is, quote, nearing a meltdown over mcguire's removal and the reason behind it. as our colleagues report, the

episode has raised the spectrum trump is punishing intelligence officials for providing accurate information to members of congress who are cleared to receive it. this is how the system is supposed to work. we should note that mcguire's testimony back in september when he told whistlemakers that he did the right thing and followed the law every step of the way by reporting concerns over the president's phone call with ukraine's president, trump sent shock waves through the intelligence community when he announced wednesday that one of his partisan allies, the u.s. ambassador to germany, richard grennell, would replace mcguire as acting dni despite having no intelligence experience. >> he's not a partisan ally. everybody that has known him says he's a partisan hack and is ill equipped to handle this over

his head, will he holds the job for one week or one day. >> willie? >> so let's bring in hans nick yol with more on this. he's in on this and ken delaney. you and andrea spoke to several different sources for this story. it looks pretty clear that the director of national intelligence, a representative for him, mr. mcguire went over, talked to the house intelligence committee and said the russians are coming for the 2020 election. they want donald trump to win again. donald trump catches wind of this briefing. dni doing its job be rates joseph mcguire, the acting director of national intelligence and on wednesday announces that he's out and richard grenell is in. how did this all go down? >> well, in my intelligence sources are absolutely aghast

over this. this is one of their worst nightmares. what you're describing here is the behavior of an autocrat. up until now, we all know that donald trump has never been interested in this question of foreign election interference, but he has allowed his government to do some things. the fbi, dhs and the intelligence community are taking steps to try to protect the 2020 election. one of the things they did is appointed a security czar in the intelligence community, a woman named shelby pearson who had been a top analyst over russia matters at the dni and her job is to look at the threats and to brief lawmakers. that's exactly what she did. lawmakers on the house intelligence committee of both parties whose job is to hear this information as part of their oversight role, she told

them, our sources tell us, there is intelligence that russia wants to see donald trump elected and that russia is continuing to meddle in our politics. she's said that before, that the russians are back at it. we are told it's the same playbook for 2016, the disinformation and social media manipulation. donald trump heard about this briefing from devin nunes, the ranking republican on the house intelligence committee. he hit the roof and the next day in a meeting with dni joe mcguire, he berated mcguire about why this briefing took place at all and why he had to hear about this from nunes and particularly why was he sharing this information about the russians with adam schiff, trump's nemesis. trump was worried that this could be used against him. so mcguire is out now. so the specter of intelligence

officials speaking truth to power, which is their job, and they are being punished for it, willie. >> so, again, the director of national intelligence, that office goes in, does it job, briefs the committee, devin nunes calls the president and says hey, they're telling on you in this meeting. it upsets the president of the united states. so hans nichols, that raises the question if, in fact, richard grenell is a temporary hire, if he is just a place holder, there was talk about who might take that position, another trump defenders. >> doug collins, congressman from georgia thinking about running for the senate. the president last night on air force one mentioned he's thinking about doug collins for that position. it's not final. he said that there are other names he's considering. but the clock is ticking here. and i don't mean to boar everyone, but there is something called the vacancies act.

unless the president officially and informally nominates someone else. so the clock is ticking and you can have richard grenell say there potentially longer as the senate fights this all out for a confirmation battle. one person that we haven't heard from in all this, i think it's crucially important, senator richard burr from north carolina. remember last time when the president nominated john radcliff, another congressman for this job, this was before mcguire got the position, burr made it be known that he wasn't overly excited about this. you still need the senate on this. we'll see to what extent doug collins passes muster there. >> up next, the latest on roger stone's prison sentence and whether the president is poised to pardon him. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. when you shop with wayfair, you spend less and get way more.

so you can bring your vision to life and save in more ways than one. for small prices, you can build big dreams, spend less, get way more. shop everything home at wayfair.com the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. i'm about to capture proof of the ivory billed woodpecker. what??? no, no no no no. battery power runs out.

lifetime retirement income from tiaa doesn't. guaranteed monthly income for life. nooooo! guaranteed monthly sales tax, real estate credits, solar incentives... and we have no way to integrate all that? no...but bdo does. (announcer) people who know, know bdo.

(howling wind) (howling wind) the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. oh no, here comes gthe neighbor probably to brag about

how amazing his xfinity customer service is. i'm mike, i'm so busy. good thing xfinity has two-hour appointment windows. they have night and weekend appointments too. he's here. bill? karolyn? nope! no, just a couple of rocks. download the my account app to manage your appointments making today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. i'll pass.

let's go to ken delaney now. you were in the courtroom for the sentencing of roger stone yesterday. that was another big story playing out and the president hinting at maybe pardoning him. tell us what happened. >> it's been a dizzying day of news. i was out in the cold giving updates to the msnbc viewers. what happened was two things significant, i thought. the sentence was about what legal experts expected. he was sentence dollars to 3 1/3 years and a $20,000 fine, much less than the maximum guidelines would have called for in any of the various mos that were written. the prosecutor went into court and repudiated that clean up memo that william barr had

required be written for the first one calling for 7 to 9 years. so it really raised the question of why barr even felt the need to do that. the judge essentially evaluated the case. yes, she agreed that some of these so-called enhancements that roger stone's conduct would say worse than the base level crimes, they did apply. he threatened a witness. he should get more time for that. but then on the other side of the equation, she found he's 67 years old and he's a first offender and it's a nonviolent offense, so he gets the 3 1/3 years. she made it pretty clear that would have been the result regardless of what william barr did to intervene in the case. so it raises the question why did he bring all this on his head about the criticism in the justice department and perhaps the answer is he did it for president trump. and the second thing is what the judge said. the judge had a lengthy

allocution about roger stone's conduct and she spoke to the larger issue and she seemed to be speak to go donald trump. she made it clear that roger stone was not prosecuted for speaking up to donald trump. he was prosecuted for covering up for donald trump. she also indirectly repudiated the president for tweeting about the case and politicizing the case. she made it clear this wasn't about politics. the jurors, the prosecutors, the judge, were acting on the merits of what they thought was happening here and that roger stone committed serious crimes and that justice was served. >> so, ken, somebody can read the headlines, though, and see that he got 40 months instead of the 7 to 9 years recommended by those prosecutors who ended up quitting. and might think that donald trump actually got his way, that he did get a reduced sentence by

pressuring the judge. explain the divergence between the 3 1/2 years and the 7 to 9 years that were recommended by the u.s. attorneys. >> you're right, joe, that people might think that and tharld that would be an incredible reading of the situation. the guidelines were always seen by legal experts as unduly harsh applicable to this particular case. but the prosecutors argued them because that's their job. there is a policy at the justice department to ask for the max unless there's a good reason not to do that. so they looks at the case and said hey, these are serious crimes. federal guidelines call for 7 to 9 years. the judge always has the discretion to depart from that and everyone believes he was

never going to get 7 to 9 years in this case. so the fact that will yap barr require prosecutors file a second memo saying oh, no that was totally unnecessary. >> ken delaney, thank you. coming up on "morning joe," seven days of peace after 19 years of war. the u.s. and taliban are aiming to bring american troops home. david ignatius reports on that next on morning joe. we made usaa insurance for members like martin. an air force veteran made of doing what's right,

not what's easy. so when a hailstorm hit, usaa reached out before he could even inspect the damage. that's how you do it right. usaa insurance is made just the way martin's family needs it - with hassle-free claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. because doing right by our members, that's what's right. usaa. what you're made of, we're made for. usaa the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps.

for adults with moderately to severely active crohn's disease, stelara® works differently. studies showed relief and remission, with dosing every 8 weeks. stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection or flu-like symptoms or sores, have had cancer, or develop new skin growths, or if anyone in your house needs or recently had a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems. these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions and lung inflammation can occur. talk to your doctor today, and learn how janssen can help you explore cost support options. remission can start with stelara®.

welcome back to "morning joe." breaking news coming out of the state department. mike pompeo announcing that a major agreement has been entered into or has been agreed to between the taliban and the united states. to significantly reduce violence in afghanistan, of course, the country where u.s. troops have been now for 19 years. president trump, his goelg has

long been to reduce the number of fourses there for quite some time. the negotiations have stopped, started, but david ignatius, it appears that those negotiations are actually moving more -- moving forward in a way that they haven't in the past. what can you tell us about this breaking news? >> joe, a week ago, we were on the edge of this deal. i was talking with our negotiators who were in munich meeting with other u.s. officials, the commanding general, general miller came from kabul to brief officials. essential will whey we're going to have is an introductory seven day period where there will be a reduction of violence and careful measure of that reduction while officials decide whether it's sufficient across the country. on february 29, there will be

the signing of this deal between the u.s. and the taliban with secret an excess that provide additional details and talks between the taliban and the african government will begin. that is the key part. the real question here is whether the taliban -- obviously, they want u.s. troops out, but are they really ready to begin working towards some common effort to stabilize the country? over this period of inter-afghan talks, there would be significant u.s. troop reductions. they'll come down from there 13,000 today to 8,600. in that 130-day period, we'll have a real sense to test whether the taliban is willing to and can deliver the reduction in violence that is the premise

here. this is an election year. president trump wants to deliver on his goal to remove troops from the longest u.s. war in history. god bless him for that, but is he going to rush for the exits when afghanistan is not stable, when the government is in danger of collapse, when there's a real risk that civil war will resume? that is the question that the military commanders i talk to say senior politicians are focused on and there's surprising agreement between democrats and republicans that we ought to be sure that things are stable in afghanistan before we move to the exit. >> so, jeremy, any talk of peace is welcome, but, but after 18 1/2 years of war, many are skeptic yalg because of our presence there. do you believe this is something different? should people look to this as something on the horizon that says maybe this war could wind up somewhere nrt nein the near ? >> i share david's concern about

an election year promise to rush for the exits. would he have been talking to the taliban for about ten years going back to 2010 when richard holbrooke kicked off this process. the taliban have been part of the political process vis-a-vis the future of average. so they were going to be coming into the government, playing a political role under any scenario. i think having 8400 troops in afghanistan is a good number. it's not too low so that we can't support the afghan government and keep it stable. it's not too high where it's keeping them from other commitments. my fear is if the president goes lower saying i want a security force around our embassy and i worry that's going to be his instinct. i hope over the comes weeks and months, they talk to secure advisers about this. coming on "morning joe," how

michael bloomberg bungled a debate that he had been prepared for. jeremy peters joins us with his new reporting next on "morning joe." - [spokeswoman] meet the ninja foodi pressure cooker,

the best of pressure cooking and air frying now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps.

tto examine investmentgo opportunities firsthand, like innovations in agricultural research. because your investments deserve the full story. t. rowe price invest with confidence. doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. i appreciate what makes each person unique. that's why i like liberty mutual. they get that no two people are alike and customize your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. almost done. what do you think?

i don't see it. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

who are you going to vote for? >> from the start, joe biden. you seem pretty sure about that. >> i'm pretty sure about that. >> the three candidates i have in mind are elizabeth warren, bernie sanders and tom styer. >> joe biden or michael bloomberg. >> elizabeth warren. it's a pretty easy choice for me to make. >> bernie sanders has a lot of good views about our education and i agree with him, but sometimes i'm like, i'm not sure. i don't know if i'll be voting for him, but it's a possibility. >> now, he's older. he can go one to one to trump and he's my best shot.

>> i think we need to find what's being called a moderate democrat. i think that needs to come back. >> "morning joe" booking producer and coauthor of "earn it," daniella. let's bring in stephanie valencia. she has new polling to share about the latino community ahead of tomorrow's nevada caucus. and i'd like to ask first how you actually conduct your polling. >> so we registered voters early this month, late january, early february to ask them how do they feel about each of the candidates. to create a likability or a favorbility score for who they like the most. what we've seen is bernie sanders, we did a poll in december and late january or

early february. biden has remained stagnant and warren has started to make inroads here in nevada. i think it's important for us to see how the latino vote is still a jump ball. it is up for grabs and there are plenty of latino voters that are very split. >> and you're looking at colorado? >> yeah. so we did a similar survey in colorado. it will be interesting to see how the debate given the record numbers of people who tuned in, how they are start to go look at the candidates now that they've seen them on the debate stage, as well. but what we did see is bernie continues to surge in nevada.

biden is dropping in some level of his favorbility, but we are seeing bloomberg starting to make inroads. what do the big super tuesday fields look like? >> if anything, what this continues to show is that the latino vote is very much up for grabs for presidential candidates to go and introduce themselves to the latina community, make the investment and build that trust with the community because ultimately, i think there are plenty of voters who are still trying to make up their minds. >> stephanie, thank you very much for that glimpse into what is ahead. and joining us now, author time

magazine editor at large and nbc news political analyst anan garadart, he is out with a new essay entitled the billionaire election. does the world belong to them or to us? also with us, "new york times" reporter jeremy peters, his new reporting is on how bloomberg bungled a debate that he had fwn prepared for. in noah rothman is back with us, as well. >> jeremy, a bit of a sense of panic that this guy was prepped, for questions about the nda, the questions about stop and frisk. they thought they he knew how to deliver his lines and he completely botched it. >> i think there's a recognition that this was bad, but it doesn't have to be fatal.

these blunders leave a sour impression to people for 24, 48 hours, but there is a real risk that is recognized inside the campaign that if he does not correct himself in the tuesday debate in south carolina, this could be something he doesn't recover from. >> so what were they saying was the reason why he fell on his face in the debate? >> i think a lot of it is that he's rusty. it's been more than a decade since he's run for office. he has not had to answer many questions. he's not heard a lot of people tell him no. he's used to explaining things on his own term. i think part of it was a discomfort with being on stage with people where he was under attack or if he wanted to attack, he knew he couldn't.

he knew he could go after sanders because the campaign has made this decision that attacking sanders is imperative because sanders is on the cusp of this break through moment and if he's not stopped, he could run away with the nomination. attacking elizabeth warren is harder. his aides don't want him to do it and they think if elizabeth warren rises in the polls that takes support away from bernie sanders, ultimately that's good for michael bloomberg. >> yeah, well, when she's coming at him nonstop, he really doesn't have much of a choice. at some point, he's going to have to respond to that. what about howard being trotted out there as the scapegoat for this? he spoke to my colleague and fell on his sword for plumeberg. he was playing bernie sanders in the debate prep from what we had reported earlier in the week. being the senior strategist, i guess that's what you do. but it's not all on howard wilson, right? this is on mike bloomberg.

>> none of this. >> he has to turn it up a notch. his whole campaign, joe, is built around this premise of him being a new york bully. he knows what a guy like donald trump is all about and he can take it to him in the general election. this is why when i interview voters, they think he can beat trump. if he turns in another debate performance like he did yesterday, that perceived strength is going to evaporate pretty fast. >> so that debate performance was bad but not fatal is because mayor blackberg could spit out another couple hundred million dollars to fix the problem. so the filing yesterday showed mayor blackberg has spent $464 million dollars around in this campaign. he's willing to spend up to a couple billion. he says whatever it takes. what does that all say about what you're writing about in the times today? >> you know, i would disagree

with jeremy a little bit. i don't think he had a bad night. i think he had a revealing night. i think that was who he is. that seemed pretty similar to the guy i saw as mayor of new york. uncharismatic, unfeeling. as someone who has reported on a lot of billionaires, he is like a lot of people in that world. when you're a billionaire, there's very few limits to your desires becoming reality. and when you shift it to a world in which you actually have to relate to farmers in the middle of the country or have an argument with people who are not just going to roll over for you, it's hard. and i think he embodies when this sunday review piece in the times talks about. this is a race now in which everything roy tates around the

access of billionaires. you have two candidates in bernie sanders and elizabeth warren whose animating idea is to take down billionaires, one of them says billionaires shouldn't even exist. the platforms of persuasion that we're all talking about the election are on owned by billionaires. and billionaires are the captains of the economy that has rated the resentment and anger and sense of hopelessness. so i think we are set up in 2020 in a way that has not happened in our lifetime for a real debate. you can't vote in 2020 without a perspective on billionaires. you have to know where you stand on the question of are billionaires just people who have drifted up from us o are they actually standing on their

backs. we've been talking to people in his camp and at the biden camp and in all the camps all along have been talking to people in the democratic party all along about those that are thinking about jumping into the race. mike bloomberg had told everyone when joe biden started to take off in the summer that he was not going to be getting into the race. he advised everybody, not going to happen. he was going to support whoever the democratic nominee was. it wasn't until biden started to stumble that he decided to jump

into the race because he was looking at bernie sanders or elizabeth warren being the nominee. i think one of the reasons why we have these billionaires jumping into the race right now is let's face it, we've had for the past several cycles really weak candidates. and the billionaires are thinking, you know, hey, they can't do any better than that, i might as well jump into the race. that is what donald trump thought in 2016. they're all losers, they're all rookies, they're all failures. i might as well jump into the race. this doesn't happen when you have a barack obama or a ronald reagan or even a bill clinton running for president because they take up that space. >> nor did it happen when you have strong institutions in the two major parties. the two major parties have sacrificed so much power and so much authority to vet candidates which are now outsourced, the capacity to fund raised for themselves, the ability to

select candidates and impose a check on bad candidates. woog now going to have two cycles. one person has a transactional relationship with their party and another who is despised by the majority members of their party. that is a situation where you have two parties that are too weak to influence politics and i would argue the results are suboptimal. back to the populism conversation we were having in the last hour. there was a conception that donald trump doesn't fit the billionaire model. >> he raised $239 million and he got $1 billion worth of free media out of the deal. he didn't necessarily buy the election. he had a message. mike bloomberg doesn't have a message, but he has money. >> so if you looked at mike bloomberg, obviously there are a lot of people in the democratic party who don't believe the

field, they don't believe bernie sanders or elizabeth warren could win, so they say, okay, maybe i don't love the fact that he's buying his way into the election, but if he's got a chance to win, i'll do that. now, you can't be a community organizer and become the savior. you have to be able to get yourself into the race. so if mayor bloomberg gets himself through super tuesday, survives super tuesday which has been his strategy all along, do you think progressives will be able to overlook the fact that he's a billionaire and all the things they object to and vote for him if he's facing donald trump? i think a lot of people will be willing to be for him. but when it's a rinny day in your town, will he have the enthusiasm to bring everybody else out? i've never met anybody who is profoundly inspired by him. people who actually believe that

we win through voting. and i think when we're looking for a savior, we get a trump. sometimes that emotion leaves new an obama direction, but sometimes it leads you in a trump direction. and now we're seeing institutions, the intelligence community sabotage the department of justice. savior politics is actually not good politics. and i would say both bernie sanders and elizabeth warren are trying to actually push us in a direction. where you don't get saved by a person, you get saved by large numbers of people taking back their destiny and refuse to go live in a country in which the future is decided by what people in gilded rooms decide it is. >> right, but -- but, annan, you do understand that of all the candidates in this field, nobody is perceived more as a savior, a political savior, a deliverer,

than bernie sanders. >> agreed. and i think it's one of the reasons that he has been insistent on this slogan of not meet us. i think that is part of the thing that makes him uncomfortable. one of the interesting things is it is so easy for 4i78 to talk abo -- him to talk about his personal story. this is a guy whose mother died very young because of a health care system that wasn't functioning as it might be. he never brings that up. but you're right, i think a lot of them have feeling about him. we're not going to be saved by a celebrity or a rich person. we're going to be saved -- look at the aligarchy that is creeping into american life and decide we're going to get off

our butts and stop that from being our future. >> it's something that's infected politics for a very long time. we, of course, now have it with donald trump in 2008, in 2012 we had it with barack obama. it was absolutely ridiculous the expectations that were being piled on to his back. we saw it eight years later with donald trump and now i think you're right, we're seeing it four years later. but let's step back from a billionaire discussion and talk about policy behind the rise to the billionaires. it was teddy roosevelt that went in and busted up the trust when it was, you know, carnegie and jpmorgan's. now we have facebook, we have google, we have amazon, we have bloomberg. when are democrats, when are

republicans, when is somebody going to go in and actually start busting up these massive man openlies in the way the federal government did to the bells back in the 70squestion. i have this kind of fantasy of creating something called the american reform commission where we would answer that question in a bipartisan way because the question you're asking actually leads to answers that could appeal to republicans and democrats. a lot of republicans don't mind breaking up big companies, including ones started by democrats like amazon and facebook. there's a question of monopoly in american life, a question of taxation, including on the right. a lot of people on the right don't like the fact that amazon pay taxes where a warehouse worker that may be a republican does pay taxes, so on and so forth. i think we need to look at what are a series of ideas, this is not about big government versus small, this is about big

concentrations of power that have actually come at the expense of small business, that make it impossible for people to be entrepreneurs. entrepreneurship is profoundly down in this country. young people half as likely to have a new business as they were in the '80s. if you plebelieve in an america business, a republican for business, you are now living in a country in which big, well connected, powerful people protected monopolies, tax policies, various other forms of tax agreements, et cetera, trade agreements, that prevented a culture of business from flourishing in this generation, and we need an american reform commission to come up with ideas that 70% of us could get behind to free the american economy from the billionaire power. >> i completely agree. it is a small government conservative, as a guy that believes in entrepreneurship, believes small businesses should

continue to be the backbone of this country, you're exactly right. it is impossible to compete with some of the massive companies. that's why entrepreneurship is down and you're also right, it is why a republican working in an amazon factory, in an amazon shipping plant is paying more money to the federal government in taxes than amazon. are some of the other largest multinational corporations on the planet, it is i mmoral, it s wrong. i agree with anna, this is something that republicans and democrats need to get around. >> thank you very much. we'll read your new essay for "new york times." up next, the trump campaign takes a page from the re-election play book of president obama. we'll tell you what that is next on "morning joe." i'm your mother in law. and i like to question your every move. like this left turn.

it's the next one. you always drive this slow? how did you make someone i love? that must be why you're always so late. i do not speed. and that's saving me cash with drivewise. my son, he did say that you were the safe option. and that's the nicest thing you ever said to me. so get allstate. stop bossing. where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. this is my son's favorite color, you should try it. [mayhem] you always drive like an old lady? [tina] you're an old lady. ♪ ♪ ♪ applebee's new irresist-a-bowls now starting at $7.99. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. the best of pressure cooking and air frying

now in one pot, and with tendercrisp technology, you can cook foods that are crispy on the outside and juicy on the inside. the ninja foodi pressure cooker, the pressure cooker that crisps. we can't calculate our total taxes? do you realize how many different taxes we pay? sales tax, different p-o-s systems in all seven countries. and online sales? that's a whole other system... and different regulations. therere'realal eate e crits,s, . and we have no way to integrate all that? no... but bdo does. peopopleho k kno knonow o.

( ♪ ) only tylenol® rapid release gels have laser drilled holes. they release medicine fast, for fast pain relief. tylenol®. for fast pain relief. it's got all my favorite shows turn oright there.boom, i wish my trading platform worked like that.

well have you tried thinkorswim? this is totally customizable, so you focus only on what you want. okay, it's got screeners and watchlists. and you can even see how your predictions might affect the value of the stocks you're interested in. now this is what i'm talking about. yeah, it'll free up more time for your... uh, true crime shows? british baking competitions. hm. didn't peg you for a crumpet guy. focus on what matters to you with thinkorswim. ♪ time for business before the bell with dominic chu. you're covering one of the biggest bank takeovers since 2008. >> morgan stanley announcing it agreed to buy online broker e-trade financial for $13

billion. this is an all stock deal, meaning e-trade shareholders will be owners of morgan stanley stock as well, e-trade customers will become morgan stanley customers. this is a big bet on expanding the client list beyond the affluent wealthy clients it is known for in the past. that combined company will have $3.1 trillion of client assets, and 8.2 million retail client relationships and accounts, so a very big deal. biggest since the great financial crisis. from big banks to big tech, google is being sued by the state of new mexico. it is the target of new mexico attorney general. he alleges google used some education products to collect data on his state's families and kids, including personal information, location data, web history, video consumption as well. speaking of google, it owns

of course popular online video platform youtube, and you could be seeing a lot more advertising promoting re-election of president donald trump. the trump campaign has bought prominent digital advertising space on youtube that will run in the immediate time leading up to the election day, according to a bloomberg report citing people familiar with the matter. the ads will appear, the video ad that plays the top part of the website when you log onto it. it is unclear how long the ads will run, how much they'll be, but here's the interesting part of the story. president obama bought the youtube mast head ahead of the election in 2012 before eventual gop mitt romney even secured his party's nomination. this is the idea that incumbents are able to plan ahead for this kind of advertising more than candidates do. interesting story there, guys. back over to you. >> cnbc's dominic chu, thank you

so much. have a great weekend. time for final thoughts. joe, you want to take it? >> i'm curious was you're thinking going into the weekend where we have the nevada caucus. >> i think bernie is going to win just because his support among hispanics is sufficient i think to demonstrate a fair bit of support on the ground in nevada. also the hispanic demographic is younger, and bernie has prohibited amount of support of support among all demographics. that's probably where it ends up. >> jeremy peters? >> something earlier about the weakness of our institutions, and donald trump is both a cause and symptoms of this. you look at what's happening in the democratic primary field where you have a number of candidates bunched together claiming they're the alternative to the distasteful frontrunner. what does it sound like? sounds like 2016 and what the

republican party went through trying to stop donald trump. of course they didn't, and we don't know what's going to happen with bernie sanders. >> and of course the dni controversy will continue to swirl into next week. >> i heard it described as the notion that donald trump's record on russia, that it has been tougher than others suspected would be a myth, it is not. we are all russia hawks. if you look at a record presided over enlargement of nato, lethal weapons to ukraine, expulsion, seizure of diplomatic property. if you're prepared to sneeze at the record, i am prepared to question your commitment to containing russia. >> that does it for us. stephanie ruhle picks up coverage now. >> thanks so much, mika, thanks, joe. i am stephanie ruhle, friday february 21st. there's a lot happening. we are one day away from the nevada caucuses. the next step picking the democratic nominee. can we trust the