♪ ♪ ♪a little bit of chicken fried♪ ♪cold beer on a friday night♪ ♪a pair of jeans that fit just right♪ ♪and the radio up well i've seen the sunrise...♪ get 5 boneless wings for $1 with any handcrafted burger. only at applebee's these are the faces of listerine. the face of millions of germs zapped in seconds. the face of clean. the face of whoa! some are of intensity, others joy. all are of... various: ahhh... listerine. feel the whoa!

it's 4:00 in new york city. i'm john heilemann in once again for nicolle wallace. crisis in ukraine, the united states and western allies grappling with the grim reality that the russian invasion of ukraine has begun. less than two hours ago, president biden announced a new round of sanctions targeting russian banks and russian elites and reiterating that putin would pay a significant price if he escalated further. >> who in the lord's name does putin think gives him the right to declare new so-called countries on territory that belonged to his neighbors? this is a flagrant violation of international law and it demands a firm response from the international community. >> the administration's new sanctions come on top of the sanctions it levied yesterday as well as the significant announcement earlier today by the german chancellor that

germany would stop the certification of the nord stream 2 natural gas pipeline that would have linked to country with russia. also today, the russian parliament, unsurprisingly, gave putin to use armed forces abroad. a move that could pave the way to an escalation. another ominous sign, the russian government has decided to evacuate all of its diplomatic missions in ukraine. this coming after russia declared the quote, independence, unquote, of two russian-backed separatists rooejs if ukraine. these developments mean that the window for a diplomatic solution to the crisis has all but closed. biden admitting that putin's marks on denying that ukraine should exist, is uninterested in

dialogue. we are told the scheduled meeting for thursday is in quote real jeopardy and it appears clear that the floated idea of a summit is a pipe dream. but u.s. diplomatic efforts meant to unite nato allies and support ukraine are still very active. in just a few moments, blinken will hold a press conference with his ukrainian counterpart. now joining us, david ignatius of "the washington post." plus live with us from paris, best-selling author and msnbc contributor, catty kay. also, chief white house news correspondent, peter alexander, and spokesperson at the department of treasury where she handled all the public affairs related to sanctions policy. i want to start with you because you're at the white house on the

ground. president biden out here less than two hours ago announcing this latest round of sanctions and talking tough talk at putin. give me a sense of what the day has been like where you are. >> we, i think it's clear that the white house is trying to find that calibration. that place where they can be swift and severe in the sanctions they're leveling against russia. leveling against russian banks, debt, and against a series of russian oligarchs and their families that they detailed a short time ago while also leaving open, preserving the possibility for further sanctions. the president said it's very clear that is on putin's mind right now. the desire to expand the territory that he would potentially try to take in the course of this process. it's why within the last couple of hours, we heard from the president and that was followed up with a statement from loud

lloyd austin, sending equipment to those former soviet republics that border russia, as well as to poland that is alongside belarus and ukraine as well. this is sort of a careful calculation. a detailing that just moments ago, but it's clear after there was some reluctance here by the white house to describe this as an invasion, that that's what they're watching and doing everything they can to find a right balance in what's effectively a very dangerous game of chess that has the risk of a world war. >> there's lot of signs that an escalation is happening. the decision to put the president out today, as we started this day, we didn't know we would be hearing from joe biden directly, seems like a significant signal from the

white house that they are con cognizant of the notion a rubicon has crossed. >> revealing almost everything they know about what they expected putin would be doing in the course of this process. we heard from the secretary of state speaking before the un, from the un ambassador. from the president himself. basically trying to prepare americans and more importantly, to call out russia in advance as well. i think yesterday, there was some sense that we were starting to hear from foreign leaders, that there was a need to put him out there before the american people and before the world to address this. obviously there was one thing that touches more americans in real terms, the issue of oil and gas prices. the president saying he'll do everything in his power to reduce that impact on average american, but he said there will be a cost at least in the near term as we're already seeing. just yesterday, the state of

california recording its highest ever average price for a gallon of gas. >> i'm from california, i hear about it every time gas goes up there. david, you're here today because you're one of the smartest foreign policy thinkers i know and someone who is well sourced in the administration. i'm curious if you could talk about the evolving thinking of the biden white house and national security establishment in the that administration and how they are seeing the last two days events and what they think not the long-term, but what the short-term trajectory of this crisis might look like. >> so, i think peter had it right in saying that policy has been calibrated. i think we're watching this step by step slow motion march toward all out war. all out war would be catastrophic. the u.s. estimates as many as

50,000 ukrainian civilians could be killed. 5 million refugees across europe. i think the biden administration quite properly has been careful to explore every alternative to that cataclysm. they're still doing that. it's interesting today that president biden announced some sanctions, but kept some in reserve. called it the beginning of an invasion. obviously implying that he hopes still that the all out invasion could be forstalled. as i look at the unfolding of this policy going back to october, i'm struck by two things that are central today as they were months ago. first, the administration from the beginning has tried to make this about our nato european allies. there's been an incredible

outreach to nato members, consulting with them, sending intelligence officials to brief them, sharing intelligence with them in a way i've never seen before. the idea is that nato unity is the one thing that could confound putin. he thought nato was divided during the trump years. america almost seemed to be walking away from nato. not anymore. it's the center of american policy. the second thing that's unusual is the very deliberate use of intelligence information which they're putting out, this very classified stuff. who knows how they've gotten all this stuff out of russian intelligence, but they're putting it out every day. if they find a kill list of assassination targets, they put it out. if they find a false flag plots, they put it out. i think that's left the russians flumished. you could see that, i thought, in yesterday's comments from

putin and other officials. >> very quickly, you've pointed out this has been unfolding since october. do you think people at the administration, president biden and others who are really running the show, are surprised to find themselves where they find themselves today? >> i think from the beginning, they had intelligence that said this is different. this isn't just an exercise. they had something. we still don't know quite what it was, that told them this was operational planning. this was for real. and that there were orders from the top to move forward. putin, in the summer, had published this extraordinary manifesto about his personal grievance, his sense of anger toward ukraine, that it wasn't really a real country. it was part of russia. he laid it out in the summer. cia analysts took it very

seriously then they began to get intelligence about what was happening on the ground. i think from the beginning, they've feared this could really happen and here we are on the eve of what could be a catastrophic invasion. >> catty, i'm going to bring you in. david just made the point that there are two things. one has been this war and that nato has hung together so far and that the administration has been putting europe and nato front and center. i want to play a little joe biden before i ask you a question about it on the other side. biden from that scene in the east room today where he talked specifically about this matter. >> over the last few months, we've coordinated closely with our nato allies and partners in europe and around the world to prepare that response. we've said all along and i've told putin to his face more than a month ago that we would act together and the moment russia

moved against ukraine, russia has now undeny bly moved against ukraine. we're united in our support of ukraine. in our opposition of russian aggression and in our resolve to defend our nato alliance. >> that brings the question to you. the german announcement this morning and the north stream 2 is a big deal because there was some question, clearly been a fracture point. you're in europe now. you know europe well. talk about what the reaction in europe has been and whether you sense the degree of unity and resolve on the part of nato is as firm as it looks and as the biden administration says it is. >> i think you're right about nord stream 2, the pipeline meant to take gas from siberia to germany. germany massively dependent on

russian gas to heat germans homes. there had been quite a bit of opposition, particularly from the chancellor himself, to stop the commissioning of the pipeline. perhaps that was the most important thing that happened today. america and britain could have gone further. they could have really cut russia off from the international financial system and chose not to do that. if you look at what happened over the course of the last 12 hours in response to the russian moves in eastern ukraine, i would say that the nord stream 2 announcement was perhaps the most important. it was a sign of the unity that joe biden has managed to develop amongst his nato allies. the visit by the chancellor to the white house earlier this month looked significant at the time and in retrospect, loos very significant. this is a coup managing to keep all allies, not all of whom like the u.s., you've got countries

like hungary very close to putin. there are some fractions within the west, factions within europe that don't want to be that tough. today was an indication that the germans and main european players are happy to go along with what the american position is. >> you're sitting in paris now. a lot of the talk the last 24 hours has been if this is a full scale invasion of ukraine, it will be the most significant land war in europe since the '40s. does it feel like that in paris? that they're sitting here at a hinge of history or is that not the vibe on the streets, on some of those fancy streets i know you like to frequent over there. >> the fancy streets are still pretty fancy. don't worry. it doesn't feel like i imagine france felt in june of 1940 when the city was about to fall to the germans.

no. is it all over the news here, absolutely. and president macron himself has been playing an important part of this. but european officials i spoke to at the end of last week are sounding less optimistic that there's going to be a diplomatic solution out of this and everybody's aware, really aware of the impact this is going to have on all europeans because of the refugee crisis you mentioned earlier in the program and because of those hikes in gas that could come from this. europeans are already paying 300% more for their gas this winter, heating their homes, than they were last winter. that's a big hit for people. they're about to pay even more than that because of what's happening in ukraine. >> i want to talk sanctions with you. something you know something about from your time in the obama administration. just walk us through the, joe biden when he made the announcement today and the way they've been backgrounding it ever since. these are really sanctions. they're directed at what matters to putin. at money.

and to the banks there. about the try to cut off the ability to have russia to be able to finance its debt, at oligarchs and elites. talk to us about the sanctions about how tough they are. >> sure. well, president biden has had an opportunity to have lived something like this before in 2014. i was at the treasury department when putin annexed crimea and when we fashioned those sanctions. the difference between then and now is that back then, we were, sanctions russia was a very new concept. i remember the day we did it. it was a snow day in washington. and no one knew it was about to hit. i remember driving to treasury thinking oh, my god, we're about to sanction russia. those sanctions were very deliberately surgical. they were very carefully calibrated in order to hit targets in russia without causing a backlash on u.s. and

european business because russia, unlike a lot of countries we target with massive sanctions like iran and north korea, is very well integrated into the international financial system. that means that we as the united states and others have a real power to inflict financial pain on russia, but it does also mean that there may be some backlash, which is what president biden meant today in his speech when he said democracy has a price. and i believe that that's what he was referring to. that gas prices certainly in europe, specifically in germany, which will now have to go seek a new source, but around the world as a result of that, those gas prices are going to increase. so in terms of how strong and tough these sanctions are, they are in fact tough. they sanctioned two state-owned banks that are directly related to propping up russia's regime and its military infrastructure. one of the banks seeks financing. the other bank backed defense equipment and all things related

to military and so treasury was clearly strategic in what they were pursuing and those that they targeted, the oligarchs they targeted are related to those banks and the fsd of course. as katty mentioned, they could have been stronger. there are more financial institutions. there are export controls on u.s. technology and goods that could go to russia to help its oil and gas sector, its defense sector, its tech sector in efforts to diversify its economy. so those have been left and that is a very typical treasury strategy and white house strategy. is to have layers of the onion that you continue to peel back so that you constantly have a threat of something lingering to hopefully change behavior. so there's a lot more i expect the happen, but it's not going to be the silver bullet. >> peter, you know, this goes back to you and having brought the ball back to you, i'll ask

you about clubs in the bag. given what the administration has said, which is hey, we're not going to intervene militarily in this conflict, sanctions is the name of the game. part of what they're saying is that they didn't go as far as they can go with sanctions. obviously you want to have more clubs in the bag because things could get worse. talk about what's being contemplated in terms of further sanctions if the ones they've rolled out don't have an effect. >> one of the questions we posed, what does the u.s. make of the fact that putin appears willing to deal with these sanctions and yet he continues to move forward. to hagar's point, there's clearly a lot they can do beyond this. tougher sanctions. additional financial banks. no additional technology would go to russia. swift is a term you may hear thrown around. it would basically shut off russia from sort of the world's financial trading system.

those are all sort of in the bag as you described those clubs right now, but to get where we started this conversation, that desire to calibrate, we are hearing from those officials and even though they're hearing from them, they say the u.s. needs to levy its biggest punch on russia, right now, the white house believes it needs to leave something in the bag if russia goes further because if you do it now and russia goes beyond that, what more is there to do given the fact the president says he won't send u.s. troops to ukraine. it is not a nato ally. instead, the decision had been made to defend our allies on the eastern flank of russia. >> yesterday in this hour, i had a conversation with michael mcfall and others about the reporting out yesterday. you referenced it. about the notion of enemies list and that those things are being as part of this information campaign that the biden administration is waging, the kind of things that are coming

out now. so the concern if there's a full scale invasion, there are ukrainians who have their names on lists who will be taken to camps. those are words that are unnerving for a lot of people. the question i raised yesterday with mcfall and others, if a full scale invasion happens and those kind of things start to unfold, are sanctions really going to be the farthest that the administration's willing to do or are those kinds of responses going to start to look pretty tepid if things start to get really ugly in ukraine? >> if the sanctions are cranked up, they're not going to look tepid. if there's an all out russian assault, an effort to cut russia off from the global economy, global financial system, that will look pretty strong, but it won't do the job entirely. the idea of this policy is that

the russia goes ahead, they'll feel a level of pain that over time will be intolerable and part of that is the idea that the u.s. and other countries surrounding ukraine would help ukrainians resist. will help them mount an insurgency against the russian occupation forces and send russian bodies back to moscow. how's the u.s. going to follow through on that threat and how deep are we prepared to go? biden has said we won't have american troops on the ground fighting. what other sorts of support might we offer? how would we supply it through nato allies like poland next door. what dangers might that pose for poland? those are all questions that lie ahead, but this idea that an insurgency against russian occupation will be part of our toolkit, our weapon kit, has been stated by administration officials. that's, i think, the part of

this that could prove to be most dangerous. >> katty, every time i come to you, i have sound to play for you. the broader set of responses the u.s. could bring, not just in terms of sanctions, but in terms of coordination with nato. this morning, the deputy national security adviser was on "morning joe" and said the following. going to play the sound here related to nato then we'll talk about it on the other side. >> if russia continues to move forward with this latest invasion of ukraine, you're going to see additional u.s. troop presence in the eastern flank of nato countries. you'll likely see nato take steps to authorize the movement of other nato forces and all of this frankly is the opposite of what president putin claims he wants. what he claims he wants is less nato. less u.s. troop presence close to his borders. what he's getting as a response to what he's doing is the opposite of that and we've been making this point to them that

this is not going to play out the way it will, but they continue to be on this path. >> katty, i generally don't like people to speculate that much, but i'm going to ask you to give a sense of your read of the wind and weather over there. you know, the unity so far as you pointed out has been strong. the fortitude has been strong. is nato up for that? from what you can sense and your reporting tells you, is nato ready for the kind of escalation that are they ready to hang together as people look toward the long-term to ban together, be tough and have a more asserttive role for a country that's not a nato member? >> i mean, for the moment, i guess we're in a bit of a holding pattern because we have to see what president putin does next. whether how much further into ukraine he goes and that will, to some extent, dictate the nato response. you had it today, the baltic

countries for example, very firmly. those ones that are right on russia's doorstep that know what it feels like to be under russia's thumb, coming out saying we want a doubling of nato troops in our countries in order for us to feel protected. you had nato members already ramping up their presence in the central european countries, the countries up against the russian border. you've seen it already. i think it's a misnomer to talk about this in the context of a world war. nobody i have spoken to has said this is going to be the third world war. yes, it's going to hit europe massively. economically and with the ref ref refugee crisis. war is always a failure. when wars start, you don't know where they're going to lead to next, but for the moment, nato's clear it's not prepared to go

into ukraine to assist those ukrainians who might be about to be clobbered by russia. they'll do what they can to support the insurgency, to beef up security on their own, on nato's own eastern banks, but for the moment, that's as far as they plan to go. you don't know what happens when war starts. >> it's certainly the case, inning you're right, conventional wisdom among most people is that it would not be a world war. one who said it would was joe biden about a week ago. hagar, we're waiting for antony blinken. the sanctions that have been, we're talking about what the sanctions do and what further sanctions might do. the one that interests me most, the category, because when you listen to russia experts and people who spend time with putin, if you spend time in russia, it's the ones targeted at oligarchs. how do you make putin and his

class in russia feel the pain personally? it's clear he doesn't care that much about his people. it's clear he doesn't care much about the russian economy. it's also clear he cares about his own net worth and the net worth of his friends. what would be the sanctions that the united states and the allies could undertake that would most bite the oligarch class including putin? >> sure. well, you've hit the nail on the head because the power and money in russia is really only held by a very small group of men. those are the men that need to be targeted and frankly europe has lagged behind targeting them. the uk announced additional sanctions on oligarchs today, but they're really behind on that. for years, they've been able to buy up property and real estate and put their assets and establish businesses in london, monaco, all over europe, really. we're going to need to lead on

that. it is critical they partner with us on this. the thing i missed and should have added, the president is trying to do with these sanctions is not just the practical effect, by putting whatever target you have on a sanctions list. yes, u.s. persons are prohibited from doing business with them and any assets are frozen, however, what he's trying to do is make russia an international pariah and telling the whole world you need to partner with us in not doing business with russia. in not buying whatever good or service they have from russia. right? and that's what undermines russia. when you have clients of these banks that are now going to move their assets or try to sell their businesses off and do whatever they can, the fact that these sanctions will make it harder, costlier and riskier for the targets to operate and

pursue their nefarious behavior, that's the goal of the sanction. so the positive side with why they will not be a silver bullet in changing putin's calculus as david mentioned, the positive side is that it gives us a bargaining chip and over time, it will financially undermine russia's military to prevent them from pursuing potential future aggression, whether it be ukraine or georgia or other neighbors. but it's risky. all risky. >> peter alexander and my fellow wildcat, we got to let you go. thank you for being part of our coverage and we're going to bring in another brilliant nbc reporter. matt, who's in moscow. the sanctions got announced about two hours ago. what's the reaction in moscow?

>> the kremlin when asked said they just didn't watch biden's speech. president putin was busy with a working meeting, so not too much there, but we know the russians expected this. they've been open about that. it's something putin and various other officials have been repeatedly bringing up. and they've kind of told the russian people that sanctions will happen no matter what. it's important to look at that. the fact they're saying sanctions will happen no matter what because it does feed into the domestic narrative we see here as being sold to the russians about a hostile west kind of being behind all of the things they're being told are happening in ukraine. so that's just kind of where we're at now with the sanctions. we'll obviously hear probably a little bit more tomorrow from the kremlin at the daily briefing and possibly some of

the affected parties for example, but that's it for now. >> all right, thank you very much. we're still waiting on blinken and the ukrainian foreign minister to hold their joint news conference. as we wait, we'll stick where our panel. david ignatius, i want to ask you this question, but first, i want to play a little sound for you. the united states ambassador of the united nations last night went after putin with a big stick. let's listen to her talk and then we'll talk about putin's long game on the other side. >> in essence, putin wants the world to travel back in time, a time before the united nations, to a time when empires ruled the world. it is not 1919. it is 2022. the consequences of russia's actions will be dire. across ukraine, across europe, and across the globe. >> david, we're inside the

two-minute warning now. probably about a minute and a half. give me your sense of what -- we're still waiting. a lot depends on what putin does next and how do you think he's thinking about what he's going to do next. >> based on what we've seen so far, putin likes to move, stop, wait, turn the screw a little tighter, move again, stop, wait. it's tended to be his approach. so it's possible that this all out cataclysm of war may not happen. it's hard to think of him keeping that great big army of 150,000 plus on the borders for months ahead to play that out.

my fear is that we're going to end up with ukraine effectively withdraws. that he will have, one way or another, through military attack, assassinations, through covert action in ukraine, the kind the administration has discussed, neuter the government. the government may have to flee. it will be an exile. and europe will denounce that sanctions will be imposed, but putin is used to living with what he calls, we call in foreign policy, frozen conflicts. be this ukraine that's frozen at the eastern edge of europe and people will deplore it, denounce it, but they won't take military action to reverse it. and the question is can putin live with that long-term and continue to threaten further advances against nato, further

efforts to consolidate what he sees as his borders and russian security. so i think avoiding that frozen conflict situation, that unresolved poisonous move by putin is crucial and i'm not sure the administration has a clear plan yet for how to deal with that. they want to make russia feel the pain. make this difficult. make it hurt enough that putin has to give it up, but as we've seen, putin's not a leader who gives up easily and the russian people have shown in all the wars they've fought, that anybody bets on them quitting because the going gets rough makes a bad bet. >> we're losing our connection, david. we're about to see the joint news conference in washington. that seems like it should be imminent given that we gave the

two minutes warning about two minutes ago, but as long as it's not happening right now, i'll ask you the same question i asked david because you're also a student of putin. what's your sense of how putin is thinking about this crisis and what his long-term objectives are and what his long game may be. >> look, i mean the way he's ramped up his rhetoric in the last 48 hours has alarmed people who watch him and watch what he does. the fact that even today he's talking about the possibility of ukraine becoming once again a nuclear state on russia's borders and that would be unacceptable. that's more than just the area he's taking. he seems to have his eye on the rest of the country and see that as portraying that for russians as a real threat to russian national security. that's the pretext he's looking for. but david's right. let's imagine a situation in which he goes in as he has to those separatist regions. he can still do a lot of damage to ukraine from there. he can carry out covert strikes

from there. he can cripple the government from there. it's very easy to imagine the government falls and russian government comes into play and it's no longer the democratic ukraine it has been for the last 30 years. in the heart of europe. and then what does europe do and what does the united states do? if it's cut off from the financial system as peter was talking about earlier, which you know, any european or anyone who trades here knows about because it's the only way you can use money, that would be dramatic. that would cut off the russian economy and that would be hard for putin to maintain, but at the moment, the way he's talking, it sounds like he's prepared, even if it's not an invasion into ukraine, he's prepared to exert as much influence as he can over ukraine and that puts ukraine in this kind of frozen position and that leaves the west with a question

of how to respond. we're not there yet. we don't know whether we're going to wake up tomorrow morning and find out he's decided to go for kyiv and not wait. >> we're now proving in politics, unlike the nfl, is two morning warning isn't what it says. i may have to cut you off, but i'm going to give you the third bite at this apple relating to putin. you watched him in 2014. the question is still the same but i'd love you talk about it in the context of having watched mim in 2014 and the ways in which that set of circumstances have shaped the putin who is undertaking these actions. >> oh, absolutely. well this all started in 2014. not just the crisis, obviously, but how president putin has felt you know, his public opinion has grown ever since this happened. you had the sochi olympics.

the success thanks to the doping. he was on a high and went in and annexed crimea. and when he saw a relatively weak response from the obama administration at the time for something so brazen, right, for taking territory, i think to him that was a message of okay, great, this is something i can continue to do with little recourse. under the trump administration. they were inconsistent where its behavior and messaging toward russia. so president trump thought he could do a deal. you know, in some kind of friendly way and he learned obviously that that's not how it was going to work. sanctions continued. he flip-flopped on nato from not supporting it to sort of supporting it. and he supported arming ukraine, right? and now you have when president biden came in, he lifted the sanctions against nord stream 2, which is interesting. however, he did it to underscore the alliance with germany was the most important.

but those are all things that putin watches carefully. the problem you have now with putin's brazenness and how bold he is in declaring these two areas as independent states and acting as though he's sending quote unquote peace keepers, right, clearly the problem that you have is that where will it end, correct? at a certain point, he's going to see he played his cards very well. this is a country with very few cards other than military. he's going to see he's going to get something out of it. whether it's annexing these areas or declaring them as independent states or whatever. or whether eventually he gets some kind of something in return for you know, to back down. either it's something in negotiations related to his demands related to nato.

i don't think he'll get anything like that, but maybe it will be negotiations related to other issues like military assets or equipment that are near the russian border from the united states and nato. so the bottom line is he's going to see that he can behave this way as a thug and get something out of it. my real concern here is not just that he won't end. it's the message to the other dictators that are watching around the world, in particular, president xi. president xi is watching every minute of this and thinking to himself, okay, i see. this is how this is all going to do down. i'm going to start my playbook to invade taiwan because i know the u.s. is not going to militarily intervene. the reason we're not going to intervene is because it would be catastrophic. when you have two superpowers, it would be catastrophic if they fight. there are many reasons we can't go into this, sorry, my 20 month hold is here saying hi. >> your 20 month old is

expressing my view about this two-minute warning which has now gone to 47 minutes. that's me wailing there. >> ignatius, i'll come back to you one more time. one of the things that we were talking about with matt when he said this thing, they're not even watching tv in russia. the kremlin's not even paying attention to joe biden. obviously that's false on a number of levels and particularly the level of the fact the kremlin's always watching american media. domestic politics. i'm curious about how you think this crisis from putin's perspective, is there some element of testing joe biden? seeing wrongly or rightly, but having reading opinion polls, seeing divisions between in our political system between our parties, within our parties. the fact that so many republicans now have become sort of pro putinists, that tucker carlson seems to be on putin's

side every night on fox news. how much of that do you think, u.s. domestic political factors are playing into the game that putin is playing on the global stage now? >> so i think when putin launched the effort back in october, he saw president biden as a relatively weak president governing a very divided country. they had met in june. they had a very friendly summit. i think putin might have thought the americans were chasing after deals with russia. really wanted to improve relations and may have seen that as a sign of american vulnerability to the pressure he was going to bring. >> i think the russians really had been surprised. first at how resolute biden has been and how effectively he's managed to get his national security machinery to operate.

they've made it look easy to do all this communication around the world. talking to world leader every day. sometimes two or three times a day. they've made it look easy to get the intelligence, declassify it, push it out, make it public. >> david. >> i think all that stuff probably has surprised the russians -- >> two-minute warning is over. the news conference with the ukrainian foreign minister. >> in munich a few days ago, russia's aggression toward ukraine and its rejection of international law and diplomacy have accelerated. yesterday, president putin recognized the so-called independence of the donetsk and luhansk regions of ukraine where violent russian back separatists have been fighting a war since 2014. a few hours later, he gave authorization to russian troops to enter those regions. for weeks, we've been warning the world that russia was

mobilizing for military aggression against ukraine. we've made clear that if russia invaded, the united states and our allies and partners would impose swift and severe consequences. now that russia has moved against ukraine, so, too, have we moved on our strong and unified response. this afternoon, the president announced the first round of sanctions on russia in response to its actions. these have been closely coordinated with our allies and partners. we'll continue to escalate our sanctions if russia escalates its aggression toward ukraine. today, we're implementing full blocking sanctions on two large russian financial institutions. the veb and the bank. both of which have close links to the kremlin and russian military. collectively, they hold more than $80 billion in assets. these measures will freeze their assets in the united states, prohibit american individuals or businesses from doing any

transactions with them, shut them out of the global financial system, and foreclose access to the u.s. dollar. we're expanding our existing sanctions on russia's sovereign debt. we've prohibited u.s. financial institutions from trade ng the primary market. we're extending it to the secondary market. these will cut off the russian government from a key avenue by which it raises capital to fund its priorities and will increase future financing costs. they also deny russia access to key u.s. markets and investors. starting today, we'll impose sanctions on members of the russian elite and their family members, all of whom benefit with their connections to the kremlin. elites are on notice that additional actions could be taken against them. these steps are in in addition to the executive order president biden issued yesterday to prohibit investment trade to,

from and in the regions. and just as the president said we would do, today, the department of defense announced that we would be sending additional forces to nato's eastern flank to deter and defend against any russian aggression aimed at our allies. we made clear if russia invaded ukraine, we would act with germany to ensure that the nord stream 2 pipeline does not move forward. today, the chancellor announced the german government is suspending the pipeline indefinitely. we've been in close consultation with germany throughout this process. we welcome this swift and decisive action and we're executing a plan to secure the stability of global energy supplies, which is in all of our interests. the united states and our allies and partners are united in the face of russian aggression. this morning, the european union and the united kingdom announced a series of strong,

complimentary actions. president putin's deeply disturbing speech yesterday and his statements today made clear to the world how he views ukraine. not as a sovereign nation with a right to integrity and independence, but rather as a creation of russia and therefore, subordinate to russia. it's a completely false assertion that ignores history, international law, and the tens of millions of patriotic ukrainians who are proud citizens of a free and independent ukraine. now that we've heard it directly from putin himself, it confirms what we've been saying that he did not send more than 150,000 troops to the ukrainian border because of benign military exercises or to respond to threatened aggression from ukraine or to stop a fabricated genocide by ukraine or any other manufactured reason. his plan all along has been to invade ukraine, to control ukraine and its people, to

destroy ukraine's democracy, to reclaim ukraine as a part of russia. that's why this is the greatest threat to security in europe since world war ii. ukraine is in danger. president putin is blatantly and violently breaking the laws and principles that have kept the peace across europe and the world for decades. yesterday at an emergency session, the united states and many other countries condemned russia's renewed attack on the integrity a as violation of international law and the charter. u.s. ambassador underscored that president putin has now torn to shreds the minsk agreements which sought to end conflict peacefully through diplomacy. putin himself declared those agreements null and void.

the complete abdication of russia's commitments under the minsk agreements is just the latest demonstration of russia's hypocrisy. since the beginning of this russian manufactured crisis, moscow has insisted that only legally binding agreements could satisfy its security concerns but the minsk agreements now join a long line, many legally binding, that president putin has broken. these include the hensinki final act in which countries including russia pledged to respect integrity. the charter of paris, which further established countries responsibilities to honor those pledges. the conventional armed forces in europe treaty which limits the deployment of military equipment in europe. the vienna document in which countries agreed to security

building measures to increase transparency and predictability about their military ak tifts and the budapest memorandum. in the past 24 hours alone, with his actions in the 24 past hours alone, president putin has violated all of these agreements, undoing 30 years of painstaking security. every time russia breaks one of these agreements, it not only endangers the country it's threatening at the time but nations everywhere that have been made safer and more secure by the international rules-based order. last week i agreed to meet russian foreign minister sergey lavrov this week on february 24th to discuss our countries' respective concerns about

european security but only if russia did not invade ukraine. now that we see the invasion is beginning and russia has made clear its wholesale rejection of diplomacy, it does not make sense to go forward with that meeting at this time. i consulted with our allies and partners, all agree. and today i sent foreign minister lavrov a letter to this. the united states and i personally remain committed to russia, are prepared to take dem demonstrable steps to show it's serious in finding a diplomatic solution. we will proceed based on russia's ambassadors and the facts on the ground but we will not allow russia to claim the pretense of diplomacy the same time it marches down the path of

conflict and floor. there is no question what has happened here. we have seen through their false flags, we predicted their lies. in the hours and days ahead, any further escalation by russia will be met with swift and coordinated measures. we'll continue to stand with our allies and partners to support ukraine as it faces russia's threats with courage and strength and will continue to defend the international laws that keep every country in the world safe from the kind of aggression that russia is now inflicting upon ukraine. i'm grateful to secretary blinken for welcoming me in d.c. today.

this speaks for the urgency of the current crisis that needs to be handled. we meet at a very tense and support time for ukraine, for the united states and for the world. we all are at a critical juncture for the security of europe, as well as international peace and security more broader. russian aggression has brought the world to the edge of the largest catastrophe as world war ii. ukraine does not and will never recognize this absurdity. what putin recognized is not the so-called peoples republic, he recognized his direct responsibility for the war against ukraine and an

unprovoked and unjustified war on another sobering state in europe which russia now intensify. president putin killed minsk agreements and attacked the world order. it is great breach against the law and sovereign integrity. the u.n. strongly believes the time for sanctions is now and welcome today's announcement of sanctions by president biden. the world must respond with all its economic might to punish russia for the crimes it has already committed and ahead of the crimes it plans to commit. hit russia's economy now and hit it hard.

i commend immense efforts of u.s. diplomacy led by tony to mobilize the global coalition of allies and partners to stop russia. the entire word stands today with ukraine and rightly so. putin wants much more than war torn piece of ukrainian land and people leaving there. what stops him is only our unity and resolve. and we can still stop him. ukraine continues the engagement with the united states, eu and nato with diplomatic attempts to ease efforts and yet we also stand ready for any possible development. we had a focused discussion today with secretary blinken on steps to protect ukraine and our multi-dimensional resilience. one of the proposals that we put

forward today is designing a program similar it the land lease implemented during the world war ii to support the war efforts of the allies in europe. this program will help to ensure sustainability and will improve efficiency in strengthening the capacity of ukraine to defend itself. the last point that i would like to make today, we discussed some very specific ideas and appreciated very concrete steps made by the united states. these days we receive proposals from some countries to condemn russia's behavior, to condemn but not follow the condemnation with action. and i would like to say that condemnations are important, but it's actions that really matter

now these days. and i'm grateful to our strategic partner, the united states, for its ironclad support, including military, economic and political diplomatic assistance provided to ukraine. the ukrainian people will surely remember the united states standing with ukraine at this decisive moment in history. thank you. >> we'll now turn to questions and we'll take two from each delegation. we'll talk with vivian from "the wall street journal." >> thank you very much. mr. secretary, president biden said three days ago if russia invades they will have chosen war and the door to diplomacy will be closed. today he seemed to have let the door open to diplomacy despite

labelling what russia did is an invasion. can you say what the circumstances would entail to justify talks at this point absent say a full withdrawal? does the actions in donbas kind of open the door for potential negotiations? and on that point, if you would both indulge me with two questions. president putin said the crisis would be resolved if kyiv abandoned future efforts to join nato and that's been a nonstarter for the west. so what needs to happen for any of these talks to be entertained? minister, good to see you again. quick questions for you. does the you ukrainian government have any plans to evacuate marapol and were you

informed of a list of occupied camps and have any actions been taken to respond to it? thank you. >> thank you. i'm happy to start. first, the further renewed russian invasion of ukraine that has now begun means clearly that the idea of having a meeting this week with foreign minister lavrov to resume diplomacy, diplomacy now rejected by russia, does not make sense. but having said that, to the extent there is anything we can do to avert an even worse case scenario, an all-out assault on ukraine, including its capitol,

we're open to that. we remain open to diplomacybut moscow have to demonstrate that it's serious. we made clear in the context of a russian invasion, we with not go forward with that meeting. with regard to president putin's statement about nato and the open door, it's very clear what we've seen in the last 24 hours that this has never been about ukraine and nato per se. what president putin has made clear is that this is about the

total subugation of ukraine or total neutrality of countries surrounding russia. so the issue of ukraine and nato has really been an argument and excuse to mask the fact of what this is about is president putin's view that ukraine is not a sovereign country, that it does not have an existence or independence not associated in some fashion with russia, a prom -- proposition that we not only firmly reject but so does virtually every ukrainian. >> i can only reiterate what the secretary just said. it is a choice of the people of ukraine. no one but ukraine and nato will decide on the future of our relationship. and it has never been about

nato. it is just an excuse. even if we did nothing, they will find us a really of doing something. we have two plans. plan a is to utilize every tool of diplomacy to deter russia and prevent further escalation and if that fails, plan b is to fight for every inch of our land in every city and every village. to fight until we win of course. and about the list of extermination, no, we haven't received it officially but i wouldn't exclude that such a list can exist.

>> we'll turn to olga from one plus one media. >> reporter: from your perspective is budapest memorandum alive or dead? and what actions do you expect from partners to be taken under budapest? thank you. >> well, in effect, russia began to tear up the budapest memorandum in 2014 when it seized crimea and went into the donbas, leading, backing, financing, supporting the separatists in waging wars in the donbas. i think what we've seen in the last 24 hours is the further repudiation of budapest by russia. for our part we have worked very hard over many years and especially over the last year to

do everything we can to support ukraine, to support its territorial integrity, its independence through security assistance. in the last your alone more than in any previous year, humanitarian assistance, financial assistance. just about ten days ago we provided an additional low guarantee of $1 billion to ukraine and of course leading the effort internationally to build support for ukraine in this hour of need. so we stand very much behind that support, support expressed in the budapest memorandum in doing everything that we can to uphold ukraine's independence, its security, its well being. >> budapest memorandum, no one

promised they would fight for us if we were attacked. this was not the subject matter of the budapest memorandum. this document was concluded on the premise that, first, countries who provided security assurances to ukraine will themselves not use force against us and, second, if that happens, they will do their utmost to stop it. so this should be the subject of the consultations that ukraine has initiated recently, countries who belong to this legal and political field space created by the budapest memorandum have to come together and reach an agreement on which specific action can they take to protect ukraine.

we understand one of the signatories to the budapest memorandum is russia, but this does not waive other countries of their responsibilities to do their best in order to help ukraine. ukraine a country that exists in a security vacuum. this is true. our security guarantees are ukrainian army and ukrainian diplomacy. but we realize that. but we do believe that the decisions taken in 1994 when the memoranda -- budapest memoranda was concluded, they should be respected because we sacrificed a lot to -- to make a long story short, we did a lot to strengthen global security by

abandoning our nuclear arsenal. it was a huge contribution. and we expect on the principle of reciprocity an equally huge contribution to ensuring ukraine's security. >> ben hall, fox news. >> reporter: thank you very much, both, for this today. foreign minister, there is a suggestion in what we've seen so far is a minor invasion that there's more to come and only warrants lesser u.s. sanctions. and also you and president zelenskyy called for tougher sanctions before the invasion. what more would you like to see from the u.s. and from the international community to try and deter more aggression and secretary blinken, thank you. given that russia has invaded ukraine, regardless of all the

threats of harsh sanctions, the attempts at diplomacy, what makes you think continuing down the same path will deter them any further? do you think it's time to change tact? do you think diplomacy has failed? and, secondly, have you underestimated putin? >> first, there is no such thing as minor, middle or major invasion. invasion is an invasion. second, as i said earlier, we do appreciate today's -- the sanctions which were announced today. they target russia, they're very specific, they are painful. i can say frankly that yesterday when we learned about the first executive order to impose sanctions related to economic activities in the donetsk with donetsk and luhansk province, we

saw today how it was punished. and imposing sanctions by waves, if i may put it this way, is something that can work if it continues in a sustainable way. president putin should not have a single minute when he starts to think that this is the threshold -- the pressure reached its ceiling and he will not be punished anymore. this pressure should continue to be stepped up and if that involves regular issuance of executive orders and new sanctions, we will be more than happen to see that. i will repeat again. we can, despite the horrific

address by president putin where he basically challenged the very -- he didn't challenge it, he rejected the very existence of the ukrainian state, we can still stop him if we act in very resolved way and keep mounting pressure on him. the question is that he has a certain table in his mind, which i'm not aware of but i'm sure he has it, and we should also understand that every next decision should be taken in a swift action. and we saw two executive orders issued by the president, by president biden within, what, less than 24 hours. this may be the dynamics that will have to be upheld if russia continues to escalate. and it was encouraging to hear from secretary a very simple sentence, "if russia escalates, the united states and partners

will escalate sanctions." this is exactly the rule that has to be followed. and, yes, we did believe that it would be helpful for some of sanctions, not all of sanctions, but some of sanctions to be both before the invasion begins as a preemptive measure for what russia had done before. but this question becomes obsolete now and we have to focus on a different strategy, the one that i just described. >> it's hard for me to improve much on my friend's answer. i'll just add a couple of things. first, all along we said that we were pursuing two tracks, the track of diplomacy and dialogue to try to persuade russia not to engage in renewed aggression against ukraine and at the same time a track where we were building up deterrence, building up defense and building up a

response that would have massive consequences for russia. russia's clearly chosen to reject diplomacy and dialogue and instead to pursue aggression. as a consequence we have started to pursue the severe consequences we made clear would follow from any renewed russia aggression. today faced with the beginning of russia's invasion of ukraine, we started high and we'll stay high. the sanctions that we've already announced go well beyond what we did in 2014, full blocking sanctions against two of russia's largest institutions. these institutions hold more than $80 billion in assets. they provide key services that are critical to financing the kremlin and russian military. we have comprehensive sanctions against russian sovereign debt. that means we're cutting off the russian government from western

financing, sanctions on elites and family members and as promised, as we said all along, germany taking action on nordstream two, and if russia continues to escalate, so will we. and of course it's not only the sanctions and other measures of that nature that are being taken, it is, as we've made clear, the reinforcement of nato on its eastern flank and continuing to provide and indeed increase the support that we're providing to ukraine against every dimension, security, diplomatic, political, economic, humanitarian. all of that is in the mix. ultimately, president putin makes whatever decisions he makes. we can do everything in our power to try to shape those

decisions but as i've said all along, whatever his decisions we're prepared either way and we demonstrated that again today in full coordination with allies and partners. >> reporter: have you underestimated him? >> oh, to the contrary. we not only haven't underestimated him but laid out his play book to the world what is happening. we've had a very clear-eyed view from president putin all along. >> reporter: i'm interested about all what happened in ukraine last night, may one tell it will not work anymore and should be replaced like ukraine proposed and i have a question that may sound naive but it's

a -- if russian troops will move forward or start intense artillery fire hitting ukraine, on your understanding what will happen next and what will america do? >> thank you. with regard to the normandy format, i think the question is best directed at president putin. as far as we can see by the actions he's taken, he's rejected it and he torn up in effect the minsk agreements, which the normandy format was designed to advance. so if russia is at all serious about resolving the conflict that it created in the donbas pursuant to the agreements it signed, the minsk agreements, it's of course showing exactly the opposite. so the question is really for president putin. we supported the normandy format

all along with france, germany, ukraine and russia working to implement the agreements. and throughout ukraine has worked very hard to make good on its commitments. russia's done just the opposite. but what we've seen now in the last 24 hours would seem to be the final repudiation of minsk by russia. but again, you would have to ask president putin. with regard to what comes next, as i said a moment ago, and as we've said all along, if russia pursues its aggression against ukraine, it will face the massive consequences that not only the united states but virtually all of our allies and partners have made clear would follow. you've heard this from the g-7, the leading democratic economies of the world, you've heard it from the european union and you've heard it from nato. and that includes what we've

started with today and that is very severe economic and financial sanctions that will exact significant costs from russia. it includes reinforcement of nato and the defense of all allies in nato and it includes additional assistance to ukraine in every area, security, diplomatic, political, economic, humanitarian. all of that will follow. and again, i repeat what i said before, if and as russia escalates, so will we. >> thank you, mr. secretary, thank you mr. minister. so it's about 5:17 here on the east coast. we have just listened to the

foreign minister discuss president biden's earlier announcement of additional sanctions against russia for its invasion of ukraine. watching along, former ambassador of russia, michael mcfaul, and founding partner of puck news, "new york times" diplomatic correspondent michael crowley and ben rhodes, former deputy national security adviser to president obama. michael mcfaul, you were here with me yesterday. i'm going to start to give just a panoramic overview of this day, including what we just heard from from blinken and kuleba, i want could get your general assessment of how we're

doing and where we're going. >> the administration is now using the word invasion or the start of invasion. that's the right way to describe what is happening in ukraine. number two, you had a much wider range of sanctions today than you had yesterday, serious ones a couple of the banks, i dare you to try to say that, john, it's a hard word to say. that bank is used to finance the military industrial complex. veb, we just called it putin's slush fund run by the first deputy prime minister back when i was ambassador. now he's chairman. these are close to putin and they went after the children in the executive order of some of the elite around vladimir putin. that's -- to the best of my knowledge, that's the first time we've done that.

i applaud those decisions. and at the same time, i want to emphasize i do not see a scenario in which sanctions change putin's calculus regarding his next steps. they're the right thing to do, they're the morally just thing to do but when people ask are they effective, are they enough, i think that misses the point. at this moment in this horrible moment that we're in, they're not going to affect putin's calculus and i think there's more to come on that in the coming hours and days. >> did you hear anything from blinken and kuleba as important beyond the four square side by side, showing a united front? was there anything that stuck out as meaningful or newsworthy in that briefing they just did? >> the newsworthy piece was secretary blinken took his meeting down with foreign

minister labrov. i also have to say and ben rhodes is here with me, he has written a lot of statements for press conferences, i actually thought it was a very strong statement to spell out to the american people about what is at stake here. i think they need to continue do that. if we are going to witness the largest war in europe since 1939, we have to make sure the american people understand what is going on here. i think blinken did a great job of that today. >> talk to me about the day from the white house point of view, michael mcfaul was all over the area yesterday saying this is an invasion, this is an invasion. the white house kind of balked

about that and by the time we got into the afternoon, they said, yes, this is what it is. talk about the thinking inside the white house and the planning that led both the decision to put joe biden out today and tony blinken as mcfaul just said making the news that the lavrov meeting is now off. >> john, i don't want to make too much of it but i think you got a little bit of sense of uncertainty from the white house over the last 24 hours or so. to me it's another example of how skillfully -- i don't want to praise him any other way, but how creative a tactician he can be. he made a move, recognized the so-called independence this region but didn't initially send troops in. while there are already some russian troops in the donbas.

is this really an invasion pup -- you go back to the press conference that president biden had, where it looked like he had gone into the donbas, there's a long-running conference and while some wanted to go pedal to the metal with all the sanctions the u.s. himself has contemplated, biden was thinking this is far from the worst case scenario. putin is not yet sending huge numbers of tanks over three parts of the border en route to conquering kyiv. is there still a possibility that we could deter him? so holding some sanctions back in reserve as a deterrent but it's not a crisp, clean response. i think this is exactly how putin wants it.

he's sewing a certain amount of uncertainty. generally speaking i think the biden administration is doing everything it can do. the problem is that putin has all the leverage in this scenario. no one wants world war iii. >> do you sense that that's true that putin kind of at least for a moment caused the administration to get a little hesitant or wrong-footed slightly? michael mcfaul was quick yesterday to say the invasion has started. it's easier to do that when you're on tv versus in the white house where the stakes are really high. what have you seen whether you think the biden administration has been sure footed as they could be and exercise caution or maybe crowley was right that maybe they got a little bit

bolloxed up by the situation? frankly, back in 2014 we had this challenge, too. it could be from all thing at time because russia would try to conceal its military involvement, hide forces moving across the border, advisers or military equipment. it was always best to get to the point of calling it what it is, which is an invasion, which they've now down. there's a large package of sanctions the u.s. and european allies have prepared and they've made the decision to do some of those, germany announcing the cancellation or suspension of

nordstream 2 pipeline but there's more. there's a lot more that they have prepared as it relates to export controls that cut off inputs to the russian economy. i'm sure there as a longer list of banks they're prepared to go after and more things that could be done by european allies as well. where they've landed is they take a significant step that recognizes that the combination of what putin said and did yesterday, not just in recognizing these russian-invented republics but this narrative that ukraine does not even exist. that was tantamount of the beginning of the sanctions but are prepared to see further russian escalation and as secretary blinken alluded to, they want to be ready to show a response that they can take with

european allies. it's also about sequencing the imposition and announcement of sanctions around what putin is doing, recognizing what mike says that at this point it does not appear that any sanctions are going to deter the person that we saw give that speech yesterday in moscow. >> that's my question very quickly with you, ben. i'm not a golfer but my father was so i know that metaphor. they left some clubs in the bag and a couple of clubs they left in the bag are woods. so it raises mcfaul's question, is it your assessment that it doesn't matter how big clubs are in the bag, that sanctions are not going to deter putin if what he wants is all-out war with ukraine. >> yeah, that's exactly my belief, that everything we've seen from putin is that he's made up his mind and he's exploring the maximum strategy

that if somebody violates the sovereignty of their neighbor, invades that neighbor, there has to be a consequence and then you hope you can hold the sanctions together over time and that can have an impact on putin's inner circle and on russia broadly, they you would hope not too bad of an impact on the russian people. you want this to be an overreach where russian casualties and cause the russian public to question the course that vladimir putin has set for them. >> i woke up this morning i felt that another brilliant piece of yours -- and i was right. the title of it is "will putin get his world war iii?"

. "it's hard to imagine how this ends." is this the beginning of a generational cataclysm and if so, what tectonic shifts will it trigger? what will the word look like in a decade? will it trigger massive refugees trips to europe? those are the questions. give me a sense what you think some of the answers might be and what you think vladimir putin thinks some of the answers tos they questions will be and they are, to some extent, within his control. >> i'm not really sure what vladimir putin thinks and after his deranged history lecture

yesterday, i have even less insight. i do think it depends on what happens in the coming days. you know, i agree with the foreign minister that an invasion is an invasion is an invasion and it's all an invasion whether it's big or small. that said, realistically if russia decides to car of away just the luhansk and donetsk provinces, that's different than if putin decides to march or kyiv, topple the government and install his own people. if he installs his own government, he can't then just loaf because the ukrainians would undo it. we know the u.s. government has been training the ukrainians in

the same tactics that the u.s. army faced in iraq, for example, during the insurgency there. what does that look like? we don't know where things end once they start. nobody knew that when peaceful protesters came out in syria to protest assad that it would lead to brexit. these can set in action that to be can mitigate. >> the beginning of a war is like opening the door to a dark room, one never knows what's in the darkness. and in "the atlantic," the headline is "putin chooses a forever war." he asserts that western

hostility is permanent. in short putin is now embracing a russian tradition of paranoia, an interiority complex that sees moscow as a savior of other nations and is feared and weak enough to be threatened. your thoughts, true or false? >> i agree mostly with that sentiment and let me add a few things. putin wanted to take those two republics and declared them independent, he could have done that a long time ago. he lamented in that in that crazy speech last night. i want your viewers and listeners to read it if you can't listen to russian. it was an extraordinary speech in many ways. it's worth looking at what he said. and it means he is a

megalomaniac. he thinks he's got a mission from god to do these things and he moving towards doing it and it's i think therefore very scary. i think the point you guys were just talking about about unintended consequences is also very important. lots of leaders with bad information living in their bubbles like he does, only talking to other kgb guys. he doesn't talk to anybody else except this inner circle. when i was ambassador, i used to interact with all those guys. they have crazy ideas about the world. they're disconnected from reality in terms of what is going on in the world, that's very dangerous. and one other thing i would remind you about in terms of getting in to putin's head. he's been to war many times, and

every single one of those wars he believes that he won without justification by the way. he is not afraid of war and he thinks he'll win the next one. >> whether he won -- regardless whether he won or lost, he's still there. he's still got the power, is richer than he was before and has more power than he had before. michael crowley irk have had two days of the smartest people i know on foreign policy saying there's no way sanctions are going to affect vladimir putin's calculus. i know there are lots more people involved in the biden administration and they don't understand this also. so they got those clubs in the bag but everyone around them is telling them the clubs aren't going to work. what's the contingency planning that's going on and what happens

once there aren't in more clubs in the bag pand putin is still charging into ukraine in. >> it goes back to what i said before, which is putin has so much leverage u.s. officials, western officials really haven't broached or discussed at all publicly, which is would you take a next big step and try to cut up russia's energy experts? i mean, that, as it spand to me,s that how you could potentially incorrect nuclear armed gas national that is and the money comes from gas and especially oil exports. is there some way the us could lead a coalition of nations to check off russian energy exports.

it would be a huge escalation, incredibly difficult to do and it would be extremely painful for american consumers, consumers around the world. the last thing joe biden wants right now is to push gas prices any higher. so it's very difficult to imagine that happening. but if it looked as those putin was and possibly had designs that is the conversation that would probably come next once woo have such as technology and sanctioning major russian financial institutions in a way in a would damage russia's economy and hurt ordinary russians, but i think if you really wanted to stringle the russian economy, you would have to go after energy and no one is talking about that right now. >> ben, the things that the biden administration was getting credit for and still is to some extent, the notion of this kind of unprecedented information war, declassifying documents

like keeping the global spotlight on putin and what he's doing, holding the western alliance together, front and center for nato and keeping a lot of solidarity there, at least to this point, a lot of credit given to them. and as we sit here, the pessimistic view that he's going to try out and out to take ukraine is the view of not every but a lot of small people. is joe biden doing a good job? is there anything he could have done differently that could have stopped putin from doing what he's doing or being intent on what he's doing in. >> no, it's really hard to see. they're doing what they control. you heard secretary blinken refer to they control the capacity to release information that makes it clear that vladimir putin is the aggressor. what did that do for them? it allowed them to use that time

to line up europeans behind sinces, so they're ready to go right away. that's because of the prep work they were able to buy for themselves -- the time they were able to buy for themselves by putting that information out. they were also i think able to influence global opinion by preventing putin from getting traction. but that did not affect his decision making. and so i think when you evaluate what they're doing, what can they control? they can reassure nato and make it companies like estonia, lithuania, latvia, poland, others concerned feel reassured by the presence of u.s. forces and control the cost imposed on putin's inner circle. they can impose the cost on those fans. you announce the sanctions and then you have to enforce them.

that's going to take weeks and months to get after that money. ultimately if they're not prepared to go to war with vad nir put and and i don't think think, they cannot stop him from what he is clearly prepared to do. that prevents a world of unintended consequences we're going to be dealing with for some time now. i'll come to you julia in a second. i'm going a little out of order. mcfaul yesterday tweeted about the question if vladimir putin had asked a reelected donald trump to close nato's door to ukraine, you honestly think he wouldn't have done it? he would have done it in a heart beat. he did an interview this morning called the buxtonclaytravis show. i'd like you to hear what trump

had to say right now. >> i went in yesterday and said this is genius. putin declares a big portion of ukraine, putin declares it as independent. oak, at that and putin is saying it now comfortable, a large sek ukraine and that's the strongest peace force than i've ever seen. there were more army taens. they're going to keep peace all right. here's guy that's very savvy, i know him very well, very, very well. >> there's more in there. trump said none of this would be happening if he were president. and that's a bunch of man, putin is smart, you got to hand it to that guy, this man is genius.

i'm going to let you comment. >> i apologize. i have to go teach for thanks for letting me go first. i do have a day job at stanford. a couple of things, let's just cut to the chase. yes, the trump administration did some good things on russia policy. the trump administration did some good things. we can debate plusses and minuses of that but mr. trump himself, you just you a he wanted to do whatever he wanted. he interto try to win reelection and let are no illusions. if ands that what putin was waiting for, waiting for him to be reelected. he would have put real pressure on the nato alliance. they would have had a really hard time surviving four moe are years. had he been re-elected, one, he

would have an mandate to say the american people, and all those so-called don't ups around hip and if his buddy vad from your so i think ben's really right in this is a difficult. >> julia, it lease mike think thanks for spending park, there's a subjects that been the extraordinary thing happens in 2012 had a nominee in mitt romney who said the most

significant global let's the united states faces is russia. and a lot of people laughed at him. move from that to donald trump and a guy who said why shouldn't i believe the russians? why would vad nir putin lie to me? and now we have a full-on chunk that is part of the party. tucker carlson goes on -- is that not from vladimir puttin's indication, the fact that there is-11 and he wants weakness and division among americans. it p he must be on solve level thinking what he's about to do is kind of the byproduct of a longer-term strategy that he put in play many years ago. >> absolutely. and if you spend time watching

russian state tv, which is basically propaganda -- i do so you don't have to -- they're constantly quoting tucker carlson very approvingly and people like tulsi gabbert and all the people who kind of undermine what used to be a pretty centrist consensus you have to pull back and look at what put opinion at the munich security council conference, he said basically you guys think the cold war was really bad and you're glad it's over. we don't. we thought the cold war was great. we were one of two super powers that created a balance in the world, we can always check and it looks like he's starting to accomplish it, the difference is that during the cold war the american political establishment

and the foreign policy establishment was pretty united when it came to the soeft. it was and now that put season getting us back to cold war 2.0, what does he want in washington? >> a spl a and, b, it's a way to show to the russian people that, look, democracy isn't all it cracked up it f, just as easily bought as you sap we are. so you might as well root for your own team. >> ahhh, all the news the last two days has been grim. thank you for one more cherry on this sundae. when we return, we'll talk about the sanctions announced today

and what the biden administration needs to do to counter russia's aggression. "deadline: white house" return after this quick break, don't go anywhere. n after this quick break, don't go anywhere every trip is a big deal.

♪ ♪ ♪a little bit of chicken fried♪ ♪cold beer on a friday night♪ ♪a pair of jeans that fit just right♪ ♪and the radio up well i've seen the sunrise...♪ get 5 boneless wings for $1 with any handcrafted burger. only at applebee's

on what has been a day full of big developments in the ukraine crisis, let's check in on the ground in kyiv. joining us now, nbc's erin

mclaughlin. everyone feels we're on the brink of an invasion that has started and a more serious war. does it feel like it where you are? >> reporter: to give you a perspective of how things are going from the ukrainian point of view, today started with a speech from the ukrainian not b russia and ukraine are going to go to war. and, yet, it ended with another speech from president zelenskyy at 10:00 p.m. calling up ukrainian reserves. things seem to be moving in the wrong direction. earlier today we heard from the nato secretary-general say that nato is watching as russian troops and equipment were pouring into the separatist controlled areas. we then heard from president putin essentially say he sees the new republics to include government controlled areas. these are all ominous signs for ukrainians and, yet, speaking to ukrainians here in kyiv, they're so thankful for the u.s. and

european response so far, particularly whether it comes to the north stream pipeline, the pause put on that tow day. they see that as a step in the right direction. i was speaking to a former adviser to president zelenskyy. he said he would like to see more sanctions but understand that's phased approach. he said that too much, too soon could be unsafe. he said, "you don't want to swiftly destroy nuclear power. it will lead to chaos, slowly suffocate is the right tactic." of that's what he told me. certainly gives you a sense of the mood here in kyiv tonight. >> erin, one last question for you. the zelenskyy question. he's, you know, from the outside world, there have been moments where he's not seen to be totally sure footed. the description you gave of the about-face to have day may reinforce that view. do the voters in kyiv and throughout ukraine support zelenskyy at this point? or is there -- are there any misgivings creeping in about

whether or not he is the right president to be leading the country in this crisis? >> you know, in speaking to ukrainian experts, people who were close to him or are close to him, there is a sense here that he, you know, could have done things a bit differently. he also could have been more vocal about the threats sh specifically about getting the ukrainian people ready for a potential invasion. but that being said, they're not vocal about that. they tell that you on backgrounds or off record. this he don't want to come out on record with the criticisms. there is an understanding that ukraine at this point is facing an unprecedented threat and unity and unifying a country is seen as a priority. you definitely get that sense. they had unity day. people were wearing ribbons and a show of solidarity. unity seen as incredibly important right now, john.

>> erin, i would say president of ukraine right now maybe worst job in the world. like i said, thank you for being with us from kyiv. president biden's announcement this afternoon that the first new sanctions is against russia is just the beginning. it come as biden faced pressure from both sides of the aisle in washington to do something. but disagreements among them about how they should do the things and how aggressive they should be. also beyond ukraine, more military protection of allies near the border. senior defense official tells us that secretary of defense lloyd austin just order add decisional u.s. grounded air troops to move across europe to support and reassure our nato allies and deter any aggression against them. joining us now is anthony brown of maryland. the he is recipient of a bronze star as well as the services committee and veterans affair committee and also a candidate for attorney general of maryland. good to see you. give me a sense at this point, this is as of now not a military

conflict. but on both on the economic front and there is stuff the military is doing to protect against a refugee crisis and the stuff that lloyd austin announced. talk about the way the military has a role to play here even though it's not a role not so far at least and hopefully never a role that involves direct conflict or combat. >> sure, john. look, whim it's not a large scale conflict, certainly we have seen it invasion by russia of ukraine. and the united states military has a role not to engage in direct action with russia. the president was very clear that our president is for defense. the defense of nato and our nato allies. that's why i fully support secretary austin and the white house's decision to move european troops forward into poland and the baltic states to demonstrate our resolve and commit noent nato. and to send a strong message to

putin that article v is real and attack on any nato member is an attack on all and the united states will defend our nato allies. i think that is important. i think those troops also will be in a position to work with our nato allies. yes, to support any refugee relief operations that may occur. but most importantly, demonstrates our resolve to put forces in place should putin try to advance on a nato country. >> lindsey graham quoted saying he wants to see the sanctions regime from helln this case, he speaks for a lot of congress people on both the house side and senate side who are very strongly united. in a bipartisan way. what do you think of the sanctions rolled out so far of the prospect of further sanctions and what is the mood on capitol hill in light of the way the biden administration is

proceeding? >> certainly russia's actions have been a unifying force for members in congress, democrats, republicans, house, and senate willing to support the president to make sure he's got the right tools to impose the most effect you have sanctions at the right time and place. this first traunch is very appropriate. cutting off russian markets from the interin ational markets, from banking to leverage the sovereign debt that is going to hurt their military and certainly going after the elite. but we have to be prepared to inflict economic distress on the russian economy and if necessary the russian people as a strong signal that less europe, the united states and in fact we need to enlist our asian allies and partners are not going to tolerate any further aggression by russian forces moving west in the ukraine. i think the measured approach, the tiered approach is appropriate.

congress needs to make sure the president has all the tools that he needs to inflict the right pressure at the right time. >> congressman anthony brown, i would love to spend more time with you. you can blame tony blinken and the ukrainian foreign minister for eating up some of the time we want to spend with you. thank you for spending the time we did get to have. we'll be back after this quick break. we'll be back after this quick break. ♪

at intra-cellular therapies, we're inspired by our circle. a circle that includes our researchers, driven by our award-winning science, who uncover new medicines to treat mental illness. it includes the compassionate healthcare professionals, the dedicated social workers, and the supportive peer counselors we work with to help improve - and even change - people's lives. moving from mental illness to mental wellness starts in our circle.

this is intra-cellular therapies. one of my favorite supplements is qunol turmeric. turmeric helps with healthy joints starts in our circle. and inflammation support. unlike regular turmeric supplements qunol's superior absorption helps me get the full benefits of turmeric. the brand i trust is qunol.

that does it for us on this eventful tuesday. thank you for being with me. nicole will return tomorrow. "the beat" also back tonight. starts right now. you're back g to see you. >> good to be back. thank you, john. i want to welcome everyone to "the beat." it's good to be back, the news, of course, could be better and we're going to give you all the facts as we have them right now. >> the world reacting to what is now