good to be with you, i'm katy tur. mike pence's ears must be burning because the talk today is all about him. there's the developing fbi search at his indiana home which we're going to get into in a moment, and now his official

involvement in jack smith's special counsel investigation into president trump and the insurrection. smith has subpoenaed pence's testimony which former federal prosecutors say could signal that smith is close to coming to a decision about whether to indict the former president. after all, there is arguably no more a significant witness into donald trump's actions and intentions surrounding the intention to overturn the election than his former vice president, the man he pressured to refuse to certify the election on january 6th. joining me now is nbc news senior legal correspondent, julia ainsley, and capitol hill correspondent garrett haake. laura, why a subpoena, why not a voluntary interview? >> jack smith doesn't believe he's going to get what he needed on a voluntary basis. we understand from our reporting there were some negotiations over a period of weeks on this.

it wasn't done overnight. this went on for quite some time between the justice department and pence's legal team. they obviously didn't reach an agreement, that's why you see the subpoena now. he wants to make sure he has him under oath. you know, there's a fair amount that's already been out there through pence's aides, and pence himself does this kind of spectacular piece in the "wall street journal." just last november, where he lays out in detail some of the conversations leading up to january 6th, with the president, you can imagine the special counsel wants to know every single thing from top to bottom about those conversations, in particular, what the president said in response. >> all right. but what about pence as a witness? who is he? i mean, i just said at the top ha he's probably no more important a witness, no more important a witness out there because he was so close to the president and the president's final plan to try to overturn the election. in the scheme of witnesses that jack smith might be

interviewing, where does pence land and what can you tell us about how investigations like this normally look? >> he's a material witness. you don't go after the former vice president of the united states unless you're at an advanced stage. this is not going to be the first witness you call because you don't want to call him back twice. you want to make sure you get all your ducks in a line, and as much testimony as you can from people lower on the ring. he's the highest ranking official to face this level of scrutiny and questioning. the question is whether he's going to comply with the subpoena or whether he's going to resist it. >> we will see. laura, thank you very much. garrett, let's talk about vice president pence and his role back then on january 6th. again, donald trump pressured him to decertify the election, but bring us back to that moment, and what might vice president pence be able to tell investigators? he's already been pretty public about some details from that day. >> pence is the central figure, if you go back to the period between the election and january

6th, there were lawyers in the trump white house and associated with the former president who cooked up the idea that as vice president mike pence could unilaterally throw out electoral votes on january 6th. pence and his counsel very quickly realized that they were going to be under this pressure. they came up with their own legal rationale why that would be unconstitutional, and in those weeks we know much but not all of the back and forth between pence and his attorney, trump and his attorneys arguing about whether or not this was something pence could even do. then of course on the day itself, pence had to be rushed out of the chamber, held in a safe space beneath the capitol all day long until he could be brought back to complete the practice of certifying the election results, certifying congress's counting of the election results. we know most of this, testimony from pence's aides whom he did make available to investigators in the january 6th committee, and pence's book, he did not testify before the committee.

he was not subpoenaed but said he would not testify because he thought they were too political. in his book he describes some of the conversations but not all of them that he had with donald trump. he describes conversations where others might have been present. i think one of the things the special counsel is going to want to know, what about the conversations that were just pence and trump. that's the sort of key piece of the puzzle that we have been missing this whole time. >> i wonder if he needed a subpoena for political cover, garrett. donald trump is running for president. he's considering a run for president, from what we know at least, believe at least, politically speaking would it have been hard for him with those loyal to donald trump, that base, if it looks like he was cooperating with a federal investigation against donald trump? >> i think it would have been all but impossible, and frank apply, i'm not sure how much the subpoena would help in part because we have seen many allies of the former president defy subpoenas in this same arena.

we saw it during the january 6th investigation. now, granted those were subpoenas from congress. a subpoena from a special counsel affiliated with the doj is going to have a little bit of an easier time putting some teeth behind their subpoenas, but politically i can't imagine any scenario in which mike pence would have voluntarily come forward to testify against former president trump. doing so with the subpoena may provide him a bit of a political shield, but in a rough and tumble republican primary, i don't know how much that's going to help, especially with the folks who were fans of the trump record but not of donald trump himself. it's likely they'll have other options for folks to vote for. >> any reaction on capitol hill to this today, any reaction from republicans or from maybe some of those on the january 6th committee who wanted to talk to vice president pence? >> yeah, there's been some. now, congress is out today. a lot of members are traveling, but adam schiff, one of the leaders of the january 6th committee was out with a tweet about this just a short time ago. he wrote that pence refused to testify before the january 6th

committee saying now he's been subpoenaed. he should cooperate fully, nothing prevents him from doing so except his ambition to be president, and katie, i think that goes exactly to the point you made in the last question here, the political imperatives and legal imperatives are going to play a tug of war on mike pence's conscience. >> julia, the fbi search which we have been talking over the past few weeks, it's happening today, i believe it's happening right now. what do we know? >> yeah, you and i were talking about this for some time, and actually the former vice president himself has known this is coming for some time. unlike in the january 6th investigation, it seems that mike pence has been cooperating with the fbi giving them access to his home. right now in indiana, the fbi is combing through mike pence's residence and seeing if there are more classified documents inside that he needs to hand

over to the national archives. it's important to remember the way this chain works. when it turns out there's classified information that should have been turned over. we saw both in the case of pence and biden, they alert the national archives, explaining there's more. then it is up to the fbi to decide whether or not they need to come in and conduct a more thorough search to make sure there's no criminal violations of the presidential records act. that's the stage they're in now. it's unlike what we saw in august in chicago. they signed documents saying they had turned everything over to the national archives. it turns out there were hundreds of documents that weren't turned over. this is something investigators have to dig in and see if there are some documents that are maybe still in the residence that should have been handed over, and every time we talk about this, katy, we have to talk about the over classification. are there documents that might have been misstored? there are so many documents that get misclassified, when they're

not that sensitive or imperative to the national security interests of the united states. >> if the fbi finds more today, is that what could trigger a special counsel or -- because vice president pence is not one of the central yet at least 2024 figures, is it unlikely he's going to get a special counsel. what do you know about that? >> you and i have pontificated about what would happen next in the pence part of the classified document conversation. the last point you pointed out is a significant thing that merrick garland would be weighing. he's looking at the very high interests of the justice department to show that they are independent in these two searches and he's weighing how he can be independent with a search into the current president and former president who will also be potentially running or who announced his intentions to run for president again, unlike mike pence, and so

he's arguably in a different category. we can't rule out the idea of a special counsel depending on what they might find today. i could see it possibly being in the attorney general's interest to appoint one. right now, i think it depends on what they find, and also keeping in mind, he's not quite as high profile as other two men. >> julia ainsley, garrett haake, thank you so much. joining me is former homeland securities and counter terrorism adviser to vice president pence, olivia troy, and former u.s. attorney and msnbc legal analyst, barbara mcquade. let's go back to the january 6th investigation. at the top of the show, laura jarrett kind of laid out what sort of witness mike pence would be in an investigation like this. barbara, just go back to that, and talk to me about what it signals to you about where jack smith is, and figuring out whether to indict donald trump? >> i think -- i draw two conclusions from this subpoena,

katy. one is they are seriously considering criminal charges in this case. you would not go through the difficult process of serving a subpoena on a former vice president with all the potential litigation, the scrutiny it brings, and to find out what happened in the conversations, the individual conversations between mike pence and donald trump that no one else was at. not mike pence's aides, just pence himself. that's one point. the other is it signals they're close to the end of the investigation. typically prosecutors want to approach the people at the highest levels after they have learned as much as they can about the case. they have talked to everyone else they can talk to. they have read every other document, and all that's left is the people in the closest inner circles. it says to me they are getting very close to the end. >> do you have in your experience, what sort of time line that could be. does that mean a few months, a few weeks. i know you have been a part of

the these discussions before in a case like this, but cases that you can compare it to. any idea? >> well, we always resisted putting a deadline on things. you can talk to mike pence and learn about 25 other witnesses you need to talk to that you weren't aware of before. it suggests they were close to the end. my guess is they have done all of the legal analysis they need to do to decide what kinds of charges they're looking at. i think that listening to his testimony is important and will inform whether they file charges and if so, which charges to file. i don't think we're days away or weeks away. i think, you know, it would not be unreasonable to assume that an indictment could come this spring. >> i have tried to interview mike pence in the past, and he is extremely guarded and extremely careful with what he says. he never says a thing he does not want to say. and often times when you're asking him a question, he'll

answer the question he wants to be asked. can you tell us what sort of witness he might be for doj and whether he ever lets his guard down and speaks freely? >> well, i think he's certainly very calculated when he speaks. he's like that in meetings as well. but i think in this situation, i think he'll be honest, but i think what extent he'll be extremely forth coming and how detailing he will be, i think that is going to be the challenge. i think he will walk a fine line here, and i think if they don't get the information that they're trying to get, they're going to have to compel him to do so, and i think you're going to see a very slow process probably proceed here is my guess. i've seen kind of the pence team, how they react to situations like this. i've certainly seen it in the past where they have, you know, advised compelled to come forward before congress or other situations where they have said,

obviously cooperate, be honest willingly but wait for a subpoena. so in each situation, it was like the top cover politically to be compelled in the situation, and i think that's what you'll see with mike pence. >> do you have any reason to believe he might defy the subpoena or claim executive privilege to get out of doing this interview? >> you know, i don't know if he'll flat out defy the subpoena? that, i think i'm actually debating, kind of wondering myself whether he'll comply. i do think he'll claim executive privilege. he has an executive privilege hawk that he's hired as his lawyer. i think he will probably stake that. it's hard. he's detailed in his book. his book he talks about the days after the election. he talks about it being the twilight zone. what are the details in that twilight zone, and he talks about the conversation he had with trump, trump says it's going to take courage, and by courage it's going to take

kounch to overturn the election. -- courage to overtourn the election. he needs to show that to the american people regardless of the political calculation in his head for 2024. >> it would be a lot easier to run for president if donald trump is not running for president, if he's charged and indicted and put on trial, that might clear a path, olivia. >> i certainly thought about that, and you know, for many of us in the country who think donald trump is still a present and clear danger, should he return to the oval office, that would be a great gift to the american people in my opinion, and maybe the international community. i don't say that facetiously. >> hold on a second, we want to go to the white house. john kirby is in with press secretary karine jean-pierre. they have announced that the president will be traveling to

poland ahead of the anniversary of russia's invasion of ukraine. anniversary is a weird word to use, but a year since russia invaded ukraine. >> addressing how the united states has rallied the world to support the people of ukraine as they defend their freedom and democracy. and how we will continue to stand with the people of ukraine for as long as it takes. with that, my colleague john kirby from the nsc is going to come up and share some words and take some questions. >> afternoon, everybody. just a couple things here at the top. i think you know president lula from brazil is here today. meeting with the president soon. he's looking forward to that discussion. brazil is a key partner of the united states in a region that is also a critically important region and an ally as we work together to address common challenges throughout the world, quite frankly, not just in this

part of it. the president has personal experience working with president and his time as vice president, and have had multiple calls. of course as you know, we have already held a number of high level engagements since president lula's election. president biden called president lula shortly after he was elected to congratulate him, and identifying areas the two countries could work together. national security adviser jake sullivan traveled to brazil for meetings with president-elect lula and members of the incoming administration, and led a presidential delegation to brazil for the inauguration. and of course following the january 8 attack on brazil's democracy, president biden was quick to call president lula to convey the united states' unwavering support for democracy in brazil. the two will have a packed agenda here today, discussing issues that are important to both of them, and as i said, to the region and to the world. that includes combatting climate

change, stimulating economic development, strengthening democracy, promoting human rights, and inclusion, as well as managing irregular migration. the meeting between the two leaders will strengthen the relationship between the united states and brazil, and help set the stage for upcoming high level engagements between our two countries. one more note before we jump into questions, and this is just an update on u.s. efforts to respond and to help provide assistance to the people of turkey and syria in the wake of those devastating earthquakes. we are ramping up our assistance to these earthquakes that have now killed more than 20,000 people in turkey and syria. including that we know of, at least eight american citizens. now, this is a terrible tragedy, obviously, and our hearts continue to go out to all of those impacted. we remain in close contact with our turkish allies at every level of government, including, of course, a phone call between

president biden and president erdogan. yesterday, we announced that the united states will provide $85 million in life saving assistance to provide shelter to the displaced as well as food, medicine, and other desperately needed aid. in turkey, a usa id, disaster, assistance and response team is already on the ground and two of our most highly trained urban search and rescue teams are conducting operations in support of turkish rescue efforts in one of the hardest hit areas inside the country. these teams have nearly 200 personnel combined between them, specialized equipment, and k-9 support dogs as well. they have been able to expand their operational reach with the support of u.s. military, black hawk helicopters, and because of the extensive damage to roads and to bridges, ground transportation, i think you can understand is pretty challenging. they will continue to run air lift operations from transporting rescue personnel to

sites they are most needed to conduct operations. the dark needs are conducting structural damage assessments of buildings and infrastructure. to daylight, they have been able to cover more than 630 sites. in syria, our humanitarian partners continue to urgently scale up response efforts to reach people in need. that has included chartered flight, to teams distributing hot meals and other foods. as of this morning,s united states and its partners successfully completed its second cross border humanitarian convoy into northwest syria and one of our humanitarian partners delivered 14 additional truckloads of supplies, totaling 20 trucks of critical-food and water to people of need in the last two days. to underscore that u.s. sanctions will not prevent or prohibit humanitarian assistance in syria, yesterday the

department of treasury, i think you saw, issued a broad, general license to provide additional authorizations for disaster relief assistance to the syrian people. we already were able to deliver humanitarian assistance without this general license but we wanted to underscore the importance of humanitarian aid getting in so the treasury went ahead and issued this license as well. this will be in effect for six months. u.s. humanitarian assistance is delivered directly to the syrian people no matter where they live. we are determined to do all we can to help those affected by the earthquakes in the days, weeks and months ahead as required. >> reporter: why the president decided to go to poland, what message he wants to deliver, and is there any chance that he would visit ukraine during his visit to poland? and i have also one on president lula's visit. president lula said he wanted to create a group of countries,

including china to mediate peace between ukraine and russia. does the president support this effort? is this the right time for opening negotiations? >> there's a lot there. on the trip, i don't have any other additional stops to speak to. karine announced the purpose of the trip, to go to poland, and i think she answered the main question, what does he want to talk about, he wants to talk about the importance of the international community's resolve and unity in supporting ukraine for now going on a year. wouldn't it be great if the president didn't have to make a trip around a one-year anniversary of a war that never should have started. sadly that's where we are, and he wants to make sure he's sending a strong message not only of the united states resolve but the international community resolve, and to make clear to the ukrainian people, most particularly that the united states is going to continue to stand by them going

forward. we know the next weeks and months are going to be difficult and critical, especially for their armed forces and the united states is going to continue to stand by them. on your question about president and his peace overtures. >> president lula. >> lula, i'm sorry. >> he said he wants to create a group of countries to negotiate peace in ukraine, and those groups, according to him would include china, india, maybe some other countries? >> i certainly would refer to president lula to speak to his ideas. i think until the aggregate, we all would like to see this war end today. we'd like to see it end right now. in other words, without having to go to the negotiating table. that doesn't appear to be in the offing as mr. putin flew dozens of cruise missiles into civilian targets into ukraine, knocking

out heat and power across the country. absent that, we're going to have to stay at the task of supporting ukraine so it can succeed at the battlefield so that, if and when president zelenskyy has determined it's time to negotiate and sit down at the table to solve this diplomatically, he can do it with the wind at his back. he can do it with the strength that he knows he's going to need in that negotiation. so it's really up to president zelenskyy to determine if and when negotiations are appropriate, and certainly under what circumstances, as president biden has said countless times, nothing about ukraine without ukraine. >> on the trip to poland, we expect the president to make any kind of formal announcement as it pertains to additional security or will it mostly be a symbolic show of support as you were talking about to the ukrainian people, the u.s. polish alliance? i don't want to get ahead of the president's remarks, certainly i'm not going to do that, again, the president will make it very

clear that the united states will continue to stand with ukraine as long as it takes. he'll continue to call for the kind of international unity we have seen, not just across nato or the world, not just across europe, and i think he will certainly make clear that additional security assistance, additional financial assistance, additional help for ukraine will be coming from the united states. but i won't get ahead of anything specific. >> i had a quick follow up on the chinese spy balloon. this idea that president xi jinping may not have been aware of the order to send this balloon over u.s. soil, what would that tell you if that were true about his grip on his own government? is it possible that it's just a kind of power break down? is it surprising to the u.s.? >> we certainly can't confirm these reports about president xi's personal knowledge of that, and i would refer you to the prc to speak to their own leadership

issues and information sharing. what matters to us is that this was a violation of our sovereign airspace, and clearly with intent. now, whose intent? i don't think we have a perfect picture of that right now. clearly without question, the intent of the prc. because we know that this balloon belonged to them. and president biden acted decisively in support of our national sovereignty. >> our reporting is that u.s. officials briefing lawmakers this week, told lawmakers that this is the u.s. intelligence community's -- >> i'm not going to speak to intelligence assessments. >> reporter: thank you, karine. there's been warnings from the ukrainians as well as intelligence agencies in europe and here that as the one-year mark of the war approaches that that might be a moment where putin tries to really escalate the conflict, maybe launch a

major new offensive. are you seeing any signs of that being in the works? >> what we see, jonathan, is that russians continue to conduct offensive operations in the donbas area, the fighting around bakhmut remains vicious, even as you and i are talking. clearly he's willing to barrage the country with cruise missiles, knocking out civilian infrastructure and making life for difficult for the ukrainian people, and we believe he'll try to take advantage of these winter months to restock, resupply, rearm, contribute to his manpower in what could be renewed offensive operations come spring. have we seen all of that take shape now? i don't believe we're at a point where we have seen all of that really form. but we're anticipating that, and frankly, so are the ukrainians. and that's one of the reasons why you've seen in just recent weeks, the kinds of security assistance packages from the

united states and from others that are more advanced capabilities, the kinds of capabilities that will allow them to fight in open terrain, combined arms capabilities, armored capabilities, artillery, all of that is designed to help them prepare for whatever the russians might be planning in the spring. all of that is to say, we expect as the weather improves, fighting will probably get more vicious. >> thank you. hi, john. i have more follow ups on the lula visit, as well as the assistance the u.s. is providing to turkey. briefly, can you speak to rumors that there is another chinese balloon above alaska or any other part of u.s. territory that the u.s. has shot down. >> i can confirm that the department of defense was tracking a high altitude object over alaskan airspace, flying at an altitude of 40,000 feet and posed a reasonable threat to the safety of the civilian flight.

out of an abundance of caution and at the recommendation of the pentagon, president biden ordered the military to down the object, and they did, and it came inside our territorial waters. those water waters right now ar frozen. fighter aircraft assigned to u.s. northern command took down the object within the last hour. okay. >> reporter: thank you for that. that's really helpful. can you give more details on the support the u.s. is providing to turkey, specifically we understand that the u.s. george h.w. bush is on stand by. can you update us whether there's been communications with ankara on whether the ship will be part of humanitarian efforts. >> i think i updated as much as i could right now. what we're doing is what i put in my opening statement. there are naval assets in the mediterranean, and under the command of u.s. naval forces europe, the commander of

european command has designated the commander as in charge of the operational coordination for military assets, and he's doing that. i cannot speak to any specific contributions by the aircraft carrier, uss george h.w. bush, but obviously there's lots of capabilities in the mediterranean region that could be brought to bear, but we're working, and this is a really important point, we're working in lock step with our turkish counter parts to make sure what we're providing is what they need at the scale and the speed that they need, and not, you know, not trying to overwhelm their system with unneeded material or unneeded capabilities. so, you know, you talked about the bush, but there's a lot of military capability on the continent, under the european commanders authority that could be used, but again, we want to make sure we're doing this

appropriately through turkish counter parts. >> she's still asking questions. >> i hear you. >> reporter: just the last question, can you speak on how brazil can be a partner in monitoring irregular migration, specifically because brazil has been a route for africans coming to the u.s. through mexico. >> as i said, i would expect president lula and biden to talk about the challenges of irregular migration. you saw the vice president just this week holding a conference of some of our neighbors about this call to action to try to get at the root causes, and certainly we look and would welcome president lula's ideas and perspectives on how we can get at the root causes of all the migration in this hemisphere. >> thank you. when i hear news, i just get

very excited. >> fancy that. >> reporter: can we just go back for a moment. another aircraft of some sort, airship, balloon, something, was shot down today. who owns it? what were the circumstances? was the president directly involved in ordering this? and is wreckage being recovered? >> i'm going to try. yes, the president was involved in this decision. he ordered it at the recommendation of pentagon leaders. he wanted it taken down, and they did that. they did it using fighter aircraft, assigned the u.s. northern command. the pentagon will have more to say about the details later on this afternoon. it's only just within the last hour. we're calling this an object because that's the best description we have right now. we do not know who owns it. whether it's a -- whether it's state owned or corporate owned

or privately owned, we just don't know. that's why i said, state owned, we don't know if it's state owned, and we don't understand the full purpose. we don't have any -- we don't have any information that would confirm a stated purpose for this object. we do expect to be able to recover the debris since it fell not only within our territorial space but on what we believe is frozen water, so a recovery effort will be made. and we're hopeful that it will be successful, and we can learn a little bit more about it. >> was its appearance like the chinese aircraft? >> it was much much smaller than the spy balloon we took down last saturday. the way it was described to me, it was roughly the size of a small car as opposed to a

payload that was like two or three buses size. much much smaller. and not of the same -- not -- no significant payload, if you will. >> reporter: and lastly, is it now the policy of the united states that if unidentified aircraft are over u.s. territory that it is likely the president will choose to shoot it down? >> the president will always act in the best interest of our national security and the safety and security of the american people. >> reporter: the pentagon ordered the object be take down over alaska. >> the president ordered it. >> reporter: is it a fair take away that the pentagon regrets not taking down the first balloon before it crossed the entire u.s.? >> i'm not going to speak to the pentagon. i can tell you that the president doesn't regret the way that we handled the first balloon. first of all, apples and oranges here in terms of size. six, this was the size of a small car and it was over a very

sparsely populated area, but also more critically it was over water. water space, when we ordered this down as we did the last one. a completely different size and the debris field for this we expect to be much much smaller than it would have been for the other one. that's difference one. difference two, we knew for a fact that the prc balloon that we shot down last week was, in fact, a surveillance asset. and capable of surveillance over sensitive sites, and it had self-propulsion, there's no indication this one did. the first was able to maneuver, loiter, slow down, speed up. it was purposeful inside the jet stream. >> reporter: that would suggest maybe over alaska too, though. >> the pentagon has spoken to this question about whether or

not they should have or could have shot it down over alaska airspace. i would refer you to -- it was hours and hours of testimony yesterday on that. >> reporter: on the communications, though, we still don't know, correct me if i'm wrong, we don't know what intelligence or communications could have been collected or what devices they were targeting as i understand it. that being said, how can the president say it was not a major breach. we don't know that. >> what we do know is we knew the basic flight path of this thing. and we were able to take steps at sensitive military sites that we believed would be along the flight path to significantly curtail any intelligence ability that the chinese could get from the balloon. certainly curtail anything that would be above and beyond, you know, what they normally try to collect through other means. >> reporter: this latest object

that was shot down within the last hour, was that based upon any information from the monitoring of the last balloon over the last week, what you learned that chinese program, did that inform the decision to shoot this down? >> i would be careful saying anything specific to what we learned from the last platform, and you know, we were able to collect some information from it while it was in flight. that was another reason why we let it traverse over land the way it did. i would not say information gleaned from our surveillance of that surveillance balloon provided insights that permitted this detection and track. >> as of this moment, are you convinced that you shot down -- do you know it wasn't just the harmless weather balloon, that there was some motivation for

flying this over u.s. airspace? >> i think we're going to try to learn more. i can tell you it was an object at 40,000 feet, and the predominant concern by the president was a safety of flight issue at that altitude, remember the one that was shot down last saturday at 65 plus thousand feet, so no threat to civilian aircraft. this one at 40,000 feet could have posed a threat to civilian aircraft. it did not appear to have the maneuverable capability that the other one did. so, you know, virtually at the whim of the wind. >> thank you. so to follow up on what you just said about civilian aircraft, is that what you meant initially when you said there was a reasonable threat to shoot it down? >> yes, my exact words were reasonable threat to the safety of civilian flight. >> reporter: and given what you said earlier about intent with regard to the chinese spy

balloon does the u.s. give any credence to the chinese argument that the balloon accidentally veered off course and ended up where it did? >> you're talking about the one from last week. >> reporter: yeah. >> say that again. >> reporter: does the u.s. give any credence to the chinese argument that this thing accidentally veered off course and ended up in where it did? >> no. >> reporter: so was it targeting specific places? was it targeting military sites? >> what we know is that the flight path it executed took it over sensitive military sites. what we also know is that it could maneuver, that it had propulsion capability and steerage capability and could slow down, speed up, and that it was on a path to transit over sensitive military sites. >> thank you. >> thanks.

admiral kirby, on the latest object, you said it did not appear to have the maneuverability capabilities that the chinese spy balloon had, did it have any maneuverability or was it flying on its own? >> at this time all i can tell you is it did not appear to have the ability to independently maneuver. we'll attempt recovery and see what we can learn more from. >> reporter: sorry, just one more on the chinese spy balloon, we're reporting that the u.s. is about to impose export controls on chinese companies that are believed to have been involved in the balloon surveillance program. can you confirm that and say when the administration might impose those export controls? >> i'm not in a position to confirm those reports right now, and i would refer you to the department of treasury. >> reporter: i believe you said this was shot down or at least landed in the waters or the frozen waters off the coast of alaska, correct? >> that is our initial assessment. >> reporter: is the policy still considering the first one was shot down off the east coast,

and this high altitude object was shot down off the west coast is the policy at this point in time, you could shoot it down if it's over a body of water? >> i would derive from these two incidents some sort of policy that comes out of it. last week, we were talking about a surveillance asset. that was purposely flown over the continental united states. in the case today, we're talking about an object, again, we don't know a lot about it. but that at its altitude represented a potential threat to the safety of flying customers, you know, civil air traffic. >> reporter: based on your broad and deep experience, who do you think might own or have flown this thing in the air? >> i have no idea.

>> reporter: we know you don't know who owns it and is flying it. has anyone from the administration reached out to the chinese to see whether they will claim this new object? >> i know of no outreach this afternoon to the chinese government about this. >> reporter: the state department over the weekend or last few days, confirmed they think the chinese spy balloons have gone over 40 countries. considering that fact and the new development today, what's next on a larger diplomatic front? the u.s. talking with allies about how to police the skies, about how to bring this to the u.n. to figure out what to do? >> we are talking to dozens of nations who we know have been over flown by chinese surveillance balloons. part of this program that the chinese have invested in to share with them the context and information that we've learned by the forensics we've done, since we came in office about

this particular program, and i would remind you, we briefed congress in a classified setting in august about this. this is not something we haven't been trying to learn more about. we have been aware of it and trying to glean more information from it. and we expect that the recovery of the debris from the balloon was shot down on saturday, last saturday, will help us get even more information. but we are in the active conversations with many of these countries who we know have been over flown. >> reporter: where specifically in alaska was the high altitude object shot down? >> i'm going to -- the pentagon will be talking more about this a little bit later. they'll probably have more detail for you, but the general area would be just off the very very northeastern part of alaska, right near the alaska/canada border. >> reporter: the arctic ocean? >> yeah, in fact, that's where

it went down on that northern side of alaska near the canadian border on water that is frozen in the, yes, arctic ocean. >> reporter: was it ever over land? >> it was, yeah. >> reporter: and it was shot down within the last hour, when did the u.s. first get intelligence that it existed? >> the knowledge about the balloon in the track first came to our attention last evening. >> reporter: what time thereabouts? >> i don't have an exact time on the clock for you. it was last evening. >> reporter: have you ruled out or you have not determined it was surveillance in nature? >> we haven't ruled anything in or out. that's why we're calling this an object. >> reporter: you just called it a balloon. you misspoke there? >> yes. i'm sorry. >> reporter: you can't say it's a balloon either. >> you guys have balloon on the

brain. clarify, i'm not classifying it as a balloon right now. it's an object. we are trying to learn more from it, that it landed on water that is frozen could help us assist, make it easier for us to try to recover some of the debris, u.s. northern command is examining what the possibilities for that are. >> reporter: finally, you said you have no knowledge of any outreach to the chinese yet from the administration. are there plans to reach out and ask? >> i know of no plans to reach out to the chinese on this. i want to stress again. we don't know what entity owns this object. there's no indication that it is from a nation or institution or individual. we just don't know. >> reporter: foreign entity, though, right? >> we don't know who owns this object. >> reporter: are you tracking any other similar objects at this time is this. >> i'm not aware of any other tracks. >> reporter: and also, i know that you said that this is due to a civilian aircraft threat,

but why not wait until it's over warmer water where you could more easily recover. >> it wasn't headed over warmer weather, it was headed over the arctic. it's not very warm. >> thank you, karine and thank you, admiral. one question on a similar incident and a separate subject, if i may. given how little was known about this object at the time that our forces shot it down, is it safe to say that when the president ordered that it be shot down he did not know whether it was a manned or unmanned object? >> we were able to get some fighter aircraft up and around it before the order to shoot it down, and the pilot's assessment was that this was not manned. >> reporter: on a different subject, after the state of the union address, minutes after he delivered the state of the union

address, president biden encountered in the hauls of the capitol, brittney, the wife of bridge malconis who remains imprisoned in japan. the president told her we're going to get this done. i wonder if you can tell us if the conversation with the japanese prime minister last months and if you can flush out the president's promise to mrs. alconis. i know you don't like to say a whole lot about these efforts. what can you tell us about what's being done? >> i would go back to what i said last time, james. the president is well aware of this case. and he's well aware of what the family is going through. he's also well aware of concerns by the japanese government with respect to their judicial system. and he's got the team working on this. i'm not going to disclose personal conversations that the president had either with mrs. alconis or with prime minister

kishida. he's well aware of it, tracking it. >> reporter: admiral, over here. two questions. one on what was described, and one on ukraine. on the incident that happened in the past hour, i wanted to know, is there any line of communication that you can describe that has been ongoing over the course of the past two weeks on the diplomatic side of things? i know the defense secretary says his call to his counter part was not returned from china. on the diplomatic side of things, are there that i know -- are there lines of communication between the u.s. and china? >> of course. we have diplomatic discussions routinely with beijing, so of course the diplomatic channels remain open. sadly the military ones do not appear to be open right now. secretary austin made a faith effort to reach out to his

counter part and was rebuffed and that's unfortunate. particularly when at times like this, you want to keep as open as you can the lines of communication. the president is committed to that. >> on ukraine, president zelenskyy was in ukraine earlier this week and received a promise they would train ukrainian pilots on nato's standard jet fighters. can you tell me if you think that's a go ahead idea, if it's something the u.s. is considering in terms of training ukrainian pilots on nato airlines as well. >> if they're going to get western aircraft, they're going to need to be trained on it. that would be up to the nations that may be willing to provide aircraft. i've said it before. probably tired of hearing me say it. these are all sovereign decisions, and if a nato nation or even a non-nato nation wants

to provide capabilities like fighter aircraft to ukraine, that's certainly their decision to make. and one would assume that if you're going to introduce a system into a military that they have no experience with that there's going to have to be some training that goes along with that. we're doing it right now. fort sill, oklahoma, we've got ukrainian soldiers learning how to use a patriot battery, and outside of ukraine, we're helping train them on combined arms maneuver, so it's not unusual to do that. if an advanced capability is provided, but that's going to be a national decision. >> reporter: thank you, admiral. thank you, karine. isn't there a concern that the object and balloon were both discovered when they're already flying over u.s. airspace? shouldn't they be detected before they enter the u.s.? >> i think we're going to continue to learn a lot about how these things are or can be detected in a better way.

you heard the north com demander talk about certain gaps he felt he had in his domain awareness. from this incident last week, we'll learn about the capabilities of the surveillance asset. we also expect to learn more about our own processes and our own systems for detection and tracking. i don't want to get into exactly how this one was detected, but i can assure you that we're going to continue to try to improve our own knowledge base with respect to these systems. >> reporter: on the object, can you say anything about the proximity of it and its flight path to the oil fields near peru bay, and was there any threat at all at any point to that equipment in that region of alaska? >> i would refer you to the pentagon for more detail about the track. again, this happened in the last

hour, i don't know what the proximity was to the oil fields. we don't know what this object was. we don't know -- it would be difficult to point to a threat or a specific concern when we don't understand what this object was doing. >> reporter: one more question, on a completely different topic, the russians said they're going to cut oil off now, what is the u.s. response to that? and will you reach out to opec to ask them to compensation the difference so that the price of oil doesn't escalate at a time when you're just starting to see inflation -- >> once again, mr. putin is willing to weaponize energy, and this move, if it proves to be true, it doesn't come as a big surprise. as a reaction to the price gap, and if just shows you the lengths which he's willing to use resources like energy,

again, as a weapon. what the united states will do, have done, continue to do is work with allies and partners to make sure we can better balance supply and demand, and try to meet that need. it's important, we still believe, that mr. putin not be allowed to profiteer in an inappropriate way off the oil he puts on the market so he can then fund his military in the field. i don't have any diplomatic outreach to speak to today. we're going to continue to talk to allies and partners. opec falls in that category. i don't have any specific conversations to talk about. >> reporter: thank you, karine, thank you, john. i have two questions. china is claiming ownership of the, and china said they will take deliberate actions. when you said the balloon back to china -- >> there are no plans to send the debris that we are recovering back to china.

we're going to pull it up off the bottom of the ocean, and we're going to learn more about this capability. >> reporter: iran is building a drone factory in russia, and north korea is receiving military drones from russia. how do you view arms cooperation between north korea, iran and russia? >> i can't confirm those specific reports, but i was up here not long ago talking about the burgeoning defense relationship between iran and russia, which is not only not good for the people of ukraine, it's not good for the people of the middle east. because it will flow both ways, and russian capabilities could end up in iranian hands. and i would say the same about north korea. we know, i got up here and showed you pictures. we know that they're providing ammunition to russia artillery, ammunition specifically, and again, that's not only not good for the people of ukraine, it's

not good for the korean peninsula, that russia and north korea could be again developing a deeper relationship. >> reporter: i'm sticking more on the -- you said it was discovered last night, was it flying consistently at an altitude of roughly 40,000 feet that entire time? >> roughly. >> reporter: were there sightings by airmen? >> no. >> reporter: can you tell us when the president gave the order to shoot? >> gave the order to shoot it down this morning. >> reporter: again, to keep following up on the same topic, the speed with which you guys, can with which the president apparently decided to shoot it down, having discovered the intelligence, by the morning, saying shoot it down, was there something more specific about the threat than generally being in the airspace at which the

height at which -- >> the predominant reason driving the president's decision was the safety of flight issue. >> reporter: that's a really big area. it's not all that many planes. it's not like it was in the middle of the northeast corridor or something. you guys could have said, hey, airplanes, like steer clear of this area until we know better what this thing is because we're, you know what i mean, in other words, was there some reason why -- >> the president wasn't willing to take that kind of a risk in time. because this did not appear to be self-maneuvering, at the mercy of prevailing winds, it was much less predictable, and so the president just wasn't willing to take that risk. >> reporter: thank you. you mentioned there were fighter aircraft that were able to determine it likely was not manned.

were those fighter aircraft able to determine anything else about it up close that they wouldn't be able to find out otherwise? >> they worked hard to get as much information as they could about this object. given its size, the speed at which they were flying, it was difficult for the pilots to glean a whole lot of information, not like we were able to glean off the balloon, and not the other balloon, the balloon. thank you, michael. and we also have, you know, several days to track that. so there was a limit to how much they could -- also it was detected at night, and so the first engagement by fighter aircraft late last night was, again, difficult for them, you know, it was a small object, and these are fighter aircraft flying at pretty high speed, and the ability to glean a lot of information was limited which is

why they did another flight earlier this morning to see if we could get more, the speed, the conditions up there, made it a little bit more difficult. there were at least two i know of. at least two. last night, tried to glean as much information as they could about what it was. and then another flight today, and that flight ended up in a shoot down. >> one more question. >> i think we're running out of time. >> reporter: from the white house podium, do you have a message for whoever is responsible for this aircraft or anyone who may have similar aircraft about what the white house was doing. >> rather than sending some sort of message this that way, i

would just tell you that we're going to remain vigilant about our airspace. we're going to remain vigilant about the skies over the united states, and as i said earlier, the president takes his obligations to protect our national security interests, and the safety and security of the american people is paramount. and he's always going to make -- he's always going to decide and act in a way that is commensurate with that duty. that's the real take away here. >> did the u.s. ask brazil to block iranian warships from docking in rio, and if so, why? >> we did not ask the brazilians to block that. those ships are sanctioned. ships, specifically, and we don't want to see them dock anywhere in this hemisphere. we have been very clear about that. there was no specific ask made

of brazil. that was a sovereign decision president lula has to make. >> reporter: i wanted to follow up on a question i asked in september. in light of the chinese spy balloon incident does this administration consider chinese land purchases near u.s. military bases a national security threat? >> we are always concerned about potential foreign collection near or around our military sites, and you're right, last week is a good example of that. we take that seriously, whether that's terrestrial related or whether it's from the air. and i think i'll just leave it at that. >> reporter: would you work with congress to put in place legislation to prevent that -- >> we are always willing to work with congress to address our national security interests and threats as best we can. >> reporter: real quick, is there a time line for recovery of this ?