>> thing can help you give the best care. get pumpkin pet insurance at. pumpkin care. >> good day to you. noon eastern, 9 a.m. pacific. i'm jose diaz balart. that critical meeting between president trump and president zelensky of ukraine is currently underway at

the white house. we're going to show you comments that both of them have been having. and we'll, of course, be hearing more about the minerals deal. the leaders are expected to sign today. zelenskyy and european leaders have failed so far this week to get the president to commit to security guarantees for ukraine against russia's ongoing attacks. speaking in the oval office just moments ago, zelensky apparently called russian leader putin a terrorist. today's meeting comes after the president of the united states called zelensky a dictator last week, while refusing to do so with vladimir putin, something he seemed to walk back yesterday. >> insisting that mr. zelensky is a dictator. >> did i say that? i can't believe i said that. next question. >> the us and russia have excluded ukraine from their talks on a potential peace deal. as of right now, president putin said yesterday that he is optimistic about the new

administration. this after president trump praised russia's leader as, quote, very smart and cunning. but europe is trying to appeal to president trump. british prime minister starmer yesterday handed the president a letter from king charles with an invitation to visit. but the u.k. leader also drew a red line on russia and ukraine. it can't be peace that rewards the aggressor. history must be on the side of the peacemaker, not the invader. joining us now, nbc news white house correspondent aaron gilchrist, nbc news chief foreign correspondent richard engel, who has frequently reported from ukraine, and new york times chief white house correspondent peter baker, who chronicled the rise of putin as a reporter living in moscow. so, aaron, what are the two leaders saying so far in this oval office meeting? >> well, they just to give your viewers sort of an idea of how this all works. there are cameras that are allowed into the oval office. they're not always allowed to transmit live. and so right now, president trump and president zelensky are taking questions from the press

corps that has gathered in the room there with them. and we will get that video back out. once they put press out of the room, we'll get that video and you'll start to see the tape turn around. then we can tell you, though, that so far we've heard president trump say that the two leaders will sign this rare earth minerals agreement this afternoon after before the press conference that they're scheduled to have at 1:00 this afternoon. we also understand that zelensky said at the beginning of the comments there that he wants to talk to the us about what the us is willing to do in ukraine. obviously, we have reported that this minerals deal is seen by the white house, by the trump administration as an economic partnership that the two countries are developing for ukraine. they want some security guarantees to come along with the deal that the economic deal that results from this shared responsibility over these minerals in ukraine. and you're right, president zelensky did

also call vladimir putin a terrorist in the comments that he made at the beginning of his remarks here, he said that together we can stop him saying that together, meaning ukraine, the us and european allies who we know have been backing ukraine for three years now and who have indicated that they will continue to do that in a robust way, more so, perhaps in some cases than they have in the past. and so we're still monitoring, as these notes come out of the meeting that's happening in the oval office right now. >> richard, what. >> a tight. wire act. president zelensky is having to walk, right? i mean, the president of the united states sends a high ranking official to kyiv with a document which is apparently that joint venture that the president of the united states is so keen on. zelensky says no, can't do that. but now he's at the white house where it's expected. and in that conversation that the president

of ukraine and the president of the united states is having are having at the at the oval office, president trump apparently just said that they would be signing that in a press conference after lunch. these are some of the pictures that we're seeing. still pictures from that meeting that is continuing at this hour. richard, what can zelensky do here when it seems as though his options are so few? >> well, he's trying to. >> play a very. >> weak hand as. >> well as he possibly can. let's not forget zelensky wanted. a economic agreement with president trump. >> this was initially his idea. >> it got. >> away from. >> him somewhat. >> but it was initially. >> zelensky's idea. it was part of his so-called peace plan, and he always wanted this opportunity to take the peace plan. >> to president. >> trump and president zelensky. >> even just a. >> few. >> days ago, i just. left ukraine. >> he gave a. >> long statement. >> and said, i'm a tough

negotiator. he was sort of trying. >> to speak. >> tough, trump's language. i want to be in the room. i can. >> make serious deals, too. >> i want. >> to get there. >> so it. >> was. >> initially zelensky's idea. >> to bring the us. >> and ukraine. >> closer together. >> through an economic. >> partnership. >> which he. >> hoped would. >> also include. >> security guarantees and would incentivize the united states. >> to. >> stay engaged with ukraine in the long term. what shocked zelensky. and shocked many ukrainians was the fact that president trump seemed to like this deal and then. sent a high level delegation. to effectively strong arm ukraine into signing it and people in zelensky's office. senior officials told me that they were given one hour to sign it, that it was non-negotiable. they were told when zelensky didn't sign it because. >> he was. >> shocked by. >> the sticker price, that he was told that president trump would be angry because zelenskyy wanted a deal. >> but what. >> he. >> got in return was president trump saying, okay, put in a half $1.

>> trillion. >> into a fund that the united states controls, and we're not going to give you any explicit promises about protection. so ukrainians were were shocked. what are we. >> going. >> to have. >> to. >> give land. to russia, which is an occupier, and we're going to have to commit our entire economic future to the ukraine, to the united states, and give all our money to trump effectively. and he took that position. he said, no, he was beaten up by president trump from the from. >> the. >> white house. >> he was. >> called a. >> dictator, although. >> president trump says he. doesn't remember it. but he kept saying, jose, i just want to get in that room. i think we can negotiate a better deal, and maybe he's going to get a better deal, because the deal does seem to be getting more and more favorable to ukraine as time passes. they've apparently dropped that half trillion dollar price tag they're talking about now, a jointly managed fund between ukraine and the united states. so he's hoping to get the best deal that he possibly can, but he still wants some sort of security

guarantees, and he's going to have a lot of explaining to do to his people back home. people in ukraine who are terrified by all of this. they thought suddenly they were being abandoned. people at the. front line, the troops on the front line were feeling demoralized that they were being blackmailed by their biggest ally. and now they're worried. or now they're hoping. they're all still worried, but they're hoping if we just sign this deal and it's not too bad, we keep the united states in our corner and get security guarantees through business with the us and through security guarantees as security guarantees through europe. that's what he's thinking. that's what he's hoping. >> so, peter, thinking of what the russians are seeing and what they're hoping they could get out of a future discussion with the united states and russia. i mean, peter, the fact that this last series of conversations between the united states and russia weren't carried out in, in western europe. the first one was in saudi arabia. yes. the second one was in turkey. but

but it's almost as though what is putin expecting hoping to get out of this going forward? >> well, it's a good question actually. look, putin. first of all, has already gotten the. >> president, united states to repeat a lot of his own positions, his own. >> view of the. war by. >> saying that. >> ukraine started. it by blaming the invasion. >> that russia mounted in. >> 2022 on ukraine, in fact, letting putin out of the sorry, out of diplomatic. isolation chamber. >> that the west has sought to put him in in these last. >> three years. >> he's already gotten a lot out of this, even without the forma. >> deal. >> how much he actually wants to have a deal. is an open question at this point. there's a lot of arguments that. >> russia doesn't need a deal. >> doesn't necessarily. >> want a. >> deal, but. >> the terms. >> that trump has floated, that trump's people have floated have been very favorable to russia. they get to keep the land that they have seized. in in. >> violation of international. >> law by force. >> ukraine does. >> not get into nato. ukraine

does not get security guarantees. >> from the. >> united states. presumably. >> sanctions come off. >> of russia. >> there's all. kinds of. >> things in this for russia as it seemed to be playing out. we don't know the details yet. we'll see how that plays out. and trump has not told us what, if any, concessions he wants russia to make when he talks about the opportunities. >> the economic. >> opportunities to refashion the relationship with russia, if it. >> was going to be, you know, a new partner. >> in a way. >> it never. >> really has been before. economically. >> we haven't. >> heard from trump anything about what russia would have to give up other than stop invading its neighboring country. >> yeah. and, you know, and, richard, we're just getting information from our folks that are inside the oval office as that back and forth with the press continues at this moment that the president, united states, just just a few minutes ago, said that he had spoken with vladimir putin just a couple of days ago about this and that this according to president of united states, putin wants to make a deal on

this. and richard, back to, you know, what peter was telling us about putin and how he sees this, what he expects. what do you think that the experience that putin has had versus the united states in the past? and i'm not getting into santayana's quote, that he who ignores the past is condemned to relive it. but when you see how the united states reacted 2014, when you see what the united states did or more importantly, did not do, when syria using, you know, russia's assistance carried out this horrendous massacres. what do you think, richard? the russians are expecting going forward? >> well, vladimir putin. is in a very strong position right now. he favored president trump. he's always expressed admiration to president trump. and president trump has expressed admiration about him. this is something

that i mean, compared to where we were a year ago or two years ago, the united states was firmly behind ukraine, the united states, president biden was committing to supporting ukraine for as long as it takes. and towards the last couple of months of his administration, fearing that president trump would cut off ukraine, the united states started expediting its shipments of weapons and money. it wanted to give the ukrainians as much support as possible before donald trump came to the office. if donald trump was elected president, and lo and behold, he won. he won by a large majority. and the aid wasn't immediately cut off. instead, the ukrainians were given a bill. grants that had been given to ukraine were suddenly turned into loans and the price was very clear. give us your rare earth minerals or use your rare earth minerals. the us says they won't take direct possession of them, but use your rare earth minerals and

other natural resources as collateral to put money into a fund that apparently now is ukraine and the united states will jointly manage, and that will tie the us and ukraine into a business arrangement. this was a surprise for many ukrainians, it was not a surprise for president zelensky who wanted a partnership. but i think the amount was was certainly a surprise and difference between the for russia, how russia is negotiating and how ukraine is negotiating is for russia. everything that it gains is now territory that it didn't have. russia expanded, it captured 20% of ukrainian territory. so in a sense, it's trying to negotiate for how much of that it can keep. and can it participate, rejoin the rest of the international community, unleash its economy, improve relations with the united states. and ukrainians would say, prepare for the next invasion, whereas

ukrainians are trying to act defensively, they're trying to determine how much of their territory they have to lose and what kind of security guarantees they can receive from president trump or from the europeans. that will prevent vladimir putin from coming back and taking another bite of ukraine. so their perspectives are completely different. putin, how much can i keep zelensky? how much do i have to lose? and who's going to provide guarantees to, to, to for ukraine's security. and he sort of sees this deal, i think, as a necessary evil. we'll do this agreement with trump because it's the only way he's going to keep supporting ukraine. but they fundamentally don't agree on one thing. president trump has said time and time again that he believes putin wants to make a deal and is ready for a deal, and is looking beyond this current war. and ukrainians absolutely do not believe that because of their past, they look toward the holodomor, the forced starvation carried out by

stalin. they look to the attack of takeover of crimea. they look to the ukraine's invasion in 2014, taking the donbas. now they look to the full scale invasion and they wonder what's the next phase coming. and it's a reasonable assumption when vladimir putin says ukraine isn't isn't a country, it shouldn't exist. >> yeah. i mean, and peter, apparently president zelensky just a minute ago in that oval office back and forth, just said putin began this war. he has to pay. the question i had for you, peter, is what price has putin paid in these last three plus years, tens of thousands of his soldiers have lost their lives. untold tens of thousands have been severely injured. he has the support of north korea. right. there's some troops there. the cuban dictatorship has been supporting it. iran has been supporting with the drones. but has he suffered at all?

>> well, i don't know that vladimir putin has suffered. certainly russia has suffered, right. >> not nowhere near. >> to the extent that ukraine has. but russia was a country that had. >> begun to. >> emerge from. >> its long. >> you know, history of isolation, totalitarianism and to be part of the international community that ended three years ago. and so for russians who hoped for better times for their country, this has been a terrible deal. they have lost so many of their country people. a lot of them have been killed in the war. a lot. of them have left the country. a lot of them have given up on the idea that russia could be part of the international community, and that it would be, you know, a normal country. that's what they always talked about. we want to be a normal country. well, they're not a normal country. they're isolated from at least the west. so has that been a cost to putin? probably not. he doesn't see it that way. and i think what richard said, by the way, at the end there is really important to remember. remember that, you know, they like to say this is about nato membership or it's about, you know, the

failure of ukrainians to give up concessions. no, i mean, remember vladimir putin wrote in july of 2021, long treatise in which he said, ukraine is not a country, it's not an independent nation. it doesn't deserve to exist as an independent nation. if you're adversary is saying you don't get to exist as an independent nation, that's not about making some sort of a deal. that's actually an existential threat. and it's worth remembering that when president trump says, oh, i think putin will keep his word that he hasn't yet. in 1994, russia signed an agreement guaranteeing ukraine's sovereignty and independence and territorial integrity. it violated that agreement by this invasion and the invasion. in 2014, it made two deals in minsk for cease fires. it violated those agreements. so there's every reason for ukraine to be distrustful of any deal that vladimir putin signs. >> yeah. and i mean, let's not forget that in all of this, there have been new billionaires made within russia and without

on black market sales of natural gas and oil. but richard engel and peter baker, if you would stay with us, we're of course, continuing to monitor this oval office meeting that continues as of right now. but joining me now is retired army lieutenant colonel alexander vindman, who served as the director of european affairs for the national security council in trump's first administration. he was fired after testifying at donald trump's impeachment hearing. he is the author of the new book, the folly of realism how the west deceived itself about russia and betrayed ukraine. thank you very much for being with us, alexander, the president just said moments ago in the oval office, i'm not aligned with putin. i'm aligned with the us and the good of the world. how do you see things going so far right now? >> clearly the subtitle couldn't be more accurate, but i should have used the present tense or future tense. it continues to deceive itself about russia and continues to betray ukraine. we

seem to be repeating the same mistakes over. >> and. >> over the russians do. >> to. >> to their own detriment. >> i mean, they've been fighting to dominate this. >> portion of. >> the world. >> for centuries. ukraine spun. >> off. >> about 30 plus years. >> ago. >> and in a moment. >> of russian weakness and. >> in. >> a moment of strength. >> russia has attempted. to attempted to recapture it, not recognizing that ukraine will continue to fight for its sovereignty and independence. ukraine has massive agency. the europeans have massive agency. they will not. >> willingly or easily. >> allow russia to. score a win here, because they understand that this is destabilizing and inspires russia to continue to engage. >> in military aggression. >> and the us is also engaging in a lot of, you know, foolhardy repetition of mistakes, catering to russia. >> believing that. >> russia is. >> willing. >> to make. >> a deal. >> believing that russia is. >> willing to. >> forsake empire. >> including control over this most important. >> portion of. >> the former. >> empire of russia and the soviet union, with nothing to

show for it, nothing to. demonstrate that it actually will be a fair actor. peter baker mentioned all those different times that russia has lied about its security or its playing a. >> you. >> know, a benign actor in its backyard. and donald trump, who's had four years of experience with putin as president during a period in which russia was waging war against ukraine, seems to have learned nothing from this, this, this current arrangement, this meeting between zelensky and trump is a good thing. frankly, i think it's anytime you put a somebody like a european leader or zelensky in front of trump, they're going to chip away at his in at least briefly, because there always seems to be reversal at his perceptions that, you know, he should be siding with putin instead of with our, our teammates, the europeans and ukraine. so this and this deal to entice the us for a mutual benefit, economic investment is also a good thing. it is not a loss. ukraine

doesn't have as weak a hand as i think a lot of folks understand, mainly because they're the ones that are fighting on the ground. they don't want the us to depart, they don't want the us to alleviate the sanctions on russia. but they are not. they will continue to fight despite whatever actions the us takes, until they make their own decision that they can't do that any longer. and with the europeans in their corner, it's not that easy. >> you know, colonel, i was just speaking to a member of the parliament of ukraine just in the last hour. and one of the things she was really, you know, insistent on is that the only positive, true, permanent solution to ukraine's sovereignty going forward is if ukraine is part of nato. i'm just wondering, is that do you think, colonel? i mean, it's that's clearly one of the issues that russia has been talking about. and, you know, putin has been saying forever that under no circumstances should or could ukraine ever be a part of nato.

but barring that, what is the possible strengthening of the future of ukraine. >> long term, there are no real other solutions besides security guarantees and nato. but in the short term, if you understand the facts on the ground that russia is not as strong as it portrays itself to be, it's got its chest puffed up. it's trying to show that it's winning. it's making tiny gains at an enormous cost. it does not have the staying power to go on indefinitely. if the us maintains its sanctions, if the ukrainians continue to enjoy the support that they're getting from both the us and the european union and nato, under those conditions, russia really doesn't have the staying power to go on that much longer. it's losing enormous amounts of troops. it's digging into soviet stockpiles, really. it's about making sure that the us doesn't make a hard break. it did so diplomatically by siding with

putin earlier this week at the un. it was a disgusting turn of events, but it hasn't on the security assistance side, and it hasn't alleviated the pain on russia with regards to sanctions. as long as trump stays on sides for some time longer, the europeans continue to ramp up support. i think this is a long term a losing battle for russia, and they'll have to sue for peace. the bottom line for me is i know this this book that i wrote is about not repeating the same mistakes of the past, not succumbing to these these sweetheart deals, these dangles, these promises that, you know, putin has been throwing in front of presidents on both sides, democrat and republican, and really not succumbing to fears that when we get to this phase, it will happen, when putin starts to do some nuclear saber saber rattling, some threatening, that we hold our ground and that we defend our interests, and we through those means, we make sure that the us is more secure, that we maintain our partnerships with the europeans, that are the bedrock of our prosperity. that's the that's

the reason i wrote this book, and that's why i think it's an important conversation to have now, today. >> yeah, but but, colonel, isn't it? there are those who say it's a little bit of folly to underestimate the russian regime's ability to remain in power. you know, whereas it's true that sanctions have have have affected a large parts of the economy of russia. there are newly minted billionaires that are making hundreds of millions of dollars a year getting natural resources, oil and gas out of russia, selling it in the world, black market, making billions of dollars. a lot of that money is going into to the russian regime. do you not see the possibility that maybe putin doesn't have the pressures that people in western europe or here in the united states would have?

>> he absolutely does have the pressures. it's not something that threatens his regime. there is no indicator. and i've been saying this for years, since the beginning. there's no indicator that, you know, he's his regime itself is at the tipping point. but there is a different calculus about whether it's still makes sense for russia to engage in this war. and that becomes much, much more complex. yes, there are new billionaires. yes, there have been folks that have profited off this war, but the tolerance that the russian people have for pain, as high as it is, is not inexhaustible. they are losing many, too many people there. the russians don't necessarily have the staying power, even though they have a much larger population than ukraine, to continue to draw tens of thousands of troops on a monthly basis, let alone a potential mass mobilization to really achieve any military breakthroughs. and the economic impacts are also the russian economy is it looks in certain regards like it's teetering. that is because inflation is sky high. that is because they don't have any capital that they can,

that there's only so much time that or so much resources that you can apply for war when you have other obligations. so it is much, much closer. there's a lot of hubris from the us and russia, and i think the ukrainians have a lot of agency. >> alexander vindman, i very much appreciate your perspective. i thank you very much for being with us today. >> thank you. >> and we're going to go back to the white house and bring you the video, this oval office conversation between the president of the united states, the president of ukraine. there's also the vice president of the united states is in there. officials left and right. and they're still having a conversation that the press is actually a part of. we're going to show you that conversation as soon as we are able to turn it around. but first, a reality check on the legal battle facing elon musk and the president's doge operation in washington. plus, how these massive cuts to the federal workforce are

impacting communities across the country. we're back in just country. we're back in just minutes. you're watching msnbc. still living with odors? get back in there and freshen instantly with febreze air mist. febreze's fine mist floats longer in the air to fight even your toughest odors. so long stinky smells and hello amazing freshness. febreze air mist. (vo) what happens when one of the most famous dunkers of all time goes to the greatest lobsterfest of all time? (blake griffin) i make red lobster famous. (vo) no blake, dunking happens. (blake griffin) yeah, you're right. (vo) create your own lobster lover's dream with 2 or 3 choices on one plate. at red lobster. now there's tears. it works differently than drops. blink neutral tears is a once daily supplement. >> clinically proven to hydrate. >> from within, helping. >> your eyes produce more of

their own. >> tears. >> to promote. >> lasting, continuous. >> relief. >> you'll feel. day after day. try blink neutral tears a different way to. >> support dry eyes. >> blink tears. >> this is the emirates premium >> this is the emirates premium economy seat. i. e upset stomach iberogast indigestion iberogast bloating iberogast thanks to a unique combination of herbs, iberogast helps relieve six digestive symptoms to help you feel better. six digestive symptoms. the power of nature. iberogast. news has just confirmed a second round of emails asking federal workers to justify their jobs could be coming to employee inboxes as early as tomorrow. with an effort to make this a

weekly thing. the washington post adds, this second round of emails asking for five accomplishments will be addressed from agency hr reps, who typically have more direct authority over their staff than the office of personnel management. it comes as overnight, a federal judge ruled the opm does not have any authority whatsoever under any statute in the history of the universe. that's a quote to hire and fire employees within another agency. the suit involves the memo calling for agencies to fire all probationary employees, like some of the 600 staffers that were just fired at noaa, which includes the national weather service. joining me now are two law professors, former u.s. attorney barbara mcquade and washington post contributing columnist natasha. natasha has also counseled the then treasury secretary, janet yellen. so, barb, this order says the opm cannot directly lay off federal employees, however individual agencies can. what's the difference there?

>> well, the office. >> of. >> personnel management. >> is a management organization. >> they are not the bosses of these individuals. and so when they directed the. termination of these employees, they lacked authority to do that. only the agencies themselves have the authority to do that. now, maybe it is ultimately a distinction without a difference. if they suggest to the agencies that they terminate these employees and then the agencies. themselves do this, perhaps that is lawful. you know, jose, this reminds me an awful lot of donald trump's first travel ban. remember when there was chaos at the borders? you know, five days after he had taken office, he issued this thing that said travelers from certain countries could not come into the united states. and it was an absolute mess. and it took him three tries until he was able to achieve what he wanted to through a lawful order. it strikes me as something very similar. ultimately, if he wants to fire probationary employees at the in the federal government, he probably can do that. but it is going to take a few rounds of figuring it out,

how to do it at the right level before he can be successful in executing this plan. >> and natasha, for the first time ever, a doj employee is being ordered to provide written discovery and will be deposed. it's in a lawsuit over attempted access to sensitive information labor department systems. how significant is this step toward those transparency? >> yeah. >> i mean. >> big picture kind of. >> what is. >> striking about what's. >> happening right now. >> is. >> you. have doge. >> and you. >> have elon. >> musk as kind. >> of. >> this unelected. >> and basically unchecked. >> set. >> of powers in the. >> federal government. >> that are reshaping. >> the government in such. meaningful ways. >> it's around data access. >> it's around, as. >> barb was talking about. >> these. >> massive. >> sweeping changes. >> to. >> who works. >> in the. >> federal government. it's around. >> whether or. >> not the federal government is. >> going to appropriate dollars. >> that congress. >> says should go to particular. >> people or to. >> particular countries. >> and that all. >> of that. >> is just an. >> incredibly difficult. challenge for. the challenge. is not. just whether. >> the government can do.

>> this and whether the executive can do this. as robert points. >> out, it's how they're doing. >> it. >> and how they're going. >> about this. >> and you've. >> seen 35. >> plus legal challenges across. >> the country. i suspect. >> many more are. >> to come. >> yeah. i mean, this whole issue of the unelected powers. i mean, elon musk is put in and chosen by the president of the united states, and those efforts are in his name. right. i mean, but i know that you you worked in the treasury department. you say there there's no legitimate reason those should access federal payment systems if the goal is to cut waste, fraud and abuse. why not? >> i mean. >> you've. >> heard this. >> from musk and from doge that we. need access to the. pipes of government. these data. >> systems that. >> contain incredibly sensitive information, people's social security numbers, the irs, it's people's. >> historical tax. >> returns and all of the information about. >> their interactions. >> with. >> the agency. >> and the purported claim is that they're trying to get rid of waste, fraud and abuse in government. totally reasonable

to be concerned about waste, fraud and abuse. it's just this is not where you go. if that is your concern. and giving political actors not just about the legality of this, the sort of privacy concerns associated with giving political. actors this incredibly sensitive information about each and every american, there is real risk to the way that the federal government works and real impacts that are going to happen to households and people when, for example, tax refunds are delayed because of a particular mistake and a particular set of computer code that someone who had no business being in it because they're not trained and don't have the relevant experience, doesn't understand, or social security payments that don't make their way to households because of those sorts of issues. >> how is it that i guess, you know, how do you carry out a restructuring of the federal system, if not by going in and finding out where there is

possible abuse, fraud or just misuse of funds? i mean, when was the last time that we all heard about programs, tens of millions of dollars going to programs that maybe, just maybe would not be the priority of this administration or any other? in other words, if nothing has been done in the past, why not focus on how things are being done now, making sure that there is no trampling of individual rights? >> so i am very sympathetic for the to the idea that there needs to be government reform. i'm super sympathetic to the idea that we need to do more to combat waste, fraud and abuse. the problem and the treasury payment system is a really good example of this, and doj's attempt to access that system is a really good example. that payment system at treasury, i worked on payments related

issues in the department for two years. i was nowhere near this data system. the reason is that this data system and this infrastructure is incredibly mechanical. it is literally like agencies have told the treasury and the bureau of fiscal service dollars need to get out to these individuals, to these government contractors. and essentially, the bureau of fiscal service is the one cutting the checks. there is no it's not legal, nor is it proper for the bureau of fiscal service to be the one. nor do they have the information to try to say, oh, am i making the right payments? that is an agency question. and so if you want to go after and try to pursue the ways in which some of these programs might be structured such that people are getting access to funds, that they shouldn't be, the relevant thing to do is to be doing that exercise at the agency level. and that's not what's happening with doge. what they're doing is they're decimating agencies, so they're making it harder to identify cases of fraud. and

what they're doing is trying to tell the bureau of fiscal service, don't issue those payments, which is something they frankly have no legal authority to be doing. >> and barbara, talking about legal authority and the relevance of what do you think the relevance are? the courts are in this particular discussion, when it really is the congress and the executive and the differences in responsibilities they each have. >> yeah, such a good point. congress has the power of the purse. congress has the power to say, we want to spend money on this thing. and then the president's job is to take care that the laws be faithfully executed by spending the money as described. there's even an anti impoundment clause in the constitution that says the president doesn't get to hold all the money. the president is supposed to faithfully distribute the money as congress has deemed fit. but you ask about the rules of the court, and that is if the president is not doing his job to faithfully spend the money the way congress has said he should, then it's the role of the courts to step

in. and that's what we're seeing. >> barbara mcquade. natasha, thank you both so very much. really appreciate your time and our conversation. by the way, we're being told that the tape of the president of the united states, the president of ukraine, as well as the vice president of the united states, is going to be feeding now. this is the meeting that went on, right just until a couple of seconds ago in the oval office. we're told that that is just about 30s from having access to that. we will, of course, show that to you. aaron gilchrist is, of course, standing by, as he has been all morning with us. aaron, this meeting that apparently, from what we're told, became a little bit contentious or at least heated. here it is. >> what's your. >> message for them? >> well, if i didn't alignmyseld

never have a deal. you want me to say really terrible things about putin and then say, hi, vladimir. how are we doing on the deal? it doesn't work that way. i'm not aligned with putin. i'm not aligned with anybody. i'm aligned with the united states of america and for the good of the world. i'm aligned with the world. and i want to get this thing over with. you see the hatred he's got for putin. it's very tough for me to make a deal with that kind of hate. he's got tremendous hatred, and i understand that. but i can tell you the other side isn't exactly in love with. you know him either. so it's not a question of alignment. i have to i'm aligned with the world. i want to get the things that i'm aligned with europe. i want to see if we can get this thing done. you want me to be tough? i could be tougher than any human being you've ever seen. i'd be so tough. but you're never going to get a deal that way. so that's the way it goes. all right, one more question, please. >> i will. >> respond to this. so look. >> for four years in the.

>> united. >> states of. >> america. >> we had a president. >> who stood up at. >> press conferences and. >> talked. >> tough about vladimir putin. and then. >> putin invaded. >> ukraine and. >> destroyed a. >> significant chunk. >> of the country. the path to. peace and the path. >> to. >> prosperity is. maybe engaging in diplomacy. >> we tried. >> the pathway of joe biden, of. >> thumping our chest. >> and pretending. >> that the president of the united states words mattered more than the president. >> of the united. >> states's actions. >> what makes. >> america a good country? is america engaging in diplomacy? that's what president trump is doing. >> can i ask you? >> sure. >> yeah, yeah. okay, so he occupied our. >> parts. >> big parts of ukraine, part of east and crimea. >> so he occupied it on 2014. so during a lot of years, i'm not speaking about just biden, but those time. was obama, then president obama, then president

trump, then president biden, now president trump. and god bless. now president trump will stop him. but during 2014, nobody. stopped him. he just occupied and took. he killed people. you know what the contact. 2015 2014. >> 2014 2014. >> yeah. >> so he was not here. >> yeah, but. >> exactly right. yes. but during 2014 till 2022, you know what the situation the same that people are been dying on the contact line. nobody stopped him. you know that we had conversations with him, a lot of conversations, my bilateral conversation. and we signed with him me like a new president in 2019, i signed with him the deal i signed with him. macron and merkel. we signed ceasefire, ceasefire. all of them told me that he will never go. we signed him. gas contract. gas contract. yes. but after that, he broken

the ceasefire. he killed our people and he didn't exchange prisoners. we signed the exchange of prisoners, but he didn't do it. what kind of diplomacy jd you are speaking about? what what what what do you mean? >> i'm talking about the. >> kind of diplomacy that's going to end. >> the destruction. >> of your country. yes. >> but. >> mr. president. >> mr. president, with respect, i think it's. >> disrespectful for you. >> to come into the oval. office and try to litigate this in front of the american media. >> right now. >> you. >> guys are going around. >> and forcing. >> conscripts to the front lines because you have manpower problems. you should be. thanking the president for trying to bring an end to this conflict. >> to ukraine, that you say what problems we have. >> i have been. >> to one. >> i have actually, i've. >> actually watched. >> and seen the stories. and i know what happens is you bring people, you bring them on a propaganda tour, mr. president, or do you disagree that you've had problems bringing people into your military? and do you think. >> that. it's respectful to. >> come to the oval office of the united states of america and

attack the administration that is trying to trying to prevent the destruction of your country? >> a lot. >> of questions. let's start from the beginning. first of all, during the war, everybody has problems, even you. but you have nice ocean and don't feel now, but you will feel it in the future. god bless you. god bless you. god bless you. >> you don't tell us what we're going to feel. we're trying to solve a problem. don't tell us what we're going to feel. >> i'm not telling. >> you because you're in no position to dictate that. >> remember. >> you're in no position to dictate what we're going to feel. we're going to feel very good. we're going to feel very good and very strong. >> you will feel influenced. >> you're right now not in a very good position. you've allowed yourself to be in a very bad position. and he's happened to be right about. >> from the very beginning of the war. >> you're not in a good position. you don't have the cards right now with us. you start having cards. cards right now you don't. you're playing cards, you're playing cards. you're gambling with the lives

of millions of people. you're gambling with world war three. you're gambling with world war three. and what you're doing is very disrespectful to the country, this country that's backed you far more than a lot of people said they should have. >> have you said. >> thank you once. >> this. entire meeting? >> no. in this entire meeting, have you said thank you? you went to pennsylvania and campaigned for the opposition in october, offer some words of appreciation for the united states of america and the president who's trying to save your country. >> please. >> you think. that if you will speak very loudly about the war, you. >> are not speaking loudly. he's not speaking loudly. your country is in big trouble. >> can i. >> wait a minute? no, no, you've done a lot of talking. your country is in big trouble. i know you're not winning. you're not winning this. you have a damn good chance of coming out, okay? because of. >> our president, we are staying in our country, staying strong. from the very beginning of the war, we've been alone, and we

are thankful. i said thanks. >> you haven't. >> been in the cabinet. you haven't been in this. >> we gave you through the stupid, $350 billion. you we gave you military equipment. you and your men are brave, but they had to use our military. if you didn't have our military equipment, if you didn't have our military equipment, this war would have been over in two weeks. >> in three days? i heard it from putin in three days. this is something maybe less in two weeks. of course. yes. >> it's going to be a very hard thing to do business like this, i tell you. >> you say thank you. >> i said. >> except that there. >> except the american people. >> accept that. >> there are disagreements and let's go litigate those disagreements rather than trying to fight it out in the american media. when you're wrong, we know that you're wrong. >> but you see, i think it's good for the american people to see what's going on. i think it's very important. that's why i kept this going so long. you have to be thankful you don't have the cards. you're buried there. your people are dying. i tell you, you're running low on

soldiers. >> listen. >> you're running low on soldiers. it would be a damn good thing. and then you. then you tell us. i don't want a cease fire. i don't want a cease fire. i want to go, and i want this. i. look, if you could get a cease fire right now, i tell you, you take it so the bullets stop flying and your men stop getting killed. >> of course we want to stop the war. >> but you're saying you don't want a cease. >> fire to you? >> i want a cease fire. >> guaranteed. >> because you'll get a cease fire faster than an agreement. >> our people about cease fire. what? they think. that wasn't meant for you. what? >> that wasn't with me. that was with a guy named biden who was not a smart person. that was your. that was with obama. >> it was your. >> excuse me? that was with obama. who gave you a sheetz and i gave you javelins. yes. i gave you the javelins to take out all those tanks. obama gave you sheets. in fact, the statement is obama gave sheets and trump gave javelins. you got to be more thankful because let me tell you, you don't have the cards with us. you have the

cards, but without us you don't have any cards. >> one more question, mr. >> vice president. >> i'm sorry. >> here. a tough deal to make because the attitudes have to change. >> what if. >> russia breaks ceasefire? what if russia. breaks peace talks? what do you do then? understand that. it's a heated. >> conversation, right? >> what are you saying? >> what? >> she's asking what if russia breaks the ceasefire? >> what if they. what, if anything? what if a bomb drops on your head right now? okay, what if they broke it? i don't know, they broke it with biden because biden didn't respect him. they didn't respect obama. they respect me. let me tell you, putin went through a hell of a lot with me. he went through a phony witch hunt where they used him and russia, russia, russia, russia. you ever hear of that deal? that was a phony. that was a phony. hunter biden, joe biden scam, hillary clinton, shifty adam schiff. it was a democrat scam. and he had to go through that. and he did

go through it. we didn't end up in a war. and he went through it. he was accused of all that stuff. he had nothing to do with it. it came out of hunter biden's bathroom. it came out of hunter biden's bedroom. it was disgusting. and then they said, oh, oh, the laptop from hell was made by russia. the 51 agents. the whole thing was a scam. and he had to put up with that. he was being accused of all that stuff. all i can say is this he might have broken deals with obama and bush, and he might have broken them with biden. he did. maybe. maybe he didn't. i don't know what happened, but he didn't break him with me. he wants to make a deal. i don't know if he can make a deal. the problem is, i've empowered you to be a tough guy, and i don't think you'd be a tough guy without the united states. and your people are very brave. but you're either going to make a deal or we're out. and if we're out, you'll fight it out. i don't think it's going to be

pretty, but you'll fight it out. but you don't have the cards. but once we sign that deal, you're in a much better position. but you're not acting at all thankful. and that's not a nice thing. i'll be honest. that's not a nice thing. all right. i think we've seen enough. what do you think this is? this is going to be great television. i will say that. all right. we'll see what we can do about putting it together. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> guys. >> let's go back, guys. come on, let's go. >> we'll see i don't know. >> all right guys. >> guys. >> come on please. >> hey. >> come on. >> guys. >> come. >> on. >> let's move. >> please, please. >> thank you. >> break down. >> thank you, thank you, thank you. >> yes. >> thank you. eric holder. >> the president of united

states, saying the president of the united states saying this will make for great television, is possibly one of the largest understatements that he has made. this was, as was as unusual of a conversation between the leader of the united states, vice president of the united states, and the leader of another country, the country of ukraine. that is. well, you saw the back and forth, and i'm told that this and we just saw about ten minutes of this, but i'm told that this conversation continued for another 20 minutes or so, more than those ten minutes that we just saw together for the first time. so what we're doing is because it was a pool situation that recorded that. they recorded the

entirety of the 30 minutes or so, we will get now from the pool, the entirety of that conversation, which continued to make history. here it is. >> and we've been working very hard, very close, and we've actually known each other for a long time. we've been dealing with each other for a long time and very well, and we had little negotiations spat, but that worked out great, i think, for both countries, i think for the world actually beyond both countries. and we have something that is a very fair deal, and we look forward to getting in and digging and digging and digging and working and getting some of the rare earth. but it means we're going to be inside. and it's a it's a big commitment from the united states. and we appreciate working with you very

much. and we will continue to do that. we have had some very good discussions with russia. i spoke with president putin, and we're going to try and bring this to a close. it's something that you want and that he wants. we have to negotiate a deal. but we've started the confines of a deal, and i think something can happen. the big thing is the number of soldiers, mostly at this point, but soldiers being killed, you're losing thousands of soldiers on both sides. we're losing a lot of soldiers, and we want to see it stop. and we want to see the money get put to different kinds of use, like rebuilding the rebuilding. and we're going to be working very hard. but we've had a lot of very good conversations. i will say, until we came along, the biden administration didn't speak to russia whatsoever. they didn't speak to anybody. they just allowed this to continue. and i will say that i will say in front of you, you've heard me say it a thousand times. if i

were president, this war would have never happened. we would have had a deal negotiated for you without having to go through what you have gone through. but you, your soldiers have been unbelievably brave. we've given them great equipment, but somebody has to use the equipment. they've been unbelievably brave, and we give them great credit. this was supposed to be over very quickly, and here we are three years later. so i give tremendous credit to your generals and your soldiers and yourself in the sense that it's been very hard fighting, very tough fighting great fighters. and you have to be very proud of them from that standpoint. but now we want to get it over with. it's enough, right? we want to get it over with. so it's an honor to have you here. thank you very much for coming. we're going to sign the agreement at the conference in the east room in a little while, right after lunch, and we'll be having lunch together. we're also discussing

some other things, and we appreciate everybody being here. it's a somewhat of an exciting moment, but the really exciting moment is when we get a when they stop the shooting and we end up with a deal, and i think we're fairly close to getting that. and an honor to have you. and please, i'd like to say something. >> yeah. thank you so much, mr. president. thank you for the invitation. and really, i hope that this document, first document will be a first step to real security guarantees for ukraine, our people, our children. i really count on it. and of course, we count that america will not stop support. really, for us, it's very important to support and to continue it. i want to discuss it with details further during our conversation. and of course, the infrastructure or security guarantees, because for today, i understand what europe is ready to do. and of course, i want to discuss with you what the united states will be ready to do. and

i really count on your strong position to stop putin. and you said that enough with the war. i think that is very important to say these words to putin at the very beginning, at the very beginning of war, because he is a killer and terrorist. but i hope that together we can stop him. but for us, it's very important to, you know, to save our country, our values, our freedom and democracy. and of course, no compromises with the killer about our territories. but it will be later. and of course, what i wanted, you know, we spoke about it by phone, but about the drones production, we have very good trans production, i think the best one in the world for today because of the war. yes. and of course, we need very much the air defense. you have the best air defense in the world. and really, you helped us under attacks of russians. and i want to speak how we can exchange the licenses. we are open to share the licenses of

all our drones with you, of course, with the united states. and we need licenses for quick production of air defense even after the war. we need our nation to be calm, that we are secured. that's why we need this air shield. and of course, about this, i want to speak about the contingence. i think that france and uk already spoke to you, and we know that europe is ready, but without united states they will not be ready to be as strong as we need. and the last point was not least about exchange about our people and children. and you know that this crazy russian that they stolen 20,000 of children, ukrainian children, they changed their names, they changed their, you know, their families, relatives, and now they are in russia. we want to bring them back. and really, it's a big, big dream task and goal for me and the our warriors. we by the way we

brought we exchanged we yes. released more than 4000 warriors from russian prisons. but there are thousands more in the prison. i wanted to share with you some some images how you have just just can can i, can i now? yeah. please. some minutes. one minute, one minute i just you to understand what the in what circumstances and what situation they are and what the attitude of russia to our prisoners that guys just you before, before and after. and you see before and after just you to understand now thousands of such guys, ladies and men they are and that so they don't eat, they beat them and they, you know, so do a lot of, a lot of, you know, bad things. so out of even during the war, there are rules. everybody knows there are rules during the war. these

guys, they don't have any rules. you see that 50 60kg and a lot of such things. and i didn't want to show you what what they changes with images of children because i will share just share with you i mean it's looking tragic stuff. >> stuff. >> yeah. i wanted very much to, to give you and you, you see. yeah. this is pastor, by the way. they stolen pastors because it's not russian church, it's stolen pastors and move pastors to the prison. we at the end of last year, we brought three pastors and we could exchange them. this is pastor is like, >> yeah, nice stuff. >> yeah. so i mean, this i wanted to show you and this. so thank you very much. >> we want to get that ended right. >> yeah. yeah. of course. of course. >> i think we will. i think we will. >> and of course. >> do you have any questions

please, president. >> mr. president. >> mr. >> president thank you, mr. president. >> with the how much money. >> is the us going to put into the fund. that is being created today? >> and how does this. >> provide long term security for ukraine? >> well, we don't know exactly how much because we're going to be putting some money in a fund that we're going to get from the earth, that we're going to be taking and sharing in terms of revenue. so it's going to be a lot of money will be made from the sale and from the use of raw earth. and as you know, our country doesn't have much raw earth. we have a lot of oil and gas, but we don't have a lot of the raw earth. and what we do have is protected by the environmentalists, but that can be protected. but still, it's not very much. they have among the best in the world in terms of raw. so we're going to be using that, taking it, using it for all of the things we do, including ai and including weapons and the military. and it's really going to very much

satisfy our needs. so it was something that just worked out really well. we have a lot of oil and we have a lot of gas. we have a lot, but we don't have raw earth. so this this has just about every component of the raw earth that we need for computers, for all of the things we do. and this puts us in great shape. >> and long term security for ukraine. >> i think they're going to have great luck. i think once we make the agreement, that's going to be 95% of it. it's not going to go back to fighting. i've spoken with president putin and i think i mean, i feel very strongly i've known him for a long time, and i feel very strongly that they're very serious about it. and we'll make a deal. and when the deal is made, i don't think we talk about security. everyone is talking about the other day, all they talked about was security. i said, let me make the deal first. i have to make the deal first. i don't worry about security right now. i have to we have to have a deal. because right now, last week, 2000 soldiers died on both sides. 2000, and they're losing

1000, 2000, 3000 a week. so as we sit here and we talk, people are getting shot and dying on the battlefield. and, you know, they're not american soldiers, but they're russian soldiers and they're ukrainian soldiers. and we want to be able to stop it, and we want to be able also to spend money on other things. we don't want to. this is a tremendous amount of money. and what the biden administration did was terrible. they were giving money, but he had no security on the money. europe, as you know, gave much less money. but they had security. it was in the form of a loan. they get their money back and we didn't. and now at least we're protected because the american taxpayer has to be protected, too. but this is an incredible agreement for ukraine because we have a big investment in their country now. and what what they have very few people have. and we're able to really go forward with very, very high tech things and many other things, including