todd. good sunday morning, happy easter to those celebrating. first, north korea last night launched a ballistic missile from its base in sinpo but it exploded on the launch pad. vice president mike pence spoke to american troops at a breakfast there this morning. i'm joined by juan zuarte. juan, the failure, "the new york times" this morning leans hard into the idea that the failure wasn't necessarily a north korean failure but maybe sabotage and possibly sabotage from the united states. what do you say? >> this is a missile program that's replete with failures. we don't know yet, it could be sabotage, it could be poor engineering, just bad luck. that's the nature ofse

it's been u.s. policy to do everything possible to slow or even stop the development of both the missile and nuclear development programs, whether it's the use of sanctions, potentially sabotage, and even diplomacy. >> we know from previous reporting, this was successful done with iran's nuclear program, so it would be easy to assume they would try it. >> i think there's a playbook here. the u.s. has it. they can use asymmetric tools, sanctions and other things to try to affect their behavior. >> there was a show of military force by north korea, this parade, very elaborate. it seemed to be a concern to those that follow the north korean regime that he has acquired some new missile technology. how real is it? >> well, the regime is clearly trying to demonstrate its capabilities, its intent to build those missiles. this is a regime that has declared its intent to find a way of putting a nuclear capability on a missile that can strike the unite

the parade in pyongyang. >> juan zarate, we'll leave it there but we'll return to the topic in a few minutes. call them policy reversals, flip-flops, or a recognition of reality. it can be difficult to know what to make of the president and his evolving positions. while mr. trump has held fast to some positions, immigration, business-friendly rules, and environment, and his choice of neil gorsuch or the supreme court, on a host of other issues, mr. trump has reversed or modified his positions from the campaign. there's nothing wrong with changing positions, but is the new president being educated in office? is he being swayed less by nationalists in the white house like steve bannon and more by economist gary cohn and jared kushner? whatever the cause, the president's policy shifts have

spectrum asking, what does it all mean? >> i like to think of myself as a very flexible person. i don't have to have one specific way, and if the world changes, i go the same way. >> reporter: donald trump is wrapping up a head-spinning week of policy reversals. changing his mind on nato. just months ago -- >> nato is obsolete. >> it is obsolete. >> some of the smartest people have said, what trump said is genius. it's obsolete. >> reporter: but now? >> i said it was obsolete. it's no longer obsolete. >> reporter: and on syria, after a campaign spent promising he would stay out. >> if we did nothing, if we did absolutely nothing, we would be in great shape. >> reporter: last week, mr. trump intervened. >> tonight i ordered a targeted military strike. >> reporter: on economic policy, he promised to punish china. >> i'm going to instruc

treasury secretary to label china a currency manipulator. the greatest in the world. >> reporter: now he tells "the wall street journal" they're not currency manipulators. >> president xi wants to do the right thing. we had a very good bonding. >> reporter: the white house has struggled to explain the president's flip-flops. >> it's those entities or individuals or in some cases those issues that are evolving toward the president's trumps. >> reporter: others attribute it to his on-the-job training. >> the president is learning the job. some of the things said during the campaign i think he now knows are simply not the way things ought to be. >> reporter: shaping these reversals, a growing resig iniin son-in-law jared kushner and economist gary

diminishing role for his chief strategist, steve bannon, this week calling bannon "just a guy who works for me." many voters are forgiving, at least for now. >> i think he does see things differently, as all of us would. we just see the tip of the iceberg. >> reporter: but many have an uncomplicated message -- "not trump." republicans are struggling to define what it even means to be a trump republican, when mr. trump's views keep changing. >> i'm my own man. i'm not going to be told by one president or another how to represent the state of arizona. and this is joining me now is the chairman of the senate armed services committee, john mccain of arizona, senator mccain, welcome to "meet the press." >> thanks, chuck, thinanks for having me back. >> president trump tweeted, why would i call china a

manipulator when they're working with us on north korea? the president's policy shouldn't have anything to do with north korea. >> it may be part of the overall relationship. but china is the key. china is the key. they can stop this if they want to because of their control over the north korean economy. and by the way, i would point out, and i know this will come up later on, but there are artillery on the border between north and south korea that can reach seoul. and we can't take them all out before -- this is very -- this may be the first test of this presidency. but china can shut them down. and we should be -- whether they're currency manipulators or not, we should expect them to act to prevent what could be a cataclysmic event. and the north koreans keep making progress. they had a failure yesterday. i'm not sure why. maybe it's because of -- >> do you buy the sabotage thing, do you think our program is good enough to do things like

>> i don't think so. but i wouldn't rule it out. but at the same time, they have made steady progress. while we have made agreement after agreement after agreement. chuck, how many times on this show, we've said, oh, we now have a comprehensive agreement with north korea. i'm not blaming trump for this. i'm blaming republican and democrat presidents over the last 20 years while they've continued to make progress. >> is the carrot and stick approach with china worth doing? is using our trade practices or these conversations about currency worth having these debates in order to influence them on north korea? >> to prevent north korea from having a missile with a nuclear weapon that could strike the united states, and we would have to rely on our ability to intercept it. i'm told we do have that ability. it's still awfully risky business. this is really very serious. this guy in north korea is not rational. his father and his grandfather

were much more nationrational t is. >> when you're dealing with an irrational actor, u.s. presidents will always say military options are on the table. but when north korea is irrational, are military options something you don't want to do? >> you never want to do that, because of the proximity of north korean artillery to seoul, a city of a half million people. at the same time, this could be the first real test of the trump presidency. by the way, i believe that he'll get very good advice from mattis and from mcmaster. >> let me move on to what we've learned about president trump and his foreign policy. in your hometown newspaper, "the arizona republic," writing about the syria decision, "it was a completely ad hoc decision, it felt like the right thingdo

agree. my guess is that's the way foreign policy is going to be conducted under trump, a series of ad hoc decisions based on what seems right and ." do you think he's right? >> he's partially right. there's a difference between being a candidate and the guy with the codes. second is, he's growing and listening to wise and intelligent people. third of all, i think he was deeply moved by those pictures of the children, who wasn't deeply moved by that? but i do believe, and i support what he did and i support the bunker buster bomb, but we've got to develop a strategy. there is still not an overall strategy that he can come to congress and his advisers and say, okay, this is how we're going to handle syria, here's how we're going to handle post-mosul iraq.

and i'll give them some more time, but so far that strategy is not apparent. >> it does seem as if even on the issue of whether assad should go, president trump sort of stopped short of regime change. he said, look, he obviously isn't probably going to be a part of the solution, but he stopped short of that. why? >> because i don't think he's absolutely sure what he needs to do. but i would point out, of those 400,000 men, women, and children that have been slaughtered, they weren't slaughtered by isis. they were slaughtered by bashar al assad. the russians used precision weapons to hit hospitals in aleppo. the war crimes are horrendous here. to just say we're only after isis, in my view, rather than regime change, is something that we have to rethink. >> you said he's growing. >> yes. >> in office. there are some that will say, no, the washington establishment sucked him in. >> i hope so. >> okay. >> on national security,

believe he has assembled a strong team. and i think very appropriately, he's listening to them. that's the area of course where i'm -- >> not everybody thinks the washington consensus on foreign policy has worked over the last 25 years. >> and it hasn't, and you're right, it hasn't. but it wasn't because of the people around him now. in fact, if previous presidents -- look, for eight years we basically did nothing in response to some of the most horrendous war crimes in history. at least he did something. now i hope that there will be a strategy to follow that up. and look, america is about a moral superiority and our willingness not to fight every fight about at least respond to horrendous acts of inhumanity and war crimes. also, by the way, syria will continue to have the spread of al qaeda if we don't take care of bashar al assad. >> senator john mai

there. >> thanks for having me. >> you've been on a few times. >> time flies when you're having fun. >> there you go. earlier this week the u.s. military dropped the so-called mother of all bombs against aftisis fighters in afghanistan. president trump was asked if he personally authorized the action. >> reporter: did you authorize it, sir? >> everybody knows exactly what happened. what i do is authorize my military. we have the greatest military in the world and they've done a job as usual. we have given them total authorization and that's what they're doing. >> joining me is senator jack reed, democrat of rhode island, the ranking member of the senate armed services committee, he and senator mccain do a lot of work together sometimes. welcome to the show. >> thanks, chuck, very much. >> let me start with north korea and get to the issue of the unpredictability aspect of president tr

korea is an asset and not a liability? >> i don't think it's an asset. i think you have to have a strategy. as senator mccain indicated, china is key to that strategy. they're the biggest trader with north korea, their trade went up, in fact, last year. they've indirectly provided electronics for these missiles. if china can be brought to the point where they're putting pressure constantly on north korea, there is an opportunity, i think, to try to freeze their systems and roll them back. but it has to be a long term, deliberate, day by day strategy. one of the things about the president, he's getting good military advice from general mattis and general mcmaster, but he needs a much stronger state department. >> i want to ask about this, you talk about his relationship with secretary mattis, somebody who you supported his confirmation. >> yes. >> in the opening bite there in your

the president didn't sign off personally on the dropping of the so-called mother of all bombs. >> right. >> he has given more leeway to his military leaders to make these decisions. are you comfortable with that? >> well, these authorities have been -- are given over the lasting several years, they've increased. in fact when general nicholson was before the committee a few weeks ago, he indicated he was satisfied with the authority he had. and in fact i assume that this was not a new authority, this was something that he was authorized, deploying a particular weapons system. >> there was one comment from an anonymous official that said, look, in the previous administration, we wouldn't have dropped this without at least legislat alerting the white house. are you comfortable with that change? >> i think there has to be communication, obviously between the white house and their field commanders, that's generally throughout the national security council. i think in this case, though, general nicholson decided that the weapon was appropriate for the tunnel complex

minimized, in fact there are no reports of civilian casualties. the operation i think he deemed was something that was appropriate, well within his authority. he might have informed someone, but i don't think he went out of the way to do it. >> obviously anything we do in afghanistan is covered by the war authorization passed a long time ago. there is still some question whether anything we do in syria falls under that or not. do you believe it does or doesn't? >> i think with the pursuit of isis in syria, that it's covered by the aumf. it's an extension of the aumf. the route, as we've been extending that for many, many years now. but going after isis i think within the province of the aumf. other actions -- >> going after assad would not fall under the aumf? >> no, i don't think so. i think going after assad in terms of a deliberate, concentrated effort to conduct military operations would require the authorization of congress. i think the tack that the president took,

attack, was done under his prerogative as responding to an incident, a horrible incident, the right or the ability of nations to protect vulnerable populations. but i think anything further should be considered by the congress. >> is there a circumstance where you would support sending more troops to syria? >> i think one of the things that the president will have to do would lay out a plan, a clear plan. the ad hoc nature of what he does, the flip-flops which we've seen dramatically this week suggest an incoherence in policy. that's a function of many things. i think temperamentally as well as experientially, he's trying to come to grip with these things. he hasn't been following through with the planning process you need. he has to be able to come not just to congress but to the american people to explain in deal what he's doing. >> are you comfortable with the flip-flops? all of them this week were moves from outside the washington consensus toit

to deal with china, things like that. does that at all comfort you? >> i think it's recognizing in many cases the obvious, what he has to do. i think with respect to china, you know, their key role in north korea potentially can't be sort of jeopardized by going after them as currency manipulators. in fact there's some evidence by economists that they're not doing that recently. at one time they were. but i think these things are -- would be more comforting if they were not sort of off-the-cuff, unexplained, or glibly announced, but rather the conscious deliberation and a conscious presentation by the president. one of the things he's got to recognize is growing sort of disenchantment with russia. that disenchantment has to also be reflected with serious reflection on 2016nd

did here. they are still operating today in europe using those same disinformation techniques, et cetera, and we have elections coming up. we can't allow the russians to be part of our electoral process. >> right now he's got to accept that it happened. >> exactly. that's one of the things where that would be a great improvement in his situation. accept it happened and then move very aggressively for the good of the country to see what happened in '16 so that we're prepared and protected for '18 and '20 and beyond. >> senator jack reed, we'll leave it there, from rhode island, good to have you here. >> thank you. when we come back, the trump administration's get tough policy on illegal immigration. >> if you're here illegally you should leave or be deported, put through the system. >> but homeland security chief john kelly goes on to say it's a very complicated problem with no easy s ♪ (music plays throughout) ♪ ♪

before fibromyalgia, i was a doer. i was active. then the chronic, widespread pain drained my energy. my doctor said moving more helps ease fibromyalgia pain. she also prescribed lyrica. fibromyalgia is thought to be the result of overactive nerves. lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. woman: for some, lyrica can significantly relieve fibromyalgia pain and improve function, so i feel better. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions or suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worsening depression, or unusual changes in mood or behavior. or swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever,

tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects are dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain and swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who have had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. with less pain, i can be more active. ask your doctor about lyrica. welcome back. one area where president trump clearly has not changed or softened his position is on the issue of immigration. and the man tasked with carrying out the president's policies is the new head of homeland security, john kelly. well, i sat down with secretary kelly and i began by asking him if the administration is creating in effect a new large deportation force. >> there are a huge number -- as you know, of illegal

have to be dealt with in one way or another. i would argue, chuck, that we have to straighten this out. and i think -- i place that squarely on the united states congress. it's a hugely complex series of laws and i get an awful -- i engage the hill quite a bit. and i get a lot of -- i get an earful about what i should do and what i shouldn't do. but it all comes down to the law, doesn't it? we are a nation of laws. i would hope that the congress fixes a lot of these problems. >> okay. you say it's on congress, but there are others who say if you enforce the law on the books. so what is the issue? are the laws on the books hard to enforce and they need to be changed? is that what you're saying here? >> well, the laws on the books are pretty straightforward. if you here illegally you should leave or should be deported. put through the system. but there are 11 million people and it's very complicated. there are people who came here as children. there are people who came here illegally many years ago and they have married

and it's a complicated problem, but the law is the law. given -- but i don't have unlimited capacity to execute -- >> is it the best use of money? is this the resources you need, you need to hire more people to deal with this issue? is that your number one problem? >> i think so. the people -- you know, it's two aspects. i.c.e. operates more or less on the interior and, you know, through targeted actions against illegal aliens plus. what i mean by that is just because you're in the united states illegally doesn't necessarily get you targeted. it's got to be something else. we're operating on the other end of the spectrum, multiple convictions -- >> define a criminal here. that's -- so it seems as if on the obama administration, there was one definition. there seems to be another definition in this administration. is that fair to say? >> it is fair to say that the definition of criminal is not -- has not changed, but where on the spectrum of criminality we

>> so can you give me an example of somebody that wasn't deported before that you're deporting now? >> well, as an example, multiple duis. even a single dui depending on other aspects would get you into the system. but remember for -- >> this wouldn't have been the case under the previous administration? >> you have to remember that there's a system -- a legal justice system in place and the law deports people. secretary kelly doesn't. i.c.e. doesn't. it's the united states, you know, criminal justice system or justice system that deports people. >> i want to go back to the 11 million. it seems that the bigger problem you're dealing with is not the border, it's visa overstays. >> it's a big problem. big problem. >> is that what you need -- you need i.c.e. agents to do that? is that what you need the extra resources for? >> all of that. it's a big problem. it's a lot of people out there that need to be taken into custody and deported according to the law. visa ovta

in the country that are in fact visa overstays. and we do -- we just completed i think a targeted -- they just completed, i.c.e. just completed a targeted operation going after overstays. it's time-consuming. but at the end of the day, they came here with the promise to leave and we have to track them down. if they're still in the country and put them in the proceedings to deport them. >> i guess i'm going at this with the money for the border wall would be better spent of going after the visa overstays and would that deal with the problem that president trump campaigned on? >> you have to secure the border somehow, first and foremost. but the very, very good news, for a lot of the different reasons, the number of illegal aliens moving up from the south has dropped off precipitously. i mean, we're down 65, 70% in the last two months. these are the months that we should see a steep incline in illegal movement. 's

>> do you think that's been the president's rhetoric on the campaign and saying, well, he won, it's tougher to get across the border? >> certainly. >> is that contributing -- >> certainly. some of the other things we have done on the border. just my going down to the border on several occasions, you know that jeff sessions was just down there, the attention being paid to the border certainly has injected into these people and a vast majority of them are good people from central america, but it's injected enough confusion in their minds, i think, and just waiting to see what actually does happen. >> you as head of south com, the southern military command, your previous job before this, you were testifying on these issues during the time we had the surge of central american immigration through mexico. and i remember at the time you said, hey, i stop at the -- essentially the guatemala border there. your purview. but you talked

difficulty you're trying to find partners at the time in central america to help you with this and the u.s. drug consumption -- the u.s. drug consumers you thought as part of the problem in this. explain. >> drug consumption in the united states is the problem. just cocaine alone, when you consider the massive amounts of profit that come out of the united states, the trafficker's biggest problem is not getting drugs till now into the united states. the biggest problem they have is laundering the money. so when you have that much profit coming out of the united states and that profit is managed by cartels that are beyond violent and so you go to -- you go to the latin american countries, mexico, the united states for that matter, you mentioned corruption already, the kind of money they can offer an attorney general in guatemala or a police chief in mexico city, the kind of money they can offer, if you don't take the money, they're happy to send your -- you know, your youngest child's head to your home in

aspect of it -- >> it is. >> meaning the central american countries, is the idea of for instance marijuana legalization, does that help your problem? or hurt your problem? >> marijuana is not a factor in the drug world. >> this really is a cocaine and in some cases the opioid sort of copycats? >> it's three things. methamphetamine, almost all produced in mexico. heroin, virtually all produced in mexico and cocaine that comes up from further south. those three drugs result in the death of i think last year 52 -- i think 52,000 people to include opioids. 52,000 americans -- you can't put a price on the human misery, the costs to the united states is over $250 billion a year. the solution is not arresting a lot of users. the solution is a comprehensive drug demand reduction program in the united states that involves every man and woman of

congress needs to be working on this. i also asked secretary kelly about the fight against isis and that mother of all bombs in afghanistan. you can hear his answer on the entire interview which is posted on the website. from syria to the fate of obamacare, what are we to make of president trump's evolving positions? has he been sucked into the establishment as john mccain said he hope so.

does your makeup remover every kiss-proof,ff? cry-proof, stay-proof look? neutrogena® makeup remover does. it erases 99% of your most stubborn makeup with one towelette. need any more proof than that? neutrogena. say carl, we have a question about your brokerage fees. fees? what did you have in mind? i don't know. $4.95 per trade? uhhh. and i was wondering if your brokerage offers some sort of guarantee? guarantee? where we can get our fees and commissions back if we're not happy. so can you offer me what schwab is offering? what's with all the questions? ask your broker if they're offering $4.95 online equity trades and a satisfaction guarantee. if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab. briathe customer app willw if be live monday. can we at least analyze customer traffic? can we push the offer online? brian, i just had a quick question.

but "yes" is here. you're saying the new app will go live monday?! yeah. with help from hpe, we can finally work the way we want to. with the right mix of hybrid it, everything computes. we can't stay here! why? terrible toilet paper! i'll never get clean! way ahead of you. charmin ultra strong. it cleans better. it's four times stronger... ...and you can use less. enjoy the go with charmin.

welcome back. panelists here, former republican senator john sununu. heather mcgee and andrea mitchell and mark leibovich from "the new york times." who does still live in this town. welcome all. >> thank you. >> i want to talk about the -- start with sort of the week of donald trump and his evolving positions.

it? >> growing into the job maybe. on issues like nato, i think everyone knew that we weren't going to pull out of nato. everyone knew and understood that his rhetoric was in one place in the campaign and then it was going to be met with a reality. that nato serves a function, has great value, is important to our strategic alliances around the world. a lot is just the campaigner coming to the oval office and recognizing what's real, what's doable. look, some of it on the domestic policy issues like exim bank or currency manipulation is going to kick back on the trump base because they don't expect that kind of thing to happen. >> here's andy sullivan, what on earth is the point of trying to understand him when there's nothing to understand? he has no guiding policy, no consistency at all. just whatever makes him feel good about himself this second. he therefore believes what

in the addled head or what the last person said. a harsher response, andrea. >> i disagree. i think he likes to win and he's seen over the course of the last weeks that he wins when he listens to jared kushner, when he listens importantly to henry mcmaster and to mattis and when he's listening to the advisers and not steve bannon and now that mike flynn is gone, that is the biggest change. there is a reality check here. and he's seeing that some things work. now, it's not complete, doesn't always work. he still tweets after angela merkel leaves and insults germany. he -- so it was not just the campaign. it was also the transition and the early weeks of the presidency. but i think the health care failure really influenced his decision to turn to some wiser heads. >> well, a lot of talk about how bannon is out, and ivanka and jared are up. but there's not

coverage of what happened this week behind closed doors. like ivanka who is supposed to be for women didn't stop him from signing a bill that would put state level women's health clinics in the crosshairs. >> i'm curious -- what do you make of the speculation that is a compromise. sign that bill, but don't fight the planned parenthood bill in the budget? >> i do not feel any kind of relief. it's the most vulnerable working class women, that's the only affordable health care. they're in the crosshairs, and we saw him sign something that stopped the retirement accounts. the people who don't have 401(k)s on the jobs who have been starting to innovate at the state and the local level, so i think it's the phony populism that is the most consistent. >> you're right about this. this is a killer decision, this title 10 decision, done without a press pool, no co

and planned parenthood says it's really devastating. >> i would say though, the question of, yes, he loves to win, how do you define winning in the environment where there's no legislative action going on whatsoever? i mean, is winning to donald trump a bunch of good news stories or good winning news stories, the poll numbers. >> the contrast we have is on the national security issues you have got good leadership in place, given some autonomy. we heard from general kelly, we talked about general mattis and mcmaster, they're the guiding hands between the foreign policy activity that's been pretty -- widely accepted and well received recently, on the domestic side he doesn't have that same kind of quality team in place yet. that's part of the reason that health care went down. >> mcmaster, mattis, kelly, that is a win. they're strong people. he's obviously listening to them domestically. you're right. >> domestically there's a cover story in "the new york times" m

lobbyists. i mean, the number of lobbyists who have been getting waivers of conflict of interest rules to go into the agencies they were just representing, big industries, to try to water down rules it's astounding. the idea that that is draining the swamp is something that they're going to be -- there's going accountability for. >> the climate change decision on the paris accords this week. if they back out of that, i mean, china is watching. he wants china to help on north korea. and if we embarrass and humiliate china which we dragged kicking and screaming into the climate change agreement -- >> lobbyists have nothing to do with this stuff. this is where he was on the campaign trail. pull away from the regular lieti -- regulations, pull away from the climate change. this is campaign rhetoric being followed through and it has nothing to do with lobbyists visiting the white house this week or last week. >> i'm going to take a quick pause and i want to does cuss a couple of things that general kelly said about imsgration when we come back. by

yesterday and they were calling on president trump to release the tax returns. and he noticed. and the energy is on the democratic side when it comes to the campaigns. will it translate into votes? we may get an answer this tuesda (burke) at farmers, we've seen almost everything, so we know how to cover almost anything. even a coupe soup. [woman] so beautiful. [man] beautiful just like you. [woman] oh, why thank you. [burke] and we covered it, november sixth, two-thousand-nine. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ heare you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? try zyrtec® it's starts working hard at hour one and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®.

various: (shouting) heigh! ho! ( ♪ ) it's off to work we go! woman: on the gulf coast, new exxonmobil projects are expected to create over 45,000 jobs. and each job created by the energy industry supports two others in the community. altogether, the industry supports over 9 million jobs nationwide. these are jobs that natural gas is helping make happen, all while reducing america's emissions. energy lives here.

i can't wait for her to have that college experience that i had. the classes, the friends, the independence. and since we planned for it, that student debt is the one experience, i'm glad she'll miss when you have the right financial advisor, life can be brilliant. ameriprise it's realizing beauty doesn't stop at my chin. roc®'s formula adapts to delicate skin areas. my fine lines here? visibly reduced in 4 weeks. chest, neck, and face cream from roc®. methods, not miracles.™ enamel is the strong, wof your tooth surface. the thing that's really important to dentists is to make sure that that enamel stays strong and resilient for a lifetime. the more that we can strengthen and re-harden that tooth surface, the whiter their patients' teeth are going to be.

ts are going to really want to recommend the new pronamel strong and bright. it helps to strengthen and re-harden the enamel. it also has stain lifting action. it's going to give their patients the protection that they need and the whiter teeth that they want. ♪

and we are back. president trump noticed the tax rallies yesterday. he's tweeted about those this morning. i did an almost impossible thing to do for a republican -- easily won the electoral college. now tax returns are brought up again? someone who paid for the small organized rallies yesterday. the election is over. heather, you were at one of the small, organized

for them? >> it was fantastic. so i got to speak right after senator widen at the one here in d.c. yesterday. honestly my expectations were very low. there are the sort of earnest tax day, you know, kind of rallies by progressives saying we need more revenue. this was 25,000 people in d.c. alone. 200 rallies across the country. and the message was really quite uniform. it was show us your taxes. what are you hiding? who are you working for and then at the same time, we need economic justice and tax fairness. we're sick of hearing about how billionaires how little they pay in taxes. >> you can look at the rallies in two different ways. maybe the general public isn't as moved on the tax return issue but the fact that the rallies can happen fairly easily now on the left tells you the energy is son the left. >> i think there is a little bit of energy on the left, because trump provides a great focal point for them and it is -- >> sort of the way that obama did for the conservatives. >> sure. the coin flips,

big tax rallies used to be conservatives marking, you know, tax day. and how long do you have to work until you can actually pay your taxes and it gets later and later in the year. >> do you realize the majority of americans are okay with the amount of taxes they pay and last year they did not. >> three out of four americans wants him to release the tax returns. he kept saying it didn't matter because he lost the popular vote by 3 million votes, but people think it's unable that he thinks he's above the law. >> substantively, it doesn't matter. it doesn't matter for the policy decisions we have been talking about. it won't matter in his re-election because it didn't matter in his re-election in 2015. >> only matters -- >> a great deal on the russia investigation too. >> i don't think you'll see -- you wouldn't see anything on russia in there. i don't think you'll see anything more dramatic than he makes hundreds of millions of dollars, he's declared bankruptcy in the .

talked about and we have seen. >> -- a question that is very, very important. also, who's going to benefit from his vision for estate reform where he gets rid of the taxes that are going tone be fit -- going to benefit him. >> we can answer those questions -- >> every democrat and republican president since watergate has released the tax returns. why shouldn't -- >> i'm not saying he shouldn't. but it won't matter to the substance of the bigger policies. >> we'll get a test of the energy on tuesday in georgia. of the top ten congressional districts, the highest populations with a college degree, nine of the ten are held by democrats. you can see them. number ten is georgia, sixth, andrea. so that tells you that the democrats -- this is a seat that's moving towards them demographically. nd

small margin so they believe they have a chance, there are 11 republican candidates, several democrats. so he has a challenge here. i think there could be a blow back in this district as in many districts especially in the south for them busing in people from the outside. there could be a reaction against that. >> i would say -- there's almost a countercomplacency about all the talk -- about the great energy on the left. just like trump needs wins, the democrats don't have wins. >> a win would be close. when we come back, politics in the pulpit. it's easter sunday so let's have this conversation. how much should politics and religion mix? well, we'll hear from three on ho

coming up, "meet the press" ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ sfx: engine revving ♪ (silence) ♪ so you miss the big city? i don't miss much... definitely not the traffic. excuse me, doctor... the genomic data came in. thank you. you can do that kind of analysis? yeah, watson. i can quickly analyze millions of clinical and scientific reports to help you tailor treatment options for the patient's genomic profile. you can do that?

even way out here? yes. even way out here. even way out here? ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ what we do every night is like something out of a strange dream. except that the next morning... it all makes sense. fedex powers global e-commerce... with networks built over 40 years... that are massive... far-reaching... and, yes... maybe a bit magical.

visit fedex.com slash dream (baby crying♪ minutes old. ♪ a baby's skin is never more delicate. ♪ what do hospitals use to wash and protect it? ♪ johnson's® the number 1 choices in hospitals.

"meet the press" end game is brought to you by boeing. always working to build something better. >> welcome back. we're going to end the broadcast this eastern sunday by discussioning how religious leaders deal or don't deal with politics at a time when the country is so polarized and congregations are

we brought together t.d. jakes, pastor joann hummel of the fellowship in texas, and rabbi david saperstein. i asked if we should abide by the maxim not to mix politics and religion. >> it's a misnomer because it says that politics and religions when they're not ideologies so wherever there are people you have the intermixing of relodge yosty and you're concerned about politics and they're going to connect whether you want them to or not. >> should we stop fighting it? >> i think they're connected in the sense that religion is an internal kind of thing. that really gets at the heart. and the mind. and politics is the outworking off your values and the things that are inside you. i see them connected actually. >> sometimes i wonder if we overthought the phrase a little bit, rabbi. >> you

politics -- partisan politics, one category. but what we normally refer to as politics as you have just heard, really is interwoven with religion. in other words, when we talk about the poor, when we talk about the vulnerable, when we talk about the biblical command to welcome the stranger in our midst and love the stranger as ourselves, to protect god's creation, we are talking about global warming and refugee policy and migrant policy. they're woven together. just as the prophets around jesus of nazareth and the biblical characters all address these issues in their time, so we feel compelled to address it in ours. >> look, bishop jakes, you have not been afraid of politics. you haven't been afraid of politics and rabbi, obviously. but talk about some of your fellow pastors around bishops and rabbis. >> i think it's a thin line you have to walk. primarily people don't come to church to hear you

political beliefs. and in the black tradition, we have pastors long before we ever had a president, so our pastors have a different expectation from the congregation to weigh in on issues that affect the people and many times you become the voice of people who are voiceless. if i had to grow into understanding that that platform was also a responsibility amongst my parishers without getting nuanced over into the individual behind the politics, you do at least have to confront the issues that affect your congregation. >> where are you -- >> i'm thinking about the people in our church who want to know how to be biblical. so when they come to church they're wrestling with the issues in the world and they're not sure

so they're looking to the pulpit, and to us, with how to think. so we grapple with the issues from the biblical perspective. >> and some synagogues are becoming sanctuaries. synagogues and churches. that's a big political statement for a synagogue to make and in some -- and some congregants view it as you're taking sides. >> that's the paradox. when we're feeding hungry people in our food programs and sheltering homeless people in our homeless shelter programs and we are welcoming the refugee, the stranger, the tells us we should treat as ourselves in providing shelter to them and sanctuary to them, we are living out our religious ideals. we have pastoral responsibilities to our members. regardless of their politics or ours, we have to not compromise ourselves in a way that would undercut our ability to do that. but we're also teachers and leaders and the one o

traditional values to the world about us, that's a difficult tight rope to walk. but we have to accomplish both responsibilities. >> you think it actually -- you would be punished more if you ignored politics, bishop? >> i think it has consequences. i don't think that you can walk out of -- you're afraid to totally ignore the environment in which your faith is exemplified. and it is -- it's not an issue as to how you take it on, and you have to be willing to be misunderstood or become silent and not be heard at all. >> you heard some of the criticism of evangelicals going wait a minute, how can you set aside the moral outrage over bill clinton from donald trump? how do you explain it? >> wow. that's a hard one. i think the moral underpinnings of our country and of our faith are challenged when these things happen. when candidate trump talks about those things about

me. but i'm not called to go into the pulpit and express my views about myself. i need to look at that from a wider context of scripture. what does the bible say about how women are treated and how we should honor one another? that's my message. i'm really not going to delve into the political specifics. but bringing that to the wider and even a deeper human issue. why are we doing that and why do we do the same thing. >> do any of you see the rise of secularism as a rejection of faith leaders or a rejection of faiths? what do you attribute the rise of secularism to? >> you know, a lot of times i'm not sure that the rise is as high as the media reports that it is. i think that faith has in many cases retreated back behind private walls and i'm saying a rejection of organized religion, a pew research suggests that

retreating not that they don't have faith, but they don't express it in the way that their parents have done. the challenge of people of faith is not so much to wrestle against secularism, but to remain relevant in a society that has lost faith in all institutions. and the only -- the onus is on to recreate ourselves without losing sight of our core principles and values. >> pastor, that -- >> yeah, i'm thinking when you're saying that, bishop, is how we have made heaven here. especially in the west. we don't really need to relate to that theology of heaven and rescue and salvation the same way we did. because when we have to be rescue -- what do we have to be recu rescued from? you go to africa or the global south. and there's no secularism there because there's no -- there's no development there or there's no personal wealth there. so they're looking to god for everything that they have and there's such joy in that. it reveals the joy of

heart. >> you see the rise of secularism almost as a benefit of our success in society? >> yes, yes. i think what it does it layers over the real needs of people's hearts. but what i'm seeing in the church and i'll bow to you guys on this, but when people come into crisis they still come to the church. we are there in the crisis moments of people's lives. we are at the sick bed, at the wedding altar, at the divorce court. we are there in those spaces where people are hurting. when the money can't help it and the secular things we have enveloped ourselves with can't save you. >> well, that was a -- i hope a full conversation for you. t.d. jakes, joann hummel and david saperstein. you can see the rest of the interview on meet the press.com. happy easter sunday. happy passover to those observing. we're back next week. by the way, go wizards and go caps. because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." >> you can see more end game and postgame on the

rail ♪ manhunt in search of suspected killer who murdered a man in broad daylight while streaming on facebook live. >> the era of strategic patience is over. >> an unbreakable bond. the vice president headed to south korea after another failed missile test from the norg. a live report from seoul. another pr headache, why united airlines says the crew was justified when they reportedly moved a couple flying to their wedding. plus, why some americans could find themselves stranded on the other side of the u.s./mexico border. and had historic discovery, some 400 years in the making. "early today" starts right now. ♪ >> good monday morning to you.