this has been something that the white house -- it's a huge embarrassment for the white house. they want to explain it the best they could. there was a period that it looked like they thought that porter would hang on to the job. he was a popular guy whose star was rising. he helped write the state of the union speech. they wanted to protect him. there was a point that it was untenable. >> shepard: you said they were trying to protect him after the photograph had been public and after all of this information had been written about in the white house and they knew about it. even if it had been locked up in the office of personnel security? >> yeah, it was clear that they thought that perhaps they could ride this out, get their story out and explain circumstances. there was a period that porter's future -- it was not certain that porter was on his way out. so there were efforts made to communicate their position. so this has been an evolving story for the white house and frustrating for reporters to try to lock down their position. >> shepard: and that's the reason that this cont

what could the white house have done better? >> again, i'm not getting into ticktock detailed specifics. i think a lot of individuals were involved with the white house response to this, and a lot of us could have done better. >> thanks, clarifying about the two questions for you, so rob porter was not fired by the trump administration. >> resigned, and we accepted resignation. >> to follow up, you spoke with the president about these allegations this morning. can you give us a better idea about the concerns president had? this is a gentleman who was in the oval office close to the president, numerous times throughout the first year of the administration, what did the president specifically say about allegations in. >> he was surprised. we did not see what the allegations have brought forward, and so he was surprised by it, disheartened by it, and he was saddened. >> asking you about the memo from the house intelligence committee. >> sure. >> any update on the timeline, has the president made a decision, and where does the revie

the white house. the world tunes in to see what president trump will do about a number of things, including gun control. his administration is in the spotlight because her former campaign aide rick gates just walked out of a courtroom, just pleaded guilty to charges of conspiring against the united states and making false statements. we'll dive in that but first the president finished up the joint press conference with malcolm turnbull and standing next to a prime minister of a country of an example of how to do gun rowe form -- reform control. the topic did come up. >> they have to be adept. i'm not talking about every teacher. i'm talking about a small percentage. but people that have great ability with weaponry and with guns, those are the only people i'm talking about. but they've protect the student. >> while he didn't take questions from other than friendly media today, the president has been speaking a great deal today. this time in front of audiences, live people and not the twitter following.

just help us understand because you were in the white house in this role, does the white house grantity clearance or does the fbi? >> the fbi doesn't grant the security clearance. at the end of the day, the decision is with the white house. and the reality is that from january 2017 when rob porter first reportedly told don mcgahn about these issues, there's no way this white house should have had this person in that position. there just isn't. as the fbi background process confirmed the very serious nature of what he had done, there's no way he should have been in this position. >> and so anita, what does it say that they did have him in this position? what does that tell you about how seriously they took these allegations? >> you know, who can know what was going through their minds. but what we can infer from the fact that we kept -- that they kept him in this position is that clearly domestic abuse is not an issue that they take seriously when it's compared to having someone who they think is moving paper well. and that's a value judgment that i think women across this country are

day if not the white house briefing.sight committee says his panel is demanding answers, trey gowdy joining the course of outrage, why did the white house keep porter as a critical gate keeper to the president even as the background check revealed

it disturbs a lot of people inside the white house and outside the white house. you add that to comments when he said some immigrants were too lazy to apply for the daca program that protects them from deportation, a comment that aside from being offensive also is disruptive to a negotiation that the president is in the midd middle of on a highly important issue. you have a lot of questions being raised now about general kelly. >> mi can, a you want to review something written in the washington post, a normal white house, either party in modern history, does not attack the fbi based on ill conceived conspiracy theories nor the electoral system because it might make the president insecure, or because of substantial evidence of spousal abuse. the photo of one of the staffer's ex-wives with a badly bruised eye and protective order granted to another ex-wife takes this far out of the realm of he said she said. yet in this white house is not horror and revulsion, but a determination to protect the abuser, rob porter. >> it is surprising what's been happening in this w

this is a white house driven process. again, the president is the one who owns these decisions. >> i want to put that on the screen. the fbi statement, the fbi does not grant, deny or otherwise adjudicate security clearances for individuals on behalf of these agencies, nor does it make any security clearance recommendations. after the fbi has completed at the investigation, it provides the information to the agency, adjudicator, authority who determines whether to grant or deny the security clearance. so they provided the information to the white house and they decided, you know what? they're going to still let these individuals who don't have permanent security clearances, even though they review sensitive national security, classified information, continue on the job. >> right. there were a number of people about whether they would ever get a security clearance including sebastian gorka and others who have since left the white house. clear lly a decision was made tt rob porter was important enough to stay. >> and jared

i was actually there for jeanne white, coming out with a new book about ryan white, her son.s helping them promote the back. as it turned out that's when pence was working on the anti-lgbtq legislation. and all of a sudden it was the h.r.c. talking to me. and the athlete allies. and you know taking me here and there. and you know we tried to get into a press conference. but i was escorted out of that press conference. and once he learned when -- when pence learned i was removed then he invited me for a meeting. and i shared with him what it was like growing up being guy. and you know, i was born in way, bullied and suicide attempts, and, you know, all his response was, "i'll pray for you." of course he wanted a photo-op and i declined. >> and ryan white -- ryan white was -- he wasn't allowed into school because of hiv aids diagnosis and eventually died in 1990. but he became the face of the hiv. >> he was my hero. >> i wanted to remind our viewers. >> yes. >> but adam rippon and lindsey vonn have said they won't attend the white house after the olympics for a celebration host

whites, blacks or do you think the whites and blacks have equal access? again, what we see is there is a majority of whites who think that whites have an edge here. that's different than the last question, but not far behind are those who give a more color blind answer. comparing whites who give a race conscious answer where their group is privileged, those who answer to those, they seem to be more -- those who answered that question rather than color blind, they seem to give more support to an increase of funds for schools in black and latino neighborhoods for early education programs such as preschool and more supportive of disseminating college scholarships to black and latino youth. to round out a look of other do mans. they are asked who they think have a chance to be treated fairly by police, we see the highest percentage of whites reporting a privilege. this has to be because of what we have seen in the news with the black lives matter movement brought attention to in the streaming videos over and over again of police brutality. this is not new, bu

john kelly among them, the white house counsel don mcgahn. >> you covered white houses and studied white houses. is that possible? >> well, first thing i want to say is if you, in the federal government, if you are the supervisor of a unit that includes people with clearances, you know the status of their clearances. clearances are for five years. depends on the level fof the clearance. then they are reviewed. you know that because you know when they are up for review. >> safe enough to hand dealing the most sensitive information? >> yeah, you are not allowed to share materials. so it's inconceivable that the chief of staff did not know he had people working in his staff whose clearances were under review. put it this way. were interim. that were not five year clearances. so first of all there sa probis problem there and he would know that. the white house personnel office doesn't sit on this information because it's necessary for the supervisor to know t next problem with this is somebody asked for additional information in the summer, which resulted in a new report in november. and thi

joining us from the white house is jill, white house reporter for the "associated press." matthew miller is here, former chief spokesman for the justice department. now an msnbc analyst. with us at the table, "associated press" white house reporter jonathan lemere. a.p. staff porting day. nick. zerlena maxwell, now director of progressive programming for sirius xm. and rick stengel, former undersecretary of state in the obama administration who plays our statesman at 4:00 monday through friday is here as well. let me start with you, jill, this white house story is falling apart on a can ouple different levels. one, the idea that this process was somehow ongoing fell apart when chris wray said it was done in july. now, the normal process, and i know this isn't a normal white house, but that means they had an answer in july. what are you learning about that part of their story and the fact that they're still sticking to it? >> yeah, i mean, look, as you play those clips side by side by side, the story keeps changing and changing and changing. we hadn't even heard about this

the white house counsel's office, the white house security office.is the people who, based on what the fbi found, whether or not rob porter or anyone else gets a security clearance. it's just not true the way she said it. the fbi addressed this last week, by the way. they issued a satatement on thursday. the fbi does not grant, deny or adjudicate peerclearance. nor does it make clearance recommendations. after the fbi has conducted a background investigation, they give the information to the agency, ajudjudicajudicator or , who determines what to do with the information. >>> jackie spears, a member of the white house intelligence committee, i spoke to her earlier. congresswoman spears, for sarah sanders to say this investigation is ongoing, that defies how the fbi investigations work. the fbi passed along what they discovered about rob porter and it's left in the white house's hands. when you heard her claim that it's an ongoing process, does that make any sense to you? >> no. it makes no sense to me. when the fbi does a security clearance evaluation

and that's not good for the trump white house. >> from the white house to the "big brother" house.ou. >>> coming up, director rob reiner talks about his eye-opening interview about the russian investigation with john brennan and james clapper. >>> that's a wrap of this hour of msnbc live. right now it's time for "am joy" with my good friend, joy reid. >> we're going to use our best people. >> we'll get the best people. >> we'll be using our best people. >> we have to get the best people. we can no longer be so politically correct. we do things today. we're so politically correct. people are afraid to walk, afraid to trucalk, they can't speak. >> good morning.

the fbi was sending that information to the white house and the white house had to make a decision whatdo with rob porter. >> she's not just dancing on the head of a pin, she's just wrong. christopher wray made it clear today they were finished. if you listen to what he said, all this back and forth, this wasn't just "hey, we're done, here you go." over the course of many months, they were going back and forth pho the white house answering many questions or providing additional context. you have to remember, an interim clearance doesn't just mean you have temporary clearance to see some material, it means you do not have the right to have a final clearance. you are not there yet. with all this back and forth, you would think somebody at the white house would say, we need to ratchet back the responsibility this man has at least a little bit until we get through all these hoops. >> wray pointed out that the fbi received a request for a follow-up. who made that request? i want to know. who made that request which they completed and provided in november. who made that request? because the p

directly contradicting white house officials. the director of the fbi testified that it had completed its investigation to porter's back ground months ago. the response over here at the white house is anything but me, too. it is more like anybody but me. >> do you believe mr. porter's ex-wife? >> the allegations of domestic abuse have raised serious questions for west wing staffers. christopher wray disclosed what he knew about porter's back ground check and made jaws drop across washington when he said his agents completed their investigation last summer. >> the fbi submitted a partial report on the investigation in question in march. and then a completed background investigation in late july that soon there after, we received requests for follow-up inquiry. and we did the follow-up and provided information in november. and then we administratively closed the file in january. >> that appeared to contradict what top white house officials have said for days. that the background check investigation was not finished. >> the backgrou

first i want to two to pam brown standing by at the white house. >> reporter: at the white house morale is low about the handling of the rob porter situation with the white house so fiercely coming to his defense in the wake of these domestic abuse allegations. in fact, you heard today a rare admission from the white house saying that this could have been handled better. there's still a lot of outstanding questions here tonight about what john kelly, the chief of staff knew and when today the white house said that he was not fully aware until yesterday. then when pressed on that, the deputy press secretary said he didn't know about the picture of rob porter's ex-wife where she had a black eye. before there, there were on the record allegations from two of rob porter ex-wives that they were physically and verbally abused by him. john kelly, the chief of staff and other top white house aides knew months ago about some of these allegations. it raises the question why wasn't there an internal review. why was he able to keep his security clearance. the white house explains that away by sayin

all these people leaving the white house. it is a mess when it comes to how they make the personnel decisions and moving forward. >> the director of national intelligence said people with what are called interim security clearances should have access on a limited basis. have you gotten any indication that the white house is restricting these individuals who don't have full security clearances, to only limited information? >> well, we know in this case, that this is not a junior staffer. this was not someone who only had passing access to information. this is person responsible for personally delivering some of the most classified information directly to the president of the united states. i'm not sure what limitations there were. the real question is how it is the white house chief of staff continues to maintain they did everything right when we now know the fbi completed its review seven months before. this is an administration and a president that has been besmirching the good work of the fbi and now they're even questionin

today the white house tried to pass the buck to white house intelligence agencies.e panel. >> i thought the most important thing he said was drawing that distinction. it is not uncommon to have people there who have not been fully approved. i was there for six weeks, seven weeks waiting for my -- that's normal. but once it's clear that the fbi is not going to approve you because you are a security risk in their eyes, it's normal for you to be out. the idea that there's this whole new category of people who just, y'all ain't never going to be approved but here's some security documents anyway, that is new. it's weird. it's not normal. it's bad. it's risky. it's dangerous. no matter what anybody else tries to say, oh, well, this is a new way of doing government. there's a reason we do it the way we've done it because i hate to keep pointing this out. if somebody can't pass the fbi vet, that means they could be blackmailed. they could be bribed. there's something about them that history has proven people in that category are dangerous to our country. this is not just,

chief of staff leaving the white house, that makes him actually the third deputy white house chief of staff to leave the trump administration and they only got there 13 months ago. have we tried to even -- did we make -- did we try -- look, we squeezed them in in yellow front there. there., another deputy white house chief of staff and now yet another deputy white house chief of staff. we need a bigger wall. anyway, while we await news of whether the president is about to fire another chief of staff, as well, yet, another deputy white house chief of staff is gone and no sooner did that news arrive "the washington post" broke news another staffer resigned this evening and in his case, the second white house staffer in two days to resign because of domestic abuse allegations. now, this is not the same story as rob porter, the white house staff secretary who left office yesterday. this is a new white house staffer who you may not have known of before tonight, his name is david sorenson. we think he's in his early 30s. he was previously a spokesman for the republican party in maine and a

i should say elian na johnson, a very good white house reporter for.3lit cosaid the white house are in a state of crisis. rachel brand is leaving for somebody close to her and admin because she is very smart, accomplished and talent and wants to protect her career, she's going to walmart this source says. matt, what does this do to the way you think about the integrity and independence of the justice department. >> the pressure on the independence of the department is one of the reasons she's probably leaving. it's a miserable place to work right now. but often if you're the associate ag, you would stick around because you want the opportunity to either become the deputy attorney general or the attorney general. let's face it, those aren't great jobs to aspire to right now. you know if you take one of those jobs, at some point the president is going to ask you to do sboit inappropriate, maybe something illegal. why would you want that job? harry has it right she found an escape hatch to get out of the department. the big question now is what it means for the future of the mueller inves

house, it is up to the white house or whatever agency, it's up to that agency, the white house in this case, to make the judgment about the security clearance. interesting again hearing raj shaw today, he made, we counted, 25 references to the background clearance process. just have a listen as he was making this argument. >> the background investigation, process, the tried and true process. the security clearance process. we relied on a process. this is a process. the process was still ongoing. >> the decider in that process is the white house. the fbi does the background check, the white house has to make the decision. so the process is the administration's process here. so that attempt to kind of throw it off on someone else really just doesn't stand up to the facts. >> jim sciutto, thanks very much. >>> will the government shut down again? has rand paul managed to derail a compromise between republicans and democrats? that's ahead. >>> united states senate is grappling with the possibility of another government shutdown. yes, again. turns out it could be a long night. phil mattingl

white house communications director would get the word from the white house counselor chief of staff would be in the loop. but they're just flat out saying that's not true. it seems like for all the holes in the time line, for all the holes in the fact pattern, that was a comment that she might live to regret. >> we'll have to see. she didn't say much there. she said that's not accurate. we're going to need to have some more information from the white house. what does that mean? it's not accurate. what i'm trying to figure out today in my reporting is what did the fbi tell the white house throughout the past year? what was the extent of what the fbi said with regard to porter's status and his background check, because once we can figure that out as a press core, then we'll understand did the white house act -- when presented with certain information or not. but it's still somewhat vague and the white house seems to be living in this hazy space about what exactly was told to the white house, what they knew about rob porter's status. >> kimberly, let me read you a time line we put toge

it's found its way inside the white house. they must be especially concerned about general flynn's cooperation. after all, he had a lot of exposure, he was only indicted and pled on one count, his son wasn't pled at all. this is his reaction, a desperate move. what we're seeing from the chairman, the speaker of the house, is they're more interested in protecting the president from the legal challenges he faces than they are in protecting this country and moving toward a very real threat of an autocratic president. >> congressman quigley, late at the capital for us, we do appreciate it, thank you, sir. >> thank you. >>> when we come back, what's behind steve bannon's and corey lewandowski's refusals to testify before the house intelligence committee? could they be forced to do so? ♪ ♪ i'm jimmy, this is my definition of fresh since 1983. ♪ you won't see these folks they have businesses to run. they have passions to pursue. how do they avoid trips to the post office? stamps.com mail letters, ship packages, all the services of th

it is part of the white house. so, the white house was not very clear on that, when they were explaining that today, saying that it goes through them, and a u.s. official told me colleague jeff zeleny that the security clearance office is akin to what the hr would be in a private sector, they're more of a clearing office and they do not make decisions, they essentially, anderson, take information and pass it on, which is not what the white house was saying today at the briefing. >> right, it was interesting, sarah sanders actually didn't use the word, claiming that the white house security personnel office was doing investigations, she didn't say that, she just kept using the word their process hadn't been completed. despite what sanders, you know, continuing to make it sound like there's some distance between the white house and this investigation, that office, i mean, just to reiterate, is part of the white house. either way, we know white house counsel don mcgahn and john kelly were aware of these allegations fo

white house officials?can those two things be? >> that is something that would be well beyond my scope to determine. >> they weren't told? if everyone knew but no one in the senior staff found out? >> i haven't asked them about that

did they approach the white house? did they try to breach the white house grounds before?ver the next couple hours. again, figure out what the intent was. >> as i've been listening to you, i think you've been following along. watching along west saw picture, i think it was our affiliate. what looked to be a white suv with smashed out windows. did you catch that? josh? >> reporter: this is john. >> i didn't know if josh -- he was following along. john. i don't know if you're in front of the tv but it looked like potentially, the car, or a car, that could be in question. go ahead. >> reporter: yeah. so the, it looks like a white mini van. >> yes. missing the back window. >> reporter: think of how dynamic these are. they went from condition normal to a vehicle rams the gate. at an unknown speed at this point. so the windows could have been smashed there impact but it could have been the instant response by law enforcement to take custody of the suspect. they may have to, they couldn't get window open in the back to quickly search the car for secondary devices or explosives. w

a white house official telling "cnn tonight," the chief of staff was reluctant to dig into what white house counsel don mcgahn knew about porter. so this white house is doing what it always does. it's stonewalling, changing their story, flat-out lying. even though fbi director christopher wray blew all of that right out of the water today by simply stating the facts. >> the fbi submitted a partial report on the investigation in question in march. and then a completed background investigation in late july that soon thereafter we received requests for follow up inquiry. and we did the follow up and provided that information in november. and then we administratively closed the file in january. and then earlier this month, we received some additional information and we passed that on, as well. >> so in the face of those facts, that the fbi repeatedly briefed the white house on its investigation beginning months earlier than the white house admitted, sarah sanders changed her story today, claiming that even though the fbi's investigation was, in fact, complete, the white house personnel se

had not made a recommendation to the white house. >> but on monday sanders specifically said the white house was not involved with security clearances. >> this is a process that isn't -- doesn't operate within the white house. it is handled by law enforcement and the intelligence community. >> the in ability to get their story straight again raising questions about the future of chief of staff john kelly who learned about the allegations months ago. multiple sources say the press has not yet made a decision to replace kelly. kelly telling t"the wall street journal" his handling was all done right. even after sarah sanders admitted otherwise. >> we're looking at that internally and agree there are things we could have done better. >> cnn learned not only was the white house willing to overlook red flags in porter's background, they were in serious talks of promoting him to be kelly's deputy chief of staff. >> do you believe rob porter's ex-wives? >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> reporter: well, in addition to all of this, there is the issue of the $130,000 payment that the presi

house to warn the white house. to tell them how dangerous it would be to release this classified information. beyond that, we understand what the fbi further sent subject matter experts to the white house, to tell them more specifically about the danger of this release of this type of classified information would pose. now one major fly in the ointment about those warnings is the question of whether the white house itself may have been involved in cooking up this classified memo to attack the fbi. this is from page 23 of the transcript just released today. mr. quigley, let me ask you another question with the greatest respect. when you conceived of doing this memo, the preparation, the thought of doing it, the consultation of it, was any of this done after consultations with anyone in the white house? did they have any idea you were doing this? did they talk about doing this with you? did they suggest it? did you suggest it to them? did you consult in how to go forward with this before, during and after this point

bush white house. he is one of these folks who is always sort of a fuzzy person in the background of photos of people getting on helicopters and such. he knows the way white houses work. he knows the way white houses are supposed to work. and one big outstanding question tonight is was he familiar? was he aware of these shocking and deeply ugly allegations against rob porter. that's something that we can expect, particularly white house reporters to be digging into in the coming days. >> gabe sherman has been following this closely is tweeting tonight. he says widespread chatter tonight among republicans close to the white house that trump is nearing a decision to name gary cohn as kelly's replacement. peter nicholas, in "the wall street journal's" moments with john kelly, did it seem like the end could be near for him? >> well, replacing john kelly would be a risky thing to do. bear in mind he has only been in the job six months. he is the second chief of staff. if he is replaced that would only add t

>> this is a white house, you and i both saw during the campaign and it followed them into the whitehouse, but a white house that basically flouts the rules, sometimes brazenly and only sort of corrects their story or corrects their mistruths when they're forced to. even with the rob porter scandal, it wasn't until christopher wray testified where he painted a picture of the white house's public messaging and they were forced because they had no choice to address those questions. you see a white house that basically until someone is held accountable either by the media or a document request or mueller's probe or whatever it may be, that they are not really willing to make changes necessarily until absolutely forced to do so. >> maria, if john kelly gets replaced, and there are a lot of names floating around, do you think that they could potentially get this white house in order? is there anybody that can then change the culture of the white house? >> i think it requires someone who will totally say to the staff, you have the privilege of working for the people of this country. that i

it's up through the white house through the white house counsel's office and other officials to make a ruling. what seems clear from this time line is that, you know, the white house was asking the fbi to take another look. there was additional information coming through. but the fbi director saying clearly the background check, as far as he was concerned, was completed as of july 2016. >> the bottom line, the fbi is saying, hey, we did our job, the rest was in your hands. even after the request for following up, as you've just indicated. they've completed that as well. what does this say about questions that still exist right now about other white house staff and their security clearances? as you've been reporting, according to a u.s. official source of yours, 30 to 40 white house officials right now still do not have permanent security clearance. >> that's right. part of this is just a bure bureaucratic challenge and this white house hires a lot of people who have never been in government before so it is going to take longer to clear some of those people. but we have senior officia

it is part of the white house. so the white house was not clear on that when they were explaining that today. and a u.s. official told my colleague jeff zeleny that the office was akin to what an hr would be in a private sector. they take information and pass it on which is not what the white house was saying today. >> i was listening closely, and she did not use the word claiming that the white house security personnel office was doing investigation. she didn't say that. she said their process hadn't been completed. despite what sanders continuing to make it sound like there is distance. that office is part of the white house. either way, we know mcgahn and chief of staff john kelly were aware of these allegations for some time. >> reporter: that is right. we should not let what is important here get lost in what the white house is saying. seven-days since that first story on porter broke. today was the first day the white house mentioned this security officer. we know based on cnn reporting is that the white hous

she helped draft part of the white house response, along with other white house staffers. the president has not been happy with the handling of the whole situation this week and has told people around him he feels as though hope hicks, one of his closest confidantes, communications director, someone he views as his own daughter, according to people we've spoken with, that perhaps she put her own interest before his in the handling of this rob porter situation. as we've been reporting, hope hicks and rob porter have been dating for at least the last couple of months. and so the president himself is not very happy and is looking to move on from this controversy. as you pointed out, he spoke about it for the first time today and made no mention of the women who are alleging domestic violence by the former staff secretary here, rob porter. >> nope. not a mention. pamela, thank you. i want to start there. i have with me a panel. board director of the group stand up republic and cnn political analyst patrick healy and penny lee, who once served as executive director of the democ

a white house official is telling axios that the white house is unraveling. kelly's story that he acted immediately is now undermined by what multiple white house officials told reporters in real time. general kelly became chief of staff to right the ship. to bring order to chaotic oval office. but this porter scandal is just the general's latest. a new piece in the "new yorker" takes a deep dive on some of kelly's most alarming comments and it reads in some direction the lens through which kelly regards these cases appears to be distorted. joining me is the writer of that article amy davidson sorkin. when i saw it, i thought for some reason john kelly's pr is really good because he came into right a ship that really needed righting. he is disciplined, he is a general, he is what we all want to be the answer to the problem. but in fact time and time again, he has stepped into hot water in unforced errors, things that he was not asked to talk about. frederica wilson, he was not asked to talk about. he did not have to say that the civil war was a misunderstandi

white house briefing. the white house press secretary sarah sanders was asked about some of these conflicting stories, why the fbi director was up on capitol hill testifying that his agents had completed their investigation last july, when we were told by raj shah, the deputy white house spokesman, and sarah sanders that that process was ongoing. and her explanation was, well, the office of personnel security had this matter and that they were still looking at it and that that process had not been completed. and so anderson, by my count that is the fourth or fifth different explanation officially that we've heard from the white house as to why this information about rob porter's past was not being shared publicly. >> it's interesting because just yesterday she was pointing, saying it was law enforcement intelligence communities who hadn't finished the review process, which is -- i mean after chris wray said what he said, it was very clear the fbi had completed the background check. >> reporter: that's righ

all fired from the white house.traight from trying to cut employment benefits to trying to collect employment benefits. [ laughter ] but look at the five of them. that photo, it looks like an album cover for a band called "buffoon 5." >>> still ahead, john kelly was supposed to be a calming force in the west wing but now, of course, he's found himself in the middle of a controversy. and the president's reportedly voicing some complaints. we're going to have a lot more on the fallout over staff secretary rob porter's exit after the allegations of abuse, and we're going to go live to the white house for the very latest on that story. plus, democrats on capitol hill are now trying to rain on president trump's plan for a military parade. the "washington post's" eugene robinson has a new op-ed about the proposed parade and gene is going to tell us what he thinks the parade is really about. "morning joe" will be right back. directv has been rated #1 in customer satisfaction over cable for 17 years running. but some people

that's shaun white.hen he won his first olympic gold in 2006, for perspective, fellow snowboarders gold medalist chloe kim and red gerard were just 5 years old. at 31, shaun captured not just gold but redemption after failing to medal in sochi. needing something outstanding in his final run to take the lead, white did a trick that he'd attempted just four months ago that left him with a gash and over 60 stitches. he secured a 100 to secure the united states its 100th gold medal in the history of the winter games. once his score was announced, white burst into tears. he was sobbing as he hugged his mom, dad, and other family there. he talked about that moment at a press conference moments ago. >> at the bottom, all those emotions hit me. i won, everything we'd been through, every -- you know -- dream i've had, trying to sleep last night, you know. and i'm like living that dream right now. so it's amazing. >> reporter: despite the pressure on the only two north korean athletes that qualified to be here out

the latest from the white house when we continue.

as of this past friday, white house chief of staff john kelly announced with this memo that the white house would no longer allow access to highly classified material for staffers that couldn't get a full security clearance and once we got the policy announced, we saw people feeling off out of white house jobs. a speech writer couldn't get a fall clearance. four appointees in the commerce department as reported tonight in "the washington post" by c l carol. we asked josh raffle if him leaving tonight had something to do with the security clearance issue having to do with him. no answer from him, either. there is this fraught question looming over this security clearance controversy because the most high profile people in the white house who we know haven't been able to get full security clearances are these two. the president's daughter ivanka and her husband jared kushner are each titled as senior white house advisors. jared is in charge of middle east peace and china and mexico and all trade policy. ivanka just got back from briefing the president of south korea on the new north kor

it goes against what the white house said. >> this is a process that doesn't operate within the white house. >> the security office had not finished their process. >> we to the floor clearances. they're giving us multiple versionings of the story and frankly not telling the truth. >> everything was done right in the porter matter. >> there has to be some accountability here. >> we have seen russian intentions to have an impact on the next election. >> the united states is under attack. >> we cannot confront this threat when the leader of the government continues to deny that it exists. >> this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> finishing my card. >> roses are red, violets -- i hadn't gotten to the next line. i have to work on those. welcome to your "new day". eight days into the rob porter scandal. white house aides have repeatedly tried to up what they knew and when. the new fbi chief appointed by president trump contradicted the white house on porter's security clearance. the white house is trying to shift blame to its personnel security office, not them, though t

it's about the white house counsel. are you saying the white house counsel never learned until last tuesday that there was any allegation of any sort at any level against rob porter? >> amaga to get into the specific details, but we learned about the extent of the situation. who is we? >> the white house general. >> has he learned at any time before last tuesday when the story was broken by the daily mail that there was any allegation of any sort leveled by any person against rob porter? >> i can tell you that the process for the background is ongoing. the white house has not received any specific papers regarding the completion of that background check. >> to brief questions is the follow-up. 's status as mcgann counsel right now? >> ethic it was the same two weeks ago, two months ago, a year ago. indications to see it differently. he wastor corker said reconsidering and would probably reverse his decision and not already theion area republican primary is in the process of the state. what he tried to persuade it, or ju

house or a future white house.ometimes looking into the future is a good way to show people, not only can we manage a crisis, but we can plan for the future. that would restore credibility and i think members of congress would welcome the process to work together. >> unfortunately i have to cut this intervention short. i will invite you back for many more interventions. i enjoyed this one. >> thank you. >>> passengers are calling it the scariest flight of their lives. take a look at this video. part of the engine cover fell off a united airlines flight as it was over the pacific ocean. yikes. when it reached honolulu about an hour later the plane made an emergency landing with the flight crew telling passengers to keep their head down and brace for impact. it ended well. that's the important thing. one thing that did not end well, the westminster dog show. look at this. this is flynn, the dog that won best in show. it is a bichon. this is the second time a bichon has won best in snow. no labor golden retriever has

that the white house has laid about. can you speak to what the trect tore said. he seemed to indicate that first you would have known might have been in march, june and november and in january when the case was actually closed. ms. sanders: we explained the process last week. the white house personnel office received information last year and what they considered to be the final background information report in november but not made a final recommendation for ajudication to the white house because the process was still ongoing. in the view of personnel security office, the f.b.i.'s report required significant additional investigatory field work before personnel office could begin to evaluate the information for ajudication. as the director said information was coming to the white house personnel office in february. reporter: in the july report and back to march, what information was in those reports? ms. sanders: i wouldn't know the answer to that. raj said the nd investigation was ongoing. director wray said it was clos

whether it's the white house chief of staff or the chief counsel in the white house. when i was the press secretary, most days about 30 minutes before i went to do my briefing i'd hear a knock at my door and the white house chief of staff would stick his head in my office, that was filled with other staffers helping me prepare for the briefing, he'd look at me and say do you have everything you need for the briefing? it was not a situation -- obviously not a situation he was trying to intentionally mislead me. it is one of the chief responsibilities of the white house chief of staff to be in a position to make sure that the white house press secretary has the information he or she needs to go out and tell the truth and make an effective case in support of the president. so in this case it's pretty clear that john kelly is doing the opposite of what he's supposed to be doing. and the reason he's doing it, lawrence, this is important, is not because he's looking out for the best interests of the country or the institution of the white house or donald trump, he's trying

so the white house schiff wants to make it clear that the white house is involved. but they're not.they are the ones looking at it not the white house. >> harris: david, there has not been as i seen or read push back on the actual memo the first one from the democrats. that there push back we want to make it longer or do some kind of politics. what's your take on that. >> as we were anticipating this memo heavily and it turned out not to be as much as a bombshell as everybody, you know, as everybody thought it was, right? i mean, that was the main issue in that it's reporting there is question about how or where the fisa court was. >> harris: is the democrats going to be bombshell? i know you haven't seen it but you run in democratic circles. >> the reality is this whole thing is a big smoke screen designed to draw, take away attention from mueller and the investigation. >> harris: you don't think there is a problem with using a document that is maybely unverified to spy on americans whomever they are? whether they work for the trump campaign or not? >> the fisa court. >> harris: do

in any other white house, there would be a need for the white house chief of staff in the middle of aontroversy to step up to that microphone himself today -- and when i say that, it's hard to think of another white house where a chief of staff was ever the center of a controversy, the last one i can think of is john sinunu in the 1980s. >> i talked to chris whipple, who interviewed the 17 living former chief of staffs, nothing including reince priebus, and the truth of the matter is he regards john kelly as the worst chief of staff even worse than don reagan, who was ousted by nancy reagan when he couldn't control the iran-contra crisis. john kelly has failed at his job. if his number one job is control any crisis, advance the president's agenda and stay out of the spotlight, he has failed on all three measures. it is he who, from the reporting i've done, helped derail the president's own daca deal. so that right there is insubordination i would say. >> thank you both for joining us, really appreciate it. >>> coming up, why president trump says, and he really does say this, he said i