happened in a classified setting but i can indicate that our intelligence agencies, both director haspel probably gave the debatest breadth of information that was not only compelling but certainly exhaustive in terms of the number of attacks and planned attacks that had been contemplated and why the need for action was necessitated. eporter: mr. meadows: from this classified setting, i'm optimistic we can look at a de-escalating environment, however, it's important for us to share that this is the number one state sponsor of terror. to suggest that there are no rogue actors and not people that can potentially be in harm's way would be certainly inappropriate to draw those conclusions. at the same time, it's a good day for america because we know that american interests were protected but hopefully avoiding a war and a long protracted engagement in the middle east. [indiscernibley mr. meadows: i don't comment on conversations i may or may not have had with the president. [indiscernible] mr. meadows: obviously, getting into specification would be violating what we captain talk about, but

director haspel. unfortunately, in this toxic political environment, some of our colleagues rushed to blame our own government before even knowing the facts, rushed to split hairs about intelligence before being briefed on it, and rushed to down play soleimani's evil while presenting our own president as the villain. soon after the news broke, one of our distinguished colleagues made a public statement that rightly called soleimani a murder and then amazingly walked that message back when the far left objected to the factual statement. since then, i believe all her criticism is directed at our own president. another of our democratic colleagues has been thinking out loud about middle east policy on social media. mere days before president trump's decision, this senator tore into the white house for what he described as weakness and inaction. no one fears us, he complained. trump has rendered america i am potent in the middle east. -- impotent in the middle east. but since the strike, a complete 180. t

[overlapping questions] secretary of state mike pompeo, defense secretary mark esper, and gina haspel went to capitol hill yesterday to give a classified hearing on iran.

always ignore women that are leading the way in the republican party like a kellyanne conway, gina haspelme being the second rnc chairwoman. that's false headline. >> she's claiming nonelected officials, ivanka trump, even gina haspel, cia director, as part of the gop, interesting there. what is your response to the fact that she's saying 181 women are running in 2020 and whether or not they are actually reflective of the diversity of women across the country? >> right. well, i think she might want to wait until the votes are in in november before she starts bragging about it. at the moment, there are more democratic women running for congress and other offices than there are republican women. and republicans in 2018, republican women, had a 3% win ra rate. a lot of those races lean democrat or are a toss-up. sure, there may be some additional republican women in the house in 2018. i don't think we'll see double digits. republican women, the best hope for them is if trump loses in 2020. that gives them the opportunity to pivot and rebuild. but given trump's unpopularity with women, if he

haspel followed along with it, but leading the whole charge was mr. pompeo. >> and republican congress doug collins is attacking democrats. he claimed, basically, that democrats love terrorists. let's listen. >> they're in love with terrorists. we see that. they mourn soleimani more than they mourn our gold star families who are the ones that suffered under soleimani. that's a problem. >> can you respond to that? >> i'm not going to dignify parts of that with a response. i protect my body against terrorists. i don't need to justify that to anyone. >> he talked about gold star families and how they become a pawn in this political discourse. what is your view on that? >> i'm disgusted. i would never, ever use gold star families, military men and women or their families as any pawn in any political game. let me tell you something. this issue is about america's national security. it is not a partisan political issue. my concern is, is america safer today than it was before the president made this rash decision without considering the consequences and havi

you have acting dni, but you have gina haspel who is the cia director who was mike pompeo's deputy. this is another example of where the secretary of state has morphed. we talk about how the trump administration has imposed on people. he's the one that challenged him, now he won't stand up to the president. this administration, either by its own actions or now by the fear of its own officials, does not want to publicly account for facts. they like to live by their own truth. >> the constitutions on display today, literally right now we're watching something that's playing out from an 18th century document that's playing out from the 21st century, and i want to say that this notion that we can't anger the president of the united states is utterly preposterous and ridiculous. this is why you have a free press. it's in the constitution, it's right there. it's one of the first things the founding fathers talk about. i hope our intelligence agencies will back off that position, because it's not only their duty to share the information, as you said, jake, but it's our duty as the press bu

that's the type we're accustomed to seeing, we saw nothing like that from gina haspel. >> very finallyant to play you some sound from the canadian prime minister justin trudeau, canada lost dozens of its people when the jetliner was shot down and the canadian prime minister seems to be blaming the tension overall at least in part. listen. >> i think if there were no tensions, if there was no escalation recently in the region those canadians would be right now home with their families. >> given that it was the iranians themselves who shot down the jetliner, is that a fair statement to make, do you think? >> well, we're very aware that the trump administration by pulling out of the jcpoa, the agreement over iranian nuclear fuel enrichment basically started -- and then applying huge sanctions, high pressure campaign of sanctions led -- it's a system of provocation and escalation that president trump has been involved in and so i think it's fair to say that the u.s. has a role in the sequence of events that have arisen. certainly the direct responsibility exists with the mistakes made by t

so if they had an understanding of what haspel and pompeo were thinking, not the entire congress but a small group of people, he could have haddys or people willing to vouch for the wisdom of eliminating this person, this person that everyone agrees is a terrorist from the battlefield but instead they learned about it from a.p. reports and other news reports as everybody else was learning about it which is discomforting for congressional leaders who, by the way, take pride in the fact they are a co-equal branch of government. this is an institution that is prideful if nothing else and they don't like to be caught on guard. >> so rick, you both had seenor roles, senior seats at table where decisions of were were made by presidents and communicating them to the congress as jake is talking about and to the public. what is your take of how this rolled out the last five days. >> there is that old expression when you don't know where you're going, any road will take you there. that is why they don't have any -- any parallelness with what they're saying because there is no policy. the irony

joint chiefs of staff are expected to be on that briefing along with mike pompeo, mark esper, gina haspel are all expected to come to the hill tomorrow. if you have questions this morning about war powers, now is a good time to call in. this is linda, out of ohio, on the republican line. good morning. caller: sarah, on confused on a few things -- i'm confused on a few things. you definitely have to have congress if you're going to war, the american people have the right to know that. but when you have to do a strike because somebody's going to take a bunch of americans out, why can't the president have the right to do that? he doesn't have time to ask congress. can you explain that to me? you're doing a very good job of what you're explaining. guest: excellent. that's actually covered in the war powers resolution, giving the president 48 hours which can be long or short depending upon what exactly is going on, but it gives the president 48 hours to send notification to congress. he is supposed to consult prior, to give advanced warning, but with the law wants is within 48 hours to be told

gina haspel, the head of the cia is a career cia officer, they felt very strongly about not only thearity of intelligence, the clarity of soleimani's intent, but again this isn't an individual that popped up. there's a long, long painful history there, and for me the timing from everything i've seen was operational. normally soleimani kind of hides amongst a a crowd where you see him with his militias and i think the would of been a legitimate kind of the case for escalation and questioning of the president's authority have taken this shot in tehran are in iran, but instead again he was in baghdad operational planning and that's what drove this action. >> host: steve in maryland, republican line. >> caller: it's an honor, congressman. i retired from the army in 2000, and i of course thank you for your service. the way i'm approaching the killing of soleimani is through the geneva convention, which is based on international law. and international law defines an armed conflict and war. and i think we are in denial to say that there is not an armed conflict between us and iran. they kil

chairman of the joint chiefs of staff general milley, secretary of state pompeo and cia director haspelfortunately, in this toxic political environment, some of our colleagues rushed to blame our own government before even knowing the facts, rushed to split hairs about intelligence before being briefed on it. rushed to down play soleimani's evil while presenting our own president as the villain. soon after the news broke, one of our distinguished colleagues made a public statement that called soleimani a murderer and then amazingly walked the message back when the far left objected to her statement. so far her criticism is directed at our own president. another one of our democratic colleagues is thinking out about policy on social media. mere days before. trump's decision, tore into the white house as what is described as weakness and inaction. no one fears us, he complained. trump has rendered impotent in the middle east. since the strike, a complete 180. that same senator has criticized our own president for getting tough ludicrously. he and others have accused the administration of

from top trump administration officials including secretaries pompeo and esper and cia director gina haspel that it depends -- whatever you heard in that briefing really depends on what party you belong to. we keep hearing democrats as we heard from connolly say that he remains utterly unconvinced that there was an imminent threat posed by general soleimani who was killed by the u.s. at the baghdad airport. he said he was utterly unconvinced. the threat was not new. it was not con pelling, and he described the legal rationale for carrying it out was so sophomore you c sophomor sophomoric. it was based on the 2002 authorization that had to do with post 9/11 matters. our special coverage will continue just ahead with brooke baldwin right now. >>> we'll take it from here. hi there, i'm brooke baldwin, you're watching cnn. thank you for being with me. back from the brink or just a temporary pause. a question after iran makes good on the threat to retaliate on the united states afteri killin its top military general. more than two dozen missiles raining down in an air base in other locations in

expected to take part include secretary of state mike pompeo, defense secretary mark esper, gina haspelnd chairman of the joint chiefs general mark milley. my next guest to serve 26 years in the u.s. air force retiring in 2010 is a full colonel. the first female fighter pilot to fly in combat and the first to command a u.s. fighter squadron. arizona center martha mcsally and member of the armed services committee is joining us now. now we see the president intimating there might be some diplomatic openings. do you think this is a win for the organization? >> at this moment in time, we really appreciate the presiden president's resolve and decisiveness to go after this murderer and terrorist leader. because of activities in iraq, they shouldn't confuse restraint with weakness. president trump is willing and able to make it so painful for iran for all elements, economic and military deterrence, ease giving them the opportunity to change their course. the next move is definitely iran. i am so proud of our troops by the way, w they are over there n harm's way, and it's still a volatile time

we expect the cia director gina haspel to be there among others.mes as the house is debating how to handle the issue about tying the president's hand going forward. there's a discussion about -- within the house to have a vote as soon as next week to -- on war powers resolution to essentially prevent the president from moving forward on any aggression towards iran beyond 30 days. and after 30 days, you'd have to renew that effort. that vote is expected -- was expected initially this week but nancy pelosi delayed that until what is expected to be next week. in talking to democrats going into a closed door caucus meeting and the room next to me, they are defending that effort going forward and they're saying it makes stoe s sense to do thi even in light of the attacks, the president needs to come to congress to defend his actions. >> these are processes that need to be run. they are the two most serious constitutional processes we have. war and impeachment. so, no, they shouldn't be allowed to color each other. they need to proceed independently. if

the president's team secretary of state pompeo, defense secretary esper and director haspel just finished briefing lawmakers behind closed-doors, but some say that the meeting was cut short. >> there were so many purpose it questions they did not answer. we did not see a plan, a satisfying plan for the future. we had 97 senators there 15 got to ask questions. as questions got tough, they walked out. reporter: speaker pelosi said she will put up a war power resolution in the house for a vote tomorrow. she was not convinced today, some republicans in senate say they are not convinced after the meeting, senator hik sense miert was one of worst debriefings he has had. others think that president made the right call. >> i think that president appropriately responded. he did not respond last night, we waited for the full assessment of the attack damage or damage it did not do. >> iran deesscescalated, they ta u-turn they know they have no capability to fight against america. reporter: president did announce he is pursuing economic sanctions grain against iran. >> thank you very much. hillary va

meantime, "the new york times" has a piece about the director or one part of it, gina haspel l. that the threat of the range in general the most likely response would be a missile strike from iran's bases were american troops were deployed. took no formal position about whether to kill general soleimani, officials who listen to the announcement came over with a clear view that the cia believe that killing him would improve, and that we can security in the middle east. that's from "the new york times" but let's bring in our panel. brian and josh holmes, former top advisor of mitch mcconnell and now president of calvary consultants. all right, you heard the secretary of state there. there's obviously a lot of debate. democrats, republicans about the briefing behind the soleimani attack. where do we go from here after this war powers resolution's pass tonight? >> the power to declare war is something the framers of the constitution reserved for congress but the fact is congress over most of the last century has pretty much abrogated it. it's something -- they have not formally decl

. >> and gina haspel said that to "the new york times." and so you are confirming that. and so, now, also, to stage this widespread attack and you believe it is going to happen within days, would that not be iran launching the first shot in a war between the united states and iran? >> well, look it. iran has been attacking the united states through the proxy militias for 40 years now. >> sure. but on a lower level. >> and so last summer i had to deploy 14,000 additional forces to the region since may, and they were striking with drones, and striking aramco resources, and the forces in the fall escalated considerably. >> but you are describing a more grandiose, and if you will pardon the expression grandiose, but a more wider spread and shocking and bloody attack than the ones you described, and would that not be iran declaring war on the united states if what you are saying is accurate? >> well, it could be, and the compelling action is to take out the known terrorist leader who was on the ground meeting with another terrorist leader and taking him out to deter the attac

briefing with secretary of state mike pompeo and defense secretary mark esper and cia director gina haspeleady to bring the house resolution tomorrow. that her concerns were not addressed in the briefing. secretary of defense mark esper responding to criticism from some in congress that the briefing was insufficient. he said this, quote, most members of congress do not have access to the intelligence i think that is most compelling. that is nature of intelligence and rye stricted the "gang of eight." in reporters last hour, esper and general mark bilely they believe iran was trying to kill americans with targeted missiles. 16 short-range ballistic missiles fired at two military bases if iraq. it managed to mitt u.s. personnel, hit tax -- taxi way as parking lot and helicopter. saying they will roll out more sanctions again the country and senior administration official tells fox news they expect that announcement could come as soon as tomorrow. melissa. melissa: thank you, hillary. stocks rising amid rising mideast tensions. gerri willis joins us from the new york stock exchange with more.

you have to believe that general milley was lying, and you have to believe that gina haspel and the directorthe cia is not telling the truth, but i have to believe they are telling the truth. >> and skeptics, and that is what i do professional and we have heard from different cia directors and secretaries of defense and state different scl claims of intelligence that prove to be false. after years of war in iraq and afghanistan, it is healthy for the people to question this sort of thing, right? >> yes, i agree, but when we are talking about a full massive invasion, that is one thing, but talking about the guy that everybody knows is bad, and everybody is seeing the history of 20 years and history of 20 years of escalating attacks and saw what happened in the last week that both targeted americans and targeted an embassy, and then we see that the man was actually in iraq. what was he in iraq for? he was not there to make peace. trust me, he was there to coordinate again, and it is not a huge leap to understand that there is reason to believe that there were attacks on the horizon, and immine

the breed first, secretary of state mike pompeo, secretary of defense mark esper, cia director gina haspel and chairman of the joint chiefs, general mark milley expected to give members of congress and the reason president trump ordered the drone strike to take out the top iranian general. leading house republicans as the national security team convinced him. >> the information that was shared was both compelling and decisive. i think it leaves little doubt in my mind and certainly should leave little doubt and any members mind that not only did the president make the right call but that this was a clear and present danger for american interests and american individuals. >> a senior house democrat says he's not sold by this briefing. >> i was... while, utterly unpersuaded about any evidence about the imminence of a threat that was new or compelling. i believe this administration is after-the-fact trying to piece together a rationale for its actions that was impulsive, reckless, and put this country's security at risk. >> considering the briefings are classified, these lawmakers must be car

the reporting of the "new york times" yesterday that gina haspel, along with pompeo were pushing hard in the retaliation for taking outsole sole rather. for taking out soleimani, rather. >> that's right. it's becoming more and more clear soleimani was on the hit list in key figures of the administration a long time, even if the actual final authorization didn't come until after the contractor was killed innt iraq, now a couple weeks a or just under that. something that's gone overlooked, mike pompeo actually sent a letter to soleimani when he was cia director in 2017 essentially saying you will be held directly responsible for any americans' deaths i think was a form of a threat. they had been looking at soleimani a long time and we're starting to see a picture that emerges that is a campaign that brings president trump on board with this. as the excellent reporting by nbc showed, this was on the president's desk months ago, didn't quite get over the finish linee and didn't get it there t we saw what happened in the killing of this iranian leader. >> the u.s. certainly had eyes on sol

on wednesday with defense secretary mark esper, secretary of state mike pompeo, cia director gina haspel, and joint chiefs of staff chairman general mark milley. this is utah republican senator mike lee, speaking after the briefing. >> what i found so distressing about that briefing was that one of the messages we received from the prefers was, do not debate, do not discuss the issue at the appropriateness of further military intervention against iran. if you do, you will be emboldening iran. the implication being that we would somehow be making america less safe by having a debate or a discussion about the appropriateness of further military involvement against a government of iran. insultingng and demeaning. i don't care if they are with the cia, department of defense,, or othererwise, to come in and tell us that we can't debate and discuss the appropriateness of military intervention against un-american, unconstitutional, and it is wrong. amy: we'll have more on the tensions between the u.s. and iran with after headlines with andrew bacevich. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell rep

secretary of state mike pompeo, defense secretary mark esper and cia director gina haspel held closed-door conversations with both house and senate but didn't leave all democrats convinced that the situation with iran is effectively diffused. speaker pelosi saying moments ago they will vote on the war powers resolution in the house tomorrow, saying the briefing today did not address her caucus ' concerns and other democrats sounding off, saying they still think iran is a threat. >> nobody believes the imminent threat is upon, let me put it that way. it would be irresponsible to believe or to argue. i have heard nobody argue, that the threat to our troops, to our diplomats, to our allies, is suddenly gone because the guy is gone. reporter: president announcing new round of sanctions in response to last night's attack. senior administration official tell fox news that the sanctions could roll out tomorrow. the president also today blaming the obama administration for funding attack last night with those missiles with cash they provided to iran during his term. >> the miss sells fired last ni

i was in the house briefing and in the house briefing which i thought was fantastic where you had haspeluire to answer any question asked of them. it was a fantastic briefing. i wasn't on the briefing on the senate side. maybe something over there wasn't exchanged that they were upset about. maybe it wasn't the briefing in total. i don't know, i certainly can't answer with someone in the room with that one. charles: in your briefing you don't feel like there was pressure from the administration to suppress questions or to, or treat the fellows there, the people there, in a certain way where, to intimidate anyone? >> absolutely not. by the way a lot of people walking out of the briefing, criticizing the briefing, you, i, we've been watching them long enough since the election of donald trump, you and i knew what they were going to say walking out of the briefing regardless whatever they heard. so this is something that they're so invested in, a particular political strategy to take down the president, quite frankly it didn't even matter what they heard, they were going to say the same thi

. >> do you industrial confidence in gina haspel and dan croaoateo give you advice?don't agree with everything they say. i'll be right probably. >> thehere now are two msnbc national security analysts. clint watts and ned price, a special assistant to president obama. clint, to you first. no open threats briefing partly due to ken dlien's reporting here on our national security team that intelligence officials do not want to put in a position to have to be publicly contradicted by president trump again presumably. how do you read that? >> i think it's already signaling they don't agree with the white house or with the president's assessment on many different threats. none of this many want to be having to explain some sort of claim that the president made that isn't rooted in any sort of truth. with that, think about going into this hearing or waiting for the president or somebody at the white house to contradict you. you are pushed into a position you have to please your boss and to do that you have to lie. i'm sure they're trying to avoid that situation. this is de

in thailand, the particular secret prison for time that was run by the current cia director gina haspel>> that is correct. it remains to be seen how much this information -- the defense lawyers will be able to ask and how much of it will be permitted to be public as opposed to being kept classified. amy: president obama promised men like james mitchell would not be prosecuted. do you ever see them in the dock and questioned? -- being questioned? >> as we know from other countries, these sort of forms of accountability often take an incredibly long time and it ofuires pressure from a lot places, including transparency around the program and the releasase of the senate torture report. i think new leadership in the cia for sure and in the senate and house and in the white house. amy: i want to thank you baher , azmy, legal director of the center for constitutional rights. as well as vince warren the center for constitutional rights. when we come back, we go to brazil. the pulitzer prize winning journalist glenn greenenwald has had a criminal complaint filed against him. will he be indicted

those two individuals were jose rodriguez and the current director of the cia, gena haspel. >> thank you so much for making time tonight. >> thank you so much, chris. >> that is "all in" for this evening. the rachel maddow show starts right now. good evening, rachel. >> how was your break? >> it was great. it was really great. it's going to be quite a year. i'm processing the news right now. i'm a little stunned by what appears to have been this air strike which if true is just an enormously consequential deal. >> exactly. and i have to say watching those ongoing reports as they are rolling in tonight trying to assess whether this really happened and what the sources of information here and everything, at this point it feels very like potentially huge, also very unsettled on the factual basis of what we're getting. we are obviously monitoring that. >> this year is going to be enormously consequential in so many ways, and i just am like -- starting this way is making me wonder what is coming. >> you know what? chin up. thanks, chris. >>> and thanks to you at home

contradicted the president on whether isis had been completely defeated and that was dan coats and to gina haspel and the others, it's the fbi, the head of defense intelligence. this is a signal moment and that i know reporting, that led to the eventual departure of dan coats at a critical moment. >> you stitch it all together. i know you've been balancing between this and msnbc news today, but what you're stitching together is notwithstanding everyone keeping an open mind as to the trial, which the senators will ultimately discharge their duties. and there are many people where there's criticism of a president that doesn't rise to the extreme constitutional remedy of removal. what you're stitching together is the evidence that there's a national security issues here that are being revealed through this. before we lose you, i want to also plain germane to your comments about parnas, here was senator collins with regard to witnesses and seeming to kick the can back to the house, quote, i'm perplexed the house is sending over some additional information which should have been concluded earlier. the

it will also include defense secretary mark esper, cia director gina haspel, and joint chiefs of staffirman mark milley. meanwhile, mark milley is clarifying the u.s.' stance on the future of u.s. troops in iraq. a memo sent to the iraqi government suggesting that american troops would be withdrawn from the country was a poorly worded unsigned draft released by mistake. the letter was sent by u.s. command in baghdad. the clarification comes a day after the iraqi parliament unanimously voted in favor of expelling united states troops from their country. >>> authorities in puerto rico are assessing the damage following a powerful earthquake that struck the u.s. territory just before dawn today. the magnitude 5.7 quake rocked the town about 100 miles west of san juan. it knocked homes off of their foundations, buckled roads, knocked out power and caused some small landslides. fortunately no deaths reported. the wake wquake was the latest strongest to hit puerto rico over the past week. they've been through so much in the last couple years. the last thing they need. >> you're right. >>> tu

. >> the new york times is reporting that gina haspel didn't take a position on whether to kill soleimanio those who were in the briefing, one of the briefings she gave, before this happened. but the officials according to the times who listened to her analysis came away with the clear view that the cia believes that killing him would improve, not weaken security in the middle east. what is your response to that? >> again, the takeaway from the briefing yesterday that i had was a recitation of the many different wrongdoings of soleimani, and his qods forces over the many years but no concrete evidence that taking out soleimani would prevent an immediate targeted attacks, nor would it increase or improve our national security. the exact opposite is true and that's evident in two ways. number one, iran is speeding quickly toward developing a nuclear weapons capability. no longer complying with iran nuclear deal that trump pulled out of and number two, it is because of this escalation that our forces in iraq who are supposed to be trying to prevent a resurgence of isis and al qaeda are no lo

president's national security team, secretary of state mike pompeo, mark esper, cia director gi gina haspel amid objections that congress was kept largely in the dark. of course, it was. in the hours beforehand pompeo and esper offered mixed messages publicly about the urgency of last week's assassination. >> if you're looking for eminence, you look no further than the strike taken up against soleimani then you in addition to that have what we can clearly see continuing efforts on behalf of that terrorist to build out activities that would lead potentially to the death of many more americans. >> can you clarify the attack soleimani was planning, was that days or weeks away? >> i think it's more fair to say days for sure. he was clearly on the battlefield. he was conducting, preparing, planning military operations. he was a legitimate target and his time was due. >> he was a baghdad airportment for i'm joined by joaquin castro and valerie plame and democratic candidate forcongress. congressman, what did you make of the briefing? did you hear a jinx for stopping an imminent attack against the

picture painted by not just mike lee, but rand paul and others, was of a briefing from pompeo and gina haspelnd secretary esper where for 75 minutes they said here's what happened, this is not open for debate, we don't need you in front of tv cameras arguing with us about this. as mike lee put it, senator lee said go be good little girls and boys and defend the president effectively is how he summarized it. every once in a while we get a glimmer from a republican in congress, a principled glimmer of someone who says, i'm not going to just rally behind the president, i'm not going to defend him when i come out. when i see something wrong and violates the spirit of the constitution and the way our government is supposed to run, i'm going to say something. >> you know, one of the things that surprised me yesterday about that was that senators have healthy egos. everybody in the senate believes he or she should be president. we know that. >> right. >> when you talk down -- one of the things they hate the most is being talked down to. it's surprising more people didn't come out of that briefing th

secretary of state mike pompeo, along with him is also defense secretary mark esper and cia director gina haspels leadership this morning signaling there is no timeline for a war powers resolution to hit the floor, but that's still an ongoing discussion. >> donald trump may have been an arsonist that lit a fuse that could plunge the middle east into a catastrophic war, though he's trying to pretend as if he's the firefighter. reporter: democrats both in the house and senate say it's important for them to send a message to the president through this war powers resolution letting him know that it is still their sole authority to declare war, even though the situation with iran appears to be defused for now. neil? neil: hillary vaughn, thank you very, very much. with us now, the former navy pilot, former deputy assistant defense secretary under bush 43, peter brooks. you know, peter, i have been scouring the wires here waiting to see any iranian response to the president's remarks, none thus far, but on the threat of sanctions to come, additional ones, how do you think they sort that out? >> well,

director haspel. unfortunately, in this toxic political environment, some of our colleagues rushed to blame our own government before even knowing the facts, rushed to split hairs about intelligence before being briefed on it, and rushed to down play soleimani's evil while presenting our own president as the villain. soon after the news broke, one of our distinguished colleagues made a public statement that rightly called soleimani a murder and then amazingly walked that message back when the far left objected to the factual statement. since then, i believe all her criticism is directed at our own president. another of our democratic colleagues has been thinking out loud about middle east policy on social media. mere days before president trump's decision, this senator tore into the white house for what he described as weakness and inaction. no one fears us, he complained. trump has rendered america i am potent in the middle east. -- impotent in the middle east. but since the strike, a complete 180. t

joint chiefs of staff are expected to be on that briefing along with mike pompeo, mark esper, gina haspel are all expected to come to the hill tomorrow. if you have questions this morning about war powers, now is a good time to call in. this is linda, out of ohio, on the republican line. good morning. caller: sarah, on confused on a few things -- i'm confused on a few things. you definitely have to have congress if you're going to war, the american people have the right to know that. but when you have to do a strike because somebody's going to take a bunch of americans out, why can't the president have the right to do that? he doesn't have time to ask congress. can you explain that to me? you're doing a very good job of what you're explaining. guest: excellent. that's actually covered in the war powers resolution, giving the president 48 hours which can be long or short depending upon what exactly is going on, but it gives the president 48 hours to send notification to congress. he is supposed to consult prior, to give advanced warning, but with the law wants is within 48 hours to be told

the way in the republican party like a kellyanne conway, like a ivanka trump, like elan chao, gina haspelhat's a false headline and women all over this country recognize that president trump's policies are working for them. ainsley: she said suburban college educated white women once republicans fleeing the party in droves. talks about how only the only women who support the g.o.p. now are conservative women who go to church or evangelicals. do you agree? >> i happen to be a suburban college educated woman who supports this president and i absolutely disagree. especially when you talk to women about what democrats are proposing. things like taking away your private health insurance which we are seeing many of the candace on the stage talk about. women do not want to see their doctor-patient relationship severed. they don't want to lose their pediatrician that they have gone to for their children. women already recognize that our economy is booming. it's lifting all boats. they're not going to go against the grain with an bernie sanders or elizabeth warren or joe biden who are talking abou

--earing on a video speaking video screen, gina haspel monitoring the crisis from northern virginia ins 'sfore general soleimani death. she had advised president trump that his threat was greater than that of the iranian response. indeed, she predicted most likely the response would be missile strikes from iran to troops wereamerican deployed, the very situation that appeared to be playing out tuesday afternoon. "though she took no formal position about whether to kill general soleimani, officials listening to her believed that the cia thought it would it improve, not weaken security in the middle east. the idea of strategy from the administration when it comes to iran, your thoughts on that. when it comes to our support line in woodbridge, virginia, george, go ahead. caller: i don't know if anyone remembers when cut off he, tortured that assassinated. he was a head of state. the u.s. helped the french to get that done. soleimani, identified as a terrorist today, nobody cares about the embassies being attacked and the u.s. citizens who have been killed. we are talking about soleimani a

brian: gina haspel cia director with all these years of experience told the president directly the riskhan the risk of taking him out. take him out. what do you want him to do? >> well, look, have you nikki haley at the u.n. years ago talking specifically about this individual. it was a bold move. and i think we should all rally behind the president just like we did when barack obama took out usama bin laden. this was equal. steve: actually mitch mcconnell has said over the last couple of days i didn't get a hedz up when they took out bin laden. i didn't get a heads up. >> the president should keep it quiet but he informed the congress after that. steve: listen, after it happened with soleimani, you know a number of democrats said, you know, he really acted outside of his lane. that was thursday into friday. later that friday, a couple of days ago, peter doocy, who used to live upstairs at my house. >> yeah. steve: saw joe biden who is the frontrunner on the democratic side in dubuque, iowa. and essentially turned it around. so many complaints about this president doing it. peter asked

esper and gina haspel with the cia.d do you have any information -- we were getting word the president was going to speak last night and then we were told he wasn't. he was going to hold off until the morning. >> i think that you have got a situation where clearly the administration was conducting bomb damage assessments over the courts of the evening last night, looking at what had happened, looking at possible options and i think we will hear much more from the president this morning about that. look, i think it's very important for everybody to recognize what's gone on here what is going on is that the world has lost patience with the iranian mull also a. the world has lost patience. the iranian people have lost patience with the regime. the iranian regime is clearly desperate. they have hundreds of thousands of their citizens in the streets protesting. they are under tremendous economic pressure again because of the sanctions, because of the policies president trump put into place. and if the iranians think that the

you have career intelligence professionals like cia director gia haspel.i mcguire, you have chairman milley telling members of congress this is some of the best most exquisite intelligence they've ever seen. it was unequivocally clear that there was going to be an imminent attack within the next few days. i want to say something else, just because there's been given a lot of justifications for this attack, that strengthens the case. it doesn't diminish it, and i think there's a strange narrative going on that because there's been all sorts of reasons for doing this that that somehow diminishes the reason for taking out soleimani, but it doesn't. it strengthens it. they attacked our embassy. we can pontificate about whether they were going to attack an embassy. they already did. all right? they already did kill an american. they already did board a u.s. vessel in 2016. they already did increase massively their ballistic missile program, many of which are nuclear capable. they already did quadruple funding to hezbollah. that is post-jcpoa by the way. they al

so how does gina haspel balance that and chris wray balance that? >> joe, as ken said in his reporting, this annual threat assessment is a key organizing moment. it's part of regular order for our government. this testimony is prepared. the agencieshe analysts, work out consensus positions. what disturbs me the most is that this report, which is an essential kind of guidepost, isn't going to be issued this year. it's going to be delayed, because the intelligence agency chiefs are afraid of the president's reaction. this is -- this is the situation that you most fear, is that our intelligence agencies will begin to pull in their operations for fear of offending a petulant white house that may not like being told truth to power on any particular issue. then i think we really get into a much more dangerous situation where people are pulling their punching. that's what we're talking about here is -- is a threat assessment that's an essential part of the intelligence community to do its job being pulled, because of the fears of presidential political rea

[overlapping questions] secretary of state mike pompeo, defense secretary mark esper, and gina haspel went to capitol hill yesterday to give a classified hearing on iran. some spoke to reporters as they exited the closed-door meeting. >> uh, i have yet to see this president exercise -- >> -- characterization of your general, i think you call it your -- i know you do not speak specifics. speaking on a commodity leave this was sophomoric, and more than ever, the congress needs to act to protect the constitutional provisions about war and peace. >> what can you say about the rationale about the strike on soleimani? >> i believe there was no rationale that could pass a graduate school test. well, utterly unpersuaded about any evidence about the ms of a threat that was new or compelling. what is the legal rationale? >> the legal rationale absolutely fell in the category of sophomoric. the citation was article two of the constitution and the 2002 8 militaryrization of force, which of course had nothing to do with iran. with whatdo with happened after 9/11. [indiscernible] >> again, i will n

why he was not briefed by administration officials, but he did just speak to the cia director gina haspel, and i got a chance to ask him what he learned, and he raised some serious concerns about the ramifications of this attack. >> roumani frlswas a bad guy. he had blood on his hands and no one in america should mourn his passing. but the concern i have is america should have the ability to choose the time and place to take action. >> he went on to say that he was concerned that protests could develop in the region, they could get violent, they could target americans overseas. he's concerned there wasn't a thought-out plan to deal with that, but what he's demanding is a full briefing, something that hasn't happened yet. next week senate majority leader mcconnell said all senators will take part in the senators' briefing. this afternoon some senate staff had been briefed, adam schiff got briefed as well, but the concern warner had was these members of the gang of 8 should have been briefed ahead of time so they could provide feedback, they could understand the ramifications, particularly