intel people don't want to wave to the political sphere. they've got some intel. because that's something they don't want to say. they do missiles. they do nukes. they don't do domestic politics. i'm going to guess the intel is pretty good and the republicans on the committee clearly are embarrassed by this as they were in '16 and don't want to hear the message. >> just to point out the obvious, in 2016 they sure had a preference for donald trump. i mean, you know, they hacked the emails of the dnc. and of john podesta. they engaged in the social media conspiracy out of st. petersburg. it is a well established fact. so it would be surprising that if they were doing something else four years later. >> not to be pollyanna about this, but it also -- the fact we're having this discussion and not a discussion about what the intelligence community is doing to stop this, to combat it, to prevent it. which was the intent of this briefing in the first place to say, you know -- to send up a flair saying this is happening now again, guys. and, you know, four years ago then-p

isn't that what you want from a member of the intel community? want and should expect from a member of the intelligence community. look, you know, for intelligence agency leaders including all the previous dnis, they understand that it is their job to be relentless in gathering and providing the president with the intelligence information that he needs to be able to protect the country from foreign threats. and they should never under any circumstances have to stop and think about whether or not the information they're providing would in some way be taken personally by the president and result in some sort of retribution. if there's an intelligence official in that situation this morning it's a very difficult situation for them because we simply cannot 17 the safety and security in this country we've come to expect when our intelligence officials fear retribution from the president for providing them -- >> the fact the president seems to want to replace the career professionals, the people who have worked through and know this stuff on a granular

>> i've talked to a couple of folks inside the intell community and they have two reactions. number one is keep their nose down and do their job because they're on the front lines protecting the country. and then they shake their heads and go we know the guy at 1600 pennsylvania avenue is dangerous. we just have to try to contain the damage as best we can. year going to doing our dead level best to do that and the members in congress, we should call for their testimony, listen to them and try to contain the damage as best we can. >> it's an unbelievable state of affairs. congrats on your reporting. after the break, in the wake of trump's dismissal, his intell chief and in the throws of a purge of career public servants, donald trump is casting about for a political ally. we'll show you the kinds of candidates trump has in mind. with one day to go until the nevada caucuses, the 2020 democrats make their case to minority voters. we'll go inside the races to gain advantage with some of the most important voters. the former new york city mayor says he will release three women fro

this is the house intel committee, not the gang of eight. last question, what are lawmakers telling you even on background about how they feel about mr. grenell getting this job for which he does not seem to be qualified? >> we've talked to several people about this, you know, intelligence officials who are still in place, former high-ranking intelligence officials, lawmakers, and everyone seems to sort of have the same answer, right? grenell has very little or no experience in the intelligence field. he has sort of alienated his counterparts in germany. we had one intelligence official tell us that he's been sort of shut out almost every meeting he's had in germany. that people there don't really respect him or take him for having much value for the work that he does. and then having somebody come like grenell come into the position that he's coming into at odni, it creates all sorts of concerns, mostly because as you said earlier, the director's supposed to be apolitical. this person's supposed to gather, you know, unbiased facts and is su

now he doesn't even want the intel officers to be able to brief the intel committee. their job. intelligence officials as you can tell us go to the congress to the intelligence committee and tell them about the information they're getting. and the president didn't like that part either. >> well, i think a couple things have changed. let me tell you in a second how this is going to play out. the first is over the course of the last three and a half years. the president has realized if he plays pinocchio, the american people will believe him. if he fwoez out there and says what he wants about russia, he thinks it's fine. in the past couple of days we learned that he's going to appoint somebody as the chief intel guy who is a supporter of his. he is assuming grenell will carry water for him. when he goes to congress or the white house with talking points, the people in my old job preparing talking points are going to say the russians are interfering, what are you going to say ambassador? the second we're not talking about him, thedirector, she's tough. she is not going t

he or she produces the top secret briefing given to the president every day, documenting the latest intel from all 17 of the nation's spy agencies. it's a really big job, and it's supposed to be apolitical. they work with lawmakers from both parties on issues like election security. sometimes they need to tell the president something he might not want to hear. its purpose was to literally prevent another unforeseen disaster like the september 11th attacks. trump's first dni was dan coates but he fired him laws he issued intelligence assessments conf m confirming that russia did meddle in the election that made trump president. coates was replaced by joseph maguire and now maguire has been fired as well. and trump is now replacing him with a partisan hack, a guy with virtually no intelligence experience. his name is richard grenel, the form former spokesperson, who is currently ambassador to germany, a position he's planning to keep. as ambassador, he has attacked the german government and proclaimed he wants to, quote, empower other conservatives throughout europe, to reverse the, quote,

instead of being outraged at the russians, the president is lashing out at his own intel experts. trump claiming the discovery by u.s. intelligence sources that russia wants to prop up his campaign are just rumors and i'm quoting now disinformation. that from the president of the united states. and that this is being spread by democrats. for more on this let's bring in cnn's sarah westwood at the white house. sara, what more are you learning about the president's reaction to these intel reports on russia? >> reporter: well, fred, president trump is essentially rejecting this assessment from the his intelligence community that russia would prefer he be reelected in 2020. sources tell cnn that president trump was angry about the fact that he learned not from his own aides but from a republican ally that a top intel official briefed lawmakers last week about this conclusion from the intel community about russia's preferences. sources say that it was congressman devin nunez, a top trump ally who informed the white house about this briefing. the fallout president trump being angry abou

loyalists, nautica rear intel professionals are now overseeing national security. here's white house correspondent kaitlan collins. >> reporter: it's really a fascinating turn of events we're learning about and i want to start with last week. there was this intelligence briefing on thursday on capitol hill with a group of bipartisan l lawmakers with shelby pearson, in this role. she's coordinating all that. it's a new position that was created last summer, and she told these lawmakers that their latest assessment is russia is trying to interfere in the 2020 election and they are favoring president trump to win. she told this to a bipartisan group of lawmakers. we're told by sources the republicans in the room grew angry with this assessment and later the president found out and he got irate with the acting director of national intelligence, that would be this official's boss and that's joseph maguire, someone expected to be prmly nominated to that job, but we're told after that briefing happened thursday, he met with the president on friday. that's when they had th

the warning came in a briefing to members of congress last week by the top intel official responsible for election security. and sources tell cnn that warning prompted an irate response from the president. irate not over the very real threat to national security, but sources tell cnn he was furious over who the intel community shared the warning with, and also other sources say he was irate over how he himself found out about it. in the wake of the briefing, the acting director of national intelligence joseph maguire is on his way out. the president, replacing him with a staunch loyalist, richard grenell, the current u.s. ambassador to germany who doesn't have experience in intelligence. let's get straight to cnn national security correspondent with a big part of the story. so vivian what more are you learning about this briefing? >> our reporters are learning that a number of lawmakers were in the briefing room last week when someone from dni actually went to give them the assessment. and essentially what the assessment found was that russia is trying to meddle in the upcoming electi

and house intel wanted more at this stage. i will say one thing. assuming everything is accurate and that maybe the assessment was stated too clearly. it's not at all clear the russians want trump. donald trump's reaction is something that the russians are watching because donald trump's reaction was not, let me see the sources and methods. his reaction was, i want maguire out. that tells the russians one thing which is, of course, we're going to keep doing it. >> and lisa, to build on juliette's good point, it's maguire out, grenell, a staunch loyalist in for now, and, oh, maybe another loyalist of mine, congressman doug collins who doesn't have intel experience should take this job. now doug collins said on another network this morning he doesn't want the job. he wants the senate seat open in georgia. that's a tough interparty fight there. what does it tell you that the president is eyeing him for this? >> i think the president's reaction to this is fairly predictable. we've seen this happen before. whenever talk of russia g

even worse, intel is far from oversold intel is still not that far from overbought territory that meanss come up too far, too fast and was likely due for a drop this is what i have been emphasizing from the top of the show these things haven't done enough work is what we would say. this has got to go lower put it together and intel's chart -- last april didn't end well for bulls and collins is betting history will repeat itself and so am i this is another one that was hot, but not anymore, caterpillar. industrials are the last group you want to own when the world economy is slowing down. as long as caterpillar can hold above 130, something i don't think is likely, should be in the clear. collins gives you 130, and 129 today, and then he says this dog has serious teeth. where? cat has had a bad year in 2020 hasn't reached oversold territory. my theme we are not oversold yet. it has a slowly descending down slope, not a good sign if caterpillar didn't get any bounce then its ten week moving average will be on track to close below the 21 week moving average. when that same crossover happen

i mean, the information -- the intel community has the information.been passed to the relevant officials in congress. so the information is there, but this is a chilling message that is sent to the intel community. maybe it makes it more difficult for them to disseminate this information next time. >> got you. dana, we talked about the president's behavior about his mind-set post impeachment. what does it say about his mind-set? >> to bounce off what you were talking about with john, the way this is supposed to work -- this isn't deep state stuff. this is checks and balances. >> protocol. >> protocol, and even beyond that. it's making sure that something as very, very fundamental and scary as foreign governments interfering in american elections, that people who need to know are aware of it, that the fact that the president was apparently so upset, not necessarily that the congress was told, as they should be, but it was adam schiff, who is the chairman of the intelligence committee. if he's not going to be told about it, who is? and it's just a remin

if an angry president responds to a warning from intel officials doing their jobs by replacing the intel chief with an unqualified loyalist? it's all part of his battle against the rule of law, a battle that took a turn in a d.c. courtroom today. it was a good day for justice and a bad day for the president i'm talking about roger stone, infamous political dirty tric trickster, long-time trump krony. he lied to congress and threatened a witness over the case that revealed the president's interests in wikileaks during the campaign. don't miss the significance of all this. a u.s. district court judge and the d.o.j.'s own prosecutors opposing the president today after the four original prosecutors quit the case in protest when the attorney general william barr undercut them. so while bar is apparently willing to give the president exactly what he wants, the judge and those prosecutors are standing up for what's right. standing up for the rule of law. judge amy berman jackson sending a very clear message, not just with stone's sentence, but with her statement in the court today, insisting on

sarah, what more are we hearing about the president's reaction to this intel?> well, victor and christi, president trump is clearly reject the assessment from the intelligence community that russia would prefer to see him re-elected in 2020. he was angry not from his aides but from a republican lawmaker that the intelligence community had briefed lawmakers on that assessment by is intel officials about russia's preference for him. the president was told that by republican congressman devin nunes. and he was very angry. and that led to the outfall of joseph mcgwire. president trump has characterized this as a disinformation hoax. and he continued to reject that yesterday during a rally yesterday in las vegas. take a listen. >> i was told a week ago, they said, you know, they're trying to start a rumor. it's disinformation. that's the only thing they're good at. they get nothing done. do nothing democrats, that putin wants to make sure i get elected. listen to this, he wouldn't he rather have, let's say, bernie? wouldn't he rather have bernie who honeymooned in m

emily: that was intel ceo bob swan. be sure to catch the full episode of bloomberg studio 2.0. coming up, will the blockchain deliver? developing a programming language. later, one sneaker marketplace wants to change the way people shop. this is bloomberg. ♪ emily: blockchain in 2020. will reality live up to the hype? this book to deliver on his promise. digital asset is backed by giants like samsung. here is my conversation with the ceo. yuval: we are looking to use the money to expand to reach into different industries. we are also looking to increase some of the developer tools we have been building in recent years, and to achieve some of their ambitions using the technology. paul: you've got some high profile partners. can you tell us more about some of the things you are working on for them? yuval: as the industry progresses over the past few years, you've seen what is similar to the early days of cloud, blockchain is becoming more and more mature and you are starting to see players like vmware, microsoft, amazon e

with me, michael zell dondin, f prosecutor and cnn analyst. >> nice to see you. >> the intel reportsrussia is meddling in the election, calling it disinformation. >> he doesn't hear that which he doesn't want to hear. the problem is it creates a national security vulnerability to the united states. if you are not listening to intelligence that indicates the possibility of foreign interference in our election, and if you're dismissing people that may present a dissenting voice to you, then it creates a national security risk to the united states. that's the biggest problem trump is creating for us. >> this comes as the president caused a lot of concern over tweets, comments on meddling with criminal cases such as roger stone case, department of justice just handled, attorney general welcome barr said the president's tweets make it impossible to do his job. we talked about that last week. overall, what is the impact that this is having, the president is having on the idea of judicial independence? >> it has a chilling effect both on the judiciary which seems to be ignoring him as you s

job like this. >> he has no intel experience.hausting of the imagine if president obama did "x." game. but imagine if president obama put in a political operative with a history of pushing political conspiracies. his head would have exploded. he did not put him in charge of the dni. >> a guy who has ten years of being an intel experience. i think that is a complete fabrication of the beltway establishment that hates grenell because he is combattant. >> to be a loyalist. >> not a loyalist . the most anti-russian person in the administration. >> i remember when william barr was put in the room to be the grown up in justice. and we've seen the news surrounding him this wreak. >> i have to leave the conversation there. that's all we have today. thank you watching. we'll be back two days before super tuesday because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." what's important to you? saving for ava's college. financial security. being able to retire. on our terms. no matter what your goals are, our trusted advisors can help you reach them.

his people in the intel agencies went to congress. it was brought to them. here's the outrage, that the president of the united states wouldn't want democrats or even congress for that matter briefed on election interference efforts. our investigators, andrew mccabe and mary mccord are here to discuss. jim comer's in a tough spot. wants to defend the president on something hard to defend. let's just start on the macro look at this, the idea of the big shots turning around in their own agencies and saying, listen, you are don't just go telling congress about what anybody is doing interfering in these elections until we get the it's all clear from the president that it's okay to do so. impact. >> well, it's really frightening. i mean, it's of course routine and required that the intel communities regularly brief the intelligence committees on both the house and senate side. they also regularly brief others within the administration about threats to our national security, including foreign election interference. the thought that there would be any effort to cha

first i'd go to the intel committee. we have a chairman on the intel committee that read a transcript that was not true to the american public. we have a chairman of the intel committee who came before the american public and said he had a great fear that the administration was going to withhold the whistleblower from giving information. we learned later that the this -- that this same chairman met with the whistleblower and the only transcript with held if the basement of those interviewers was that one about the inspector general. all he needs to do is bring the committee to vote to release that transcript. i wonder what that transcript would read? could it possibly state out that member who is the chame of the intel committee could be a fact witness? could it come forth that he met with this individual before, the only person in congress who would know who the whistleblower is? could we he have just taken america through a second nightmare when we could have been focusing on so many other items? i think that's the big

what more are you hearing from the president about this intel? >> reporter: it's clear that president trump is rejecting this conclusion from the intelligence community that russia would prefer to see him reelected in 2020. sources tell cnn that president trump was angry after he learned not from aides but from a republican lawmaker that a top intelligence official had briefed lawmakers on capitol hill about these findings from the intelligence community that russia does want to help him in the upcoming presidential election and the fallout from that led the president to remove acting intelligence director joseph mcguire and install that loyalist that you mentioned, richard grenell, the apologize to germany. since all this have has come to light the president has attacked this assessment from intelligence officials as a disinformation hoax, as you mentioned, he also went after it not just on twitter, but at his rally in las vegas yesterday. take a listen. >> i was told a week ago they said, you know, they're trying to start a rumor, it's disinfor

you are looking at an intel. your words i am looking at it, at 6 -- call it 61 one when are you buying it what is the v price that you are willing to buy a stock like this because you think it has been damaged and beaten up just too much. >> the patience side of me is telling me there is still more downside as at the sell the rest of the market i think intel and some of these names are going to get sold with them i look at intel i say 55 this stock gets to 55, $56 a share, i am very comfortable owning the stock at that point in time and selling calls against it i like it at 60 but it took intel a long time for sbrel to break through 60. it final had he had done that. >> 5 is closer to 3% >> fits into the category of what you are talking about. >> absolutely. into yeah. >> when you go back the your original question of when folks like mohammad are saying don't buy the dip. the reality is most people are already investors. the real question is -- i would say don't sell the dip right in that's really where when you

. >> intel committee. maria: he told us collusion was in plain sight between president trump and the russians. he told us he didn't know who the whistle-blower was. he red a parody he called it, not even the phone call between the president and the ukraine leader. he is saying all of this stuff. he is not under oath. will you put him under oath? >> the house intel committee, excuse me, the senate intel committee under richard burr has told us that we will call the whistleblower. why is it important? i want to find out how all this crap started. if the whistleblower is a former employee of, associate of joe biden i think that would be important. if the whistleblower was working with people on schiff's staff that wanted to take trump down a year 1/2 ago, i think that would be important. if the schiff staff people helped write the complaint, that would be important. we're going to get to the bottom of all of this to make sure this never happens again. intel, senate intel, we'll deal with the whistleblower, fo

i've seen the reports from that briefing at the intel committee.t there, but i've seen no intelligence that suggests that. >> you're flatly denying that the intelligence community has inanalysis that they are trying to favor trump in the 2020 election? >> what i'm saying is that i have not seen that analysis. >> important to listen to that. he hasn't seen the analysis but yet at the same time in the same interview claims it is not true. i want to bring in my guest, robert litt is the former director, brett is a former presidential envoy for the global coalition to defeat isis at the state department and msnbc senior foreign affairs analysis. you have worked under different administrations including this administration. national intelligence is maybe one of the very few things in the government that isn't and should never be partisan. >> well, ali, the director of national intelligence. this position was created and important to remember after the attacks of 9/11 and a multi-year study that was done about what led to that attack and one of them was

. >> so, put your intel chief hat on for a second. and i believe that was a police -- a law enforcement event he was standing in front of, proving irony is better than a door nail. he was seeking some sort of moral equivalence, i guess, between the former director of the fbi and his deputy. people who have been examined, almost, i think, a half a dozen times. and roger stone, who was convicted by a jury of his peers. sglil >> it's outrageous he would try to make any moral equivalency with james comey and others. you can question their decisions and judgments but trying to carry out their duties responsibly and integrity. he wants that laughter in the room. >> they barely laughed. >> unfortunately, i did hear laughter. and talking about peter struck and lisa page and others. he plays to this debased group of people who are listening to what he is saying in terms of just trashing good public servants and defending people like roger stone? i mean, give me a break. >> phil rutker, it's so interesting and has to be from your perch with all

gave us, ambassador grenell, new acting dni, that comports with what was leaked out of that house intel committee so i have not seen it in the leaders of the intelligence committee that i've spoken with have not seen it and it comports with what was leaked out. i don't know if that is what the leakers told the house committee and those were -- >> your reaction. >> couple of things. number one, we know from the intelligence committee and even just from the mueller report hearings that russia has a sad and is already working to intervene in the election again. it is not a surprise to get intelligence that they are doing output that has been flagged for some time but number two, the fact that robert o'brien and, i believe, other from the under sunday shows over the weekend are casting doubt on whether this is happening in casting doubt on what was apparently set in the briefing raises questions. who do you believe? the fact that this was well done in the margaret brennan's follow-up question, this is something that would come from trumps administration for th' intel community iss the cia,

something about an intel briefing? now we hear what it was.d it was a briefing that russia is interfering again on behalf of president trump. pretty alarms headline. >> it is the worst nightmare of many of my source in the intelligence world. bad enough to learn that there is classified intelligence that russia is interfering again and trying to elect donald trump. we should be careful about that because it is not clear what it means. does it mean disinformation on social media, does it mean sxwer septembers that suggest people in the kremlin are discussing the campaign? that is bad enough, but then the notion that because a briefing of that information was delivered to a bipartisan group of lawmakers, that cost joe mcguire the job? that is a bombshell. i mean, we want our intelligence officials to speak truth to power. and donald trump wants to cover up -- we know he is not interested in the subject of foreign election interference. but the u.s. government has been doing a lot over the last two years to try to protect the 2020 election and on

improving a purge of the intel community. why is it happening now and why the deep state is freaking out. in a "the ingraham angle" exclusive, benjamin weingart previews his new book on ilhan omar. why he says she is leading an effort to dismantle our core institutions. but first, dr. frankenstein. may your monster. that's the focus of tonight's angle. >> washington democrat meltdown over the weekend. it was about as much fun as watching the last democratic debate. you all know by now that sanders one. and to watch the reaction, you would've thought that donald trump had just one reelection. >> democratic candidates really are not vetting bernie sanders. >> democrats need to sober out so much up and to figure out what they are going to do about it. >> i believe the real winner was put in. >> we are living and a political equivalent of climate change. >> he says it's over. >> the thrill is not running up that leg tonight. and what did they think was going to happen? did they really believe that stoking radicalism on college ca

. >>> and incoming intel chief and details of a permanent replacement to fill the nation's top intelligence role, and the president planning to tap a controversial congressman who withdrew his role once before. >>> and taking the stage, the crucial democratic debate in south carolina is shaping up to be a major test for the frontrunner bernie sanders, and his rivals are expected to hammer the self-described socialist for the past praise of communist regimes. and severe disruption, the cdc says that americans need to prepare for the coronavirus impact and for it to have a major influence in their daily lives. i'm wolf blitzer and you are in the "situation room." >>> concerns over coronavirus are putting serious pressure on the global economy right now, and the stock market taking another beating, and this time for the second straight day after a sharp new warning from the cdc. >> also tonight, president trump says he does not need foreign help to get re-elected an he says that he has not received assistance from russia or other foreign countries. i will speak with maizey hor r . and now, fir

after the briefing, the backlash, top intel officials warn lawmakers that russia's at it again, trying to interfere in the 2020 election in an effort to help the president get re-elected and we're learning the president was irate with his acting spy chief for that briefing that he later replaced him with a loyalist as we know, a loyalist with no intel experience. we're also learning that the president was upset that he had to learn about this after the fact from his ally devin nunes on the intel committee. dana bash is here and has extensive new reporting on all of that this morning. so good morning. >> good morning. >> for our viewers just tuning in and learning about this, they know that the intel chief is on the way out, now they know the president is very upset that the relevant committee was even briefed on any of this. >> right and what we're talking about is a meeting which we already knew from reporting last night, very explosive. last week, where the person responsible for election security in the intelligence community went to the house intelligence committee to give an updat

this is the senate intel report that was bipartisan. and at some point people have to not say who is it helping or hurting, whether it's helping or hurting a democrat or republican because it's hurting our country. so i think that's the fundamental issue, is that people have to not look at this through a partisan lens any more than you would have thought 9/11 as a part san attack or pearl harbor for that matter. >> what could we have been doing, in your view, and knowing the insides of this as you do, that we clearly haven't been doing? >> so, there are two indictments that were brought by the special counsel's office that layout in considerable detail how the russians both hacked and did something called active measures, and that gives a road map for ways in which we know that the russians will act and have acted. and part of that involves the intel community and there are certain things that you wouldn't discuss on public tv because you don't want your adversaries know how you're going to thwart their activities. and part of it deals

sanders -- should the sanders campaign have disclosed the information earlier, that, you know, that the intel community told them that russia was trying to help them. >> well, on the one hand they were probably worried about political backlash in the same way that president trump would actually worry that it would somehow delegitimize his own victories or any kind of advances he would make and especially with senator sanders being caught in such a contentious close race, and now he's the front runner but a couple weeks ago that wasn't as clear. and so for the sanders campaign to have come out it was really such a sensitive time to them that they felt like they could lose everything. >> david, you were shaking your head. >> yeah. i don't see the burden on the sanders campaign to do anything. they were given an informational briefing. this was not part of the tradition that happens in a campaign year when the sand dates have been selected and they receive institutionalized briefings. this wasn't that. this was something that

where did you get all that intel? >> my-- but-- >> stephen: okay. how many of your statements about the strike have been lies? >> 8 a

i have seen the reports from that briefing at the intel committee.t there, but i have seen no intelligence that suggests that. i have also heard that from the briefers that's not what they intended the story to be. who knows what happened at the house and the intelligence committee, but i haven't seen any evidence that russia is doing anything to attempt to get president trump re-elected, and our message to the russians is stay out of the u.s. elections. we have been very tough on russia, and we have been great on election security. so i think it's a non-story. >> a non-story. a lot of people don't think it's a non-story. obviously the lawmakers were briefed and the reports are the election security official says several times during the briefing that russia had developed a preference for president trump. was she not telling the truth? >> what i heard from the republican lawmakers there, and i wasn't at the hearing so i can't comment what happened at the hearing. i'm not going to play that washington game, but what i heard from republican lawmakers i

one of my investment committee members holds intel and would love to ask you about that stock becausearently you don't jim lebenthal. >> stacy i got your note from january 24th after the recent earnings in front of me. you just don't like this company, i think i'm generous in saying. >> it's not personal it's never -- >> i got it. we're on the other side of the trade. i want to hear your thought process. you're assigning it ten times multiple at your target price. th this, to a company that has really great scale, is starting to grow earnings again -- actually, has been growing earnings, is shrinking its count. so help me out and i mean it. help me out. why do you hate this company >> it's not personal they're a behemoth they always are. tremendous amount of resources to deploy when they're in a situation. they are in a situation right now. obviously, we are in a period where, you know, it's undeniable that they're lose iing. it's how much and how quickly? supporting earnings on the back of cost cuts and buybacks and they've been benefiting. a lot of that has been due to the windows r

it's meant to be an honest broker among the intel agencies.o is a twitter troll in waiting is going to have the keys on our intelligence, perhaps. >> it's part of this larger pattern we've seen which is donald trump rewarding his friends and finishing his enemies. maguire not somebody according to the reporting that was doing a job that the president liked. there was that intel briefing that talked about russia linebacking him. have i reporting that that intel or that briefing was maybe exaggerated or not quite right there. wasn't the underlying intel beneath it and it was a bipartisan pushback to it. but when you take that with the installation of rick grenell, and you look at, i don't know, the pardons that the president has made, what is your takeaway, zerlina? >> i don't think he takes the rule of law particularly seriously. i don't think that you can say that with a straight face at this stage, right? we're post impeachment, post acquittal. and we are looking down the barrel of the reality that russia may try to cheat on behalf of donald

it came from the intel official. >> no, chuck. was in the briefing that the president received from the the intelligence committee. there's not been an assertion a that rush sia is trying to benet donald trump. that's. >> forget donald trump. why isn't the president concerned about russian interference? >> concern, how about the media covering the fact that in 2018 when donald trump was president we had midterm elections that went off without a hitch. in 2016 the national security adviser susan rice told her team to stand down. that's what they testified. the head of the cyber security said we were told to stand down. we continue to talk about what's happening here with donald trump, when in fact, we have enhanced security in elections. elections today have been asserted they are safer than they were. >> the acting chief of staff said that the previous last senate secretary was told she could not bring up efforts to deter election interference particularly when it came to russia because it set the president off. are officials even

turn anything you have over to the intel committee? >> brennan: have you ever said to the president that when he repeats thing like the idea that there is a nnc server hid anyone ukraine that this is russian propaganda that he is repeating and believing? have you ever said that directly to him? >> i don't have any information about the server being in the ukraine. >> brennan: you just said things coming out of ukraine should be looked at with high scrutiny because of russian interference. >> here's my point: it was the russians who hacked into the dnc, not the ukrainian, but there are people in the ukraine that were pulling against trump because they hateed manafort. >> brennan: you have a role as chairman of the senate judiciary to have oversight of the justice department. >> i'm not in charge of the whole government. >> brennan: i understand that, however, when you're talking about being asked to do these things and a channel being open between rudy giuliani and the justice department, this sounds alot like this is in some ways a tax

they feel like the intel committee is not loyal or the intel community is not loyal, not helping theident, not serving the president. and they want people who are loyalists in there, and he's going to be at the head of the agency. it's acting but you can act for a while. he certainly can act through the presidential election, and remember, it's the one piece, the one key to the kingdom that trump didn't have, which is like unfettered access to the intel community, through somebody that he absolutely trusts. now he has that. and that doesn't mean that richard grenell couldn't go in there and turn out to be a really good head of d and i, he's there because of loyalty and it's been a test for previous presidents. people don't want disloyal people serving them, but when you're putting loyalty over hey, do you have experience in the intel community or expertise in the demand you're being put in charge of it potentially can be has hit us this week, people haven't stepped back to look at the totality of these actions to understand. very very critical week. >> jim vandehei, thank you for put

disrupts the intel community for simply telling the truth. i remember reading a column of yours once back during the obama administration where you said the shock waves after an obama speech through the intel community was akin to a car bomb going off in the parking lot. i would guess this would be something far more significant this week. >> joe, intelligence officials i talked to yesterday were shocked. more to the point, they were worried about the implications of what president trump has done for two reasons. first, the effect on the workforce in our intelligence agencies of watching as effectively one acting director is fired and replaced by someone who's so political you can almost call him a comeisar intimidates the workforce, and increasingly i hear that people are reluctant to share products that may be controversial, to issue reports that may get them in trouble with the white house. the intelligence agencies have asked not to give my public briefing this year on their assessment of threats to the united states, for fear that presid

intel's assessment of russian interference claiming it's a disinformation campaign by the democrats. and there is a report that his new acting intel chief is already beginning to clean house. >>> also, state of the race, nevada holds its caucuses tomorrow. it is a state with a much more diverse population than iowa or new hampshire, we're going to see what the latest polls are saying about african-american voters. should joe biden be worried? >>> is michael bloomberg's last entry into the democratic race a boon for bernie sanders? is he splitting the moderate vote? we're going to talk about that straight ahead. >>> plus, president trump's -- president trump movie critic, dismissing the south korean film "parasite" which won best picture and calling for more movies like "gone with the wind," a movie that glorified slavery, talking about that coming up. >>> let's get to the russia attack on our election, joining me now national security correspondent vivian solama and ryan lizza, and david prees, the author of the book the president's book of secrets, based on interviews with all the l

what more can you tell us about the expected departure of intel officials?e are learning it is expected more intelligence officials will leave this office, the office of the director of national intelligence. and this comes as there has been this shakeup and fears at the office with regard to the fact that president trump has replaced the former acting director with someone who is very close to him, an ally, ambassador rick grenell, who has very little intelligence experience. and we're also learning that there are fears that the number three, one of the top officials who is in charge of assessing intelligence with regard to election security could also leave, there are fears that we have been told she's still in her job, shelby pierson, there are fears within the community she could be forced out, too. and this comes on the heels of a wake when the number two in this office was forced out by rick grenell. so we should note there's a lot of skepticism about rick grenell amongst intelligence community. i was told that officials in this office made phone calls