general hayden, is this nefarious or naivete?> michael, right now, going with naivete, and that's not particularly comforting for me. what manner of ignorance, chaos, hubris, suspicion, contempt, would you have to have to think that doing this with the russian ambassador was a good or appropriate idea? so, again, naivete out, doesn't make me feel good about many things. >> some will read this as another sign of potential collusion. i get a more benign explanation, but not in my view defensible, is the idea the incoming trump administration felt they couldn't trust the obama administration, the intel community or both, and therefore thought they had to go this direction. >> yeah. that's one of the points i was trying to raise a second ago, michael, what degree of suspicion of the existing government, what degree of contempt for the administration they were replacing, would be required. again, to think this was acceptable course of action? it says an awful lot about the campaign, michael. says an awful lot about us as a society, th

trish: naivete!so don't think that, you know, he's somehow unpatriotic in meeting with angela merkel and creating this ambience of friendliness that we have. trish: but the timing, the timing pablo. for goodness sakes, back to having class and position as the former president. you know, most of them have kind of, you know, not interfered, right? this is actually part of a direct interference right now? >> not like he jumped on stage and said his mother wears army boots. he said the wall is unfeasible which is something he heard from pope francis in the 28 mysterious minutes that potus had with the pope. trish: not that it's unfeasible but we don't want a wall, basically. we shouldn't be putting up the wall. >> george w. bush never spoke out against barack obama. why is it okay for barack obama to speak out against donald trump. when we are in a critical juncture, trying to get israel and nato to march lock step and pay bills and fight isis and counter iran. i don't understand why you feel the need to

. >> that it was due to naivete at worst. >> does that fit -- does that fit in from what you know you idea that he's new and inexperienced politically in this close-knit team? >> that's not what we know of him at all. from what we know of him he's someone who's really able to create his own reality. largely because he comes from such a wealthy family and is strategic about how he advances his own interests. this is a big stage he's playing on now. this isn't a real estate dispute or a small new york media dispute. >> yeah, we brought up real estate because the question might be is he a good business thinker, is he a good businessman? >> i mean, i think the record is actually fairly mixed on that. a lot of people they were sort of kind of second tier real estate company in many ways. when jared took over they tried to make a big splash in new york. i don't think it's really panned out in quite the way that they hoped it would. it's raised his profile, that's for sure. but i don't know if it's meant success in real estate terms. >> wt have we missed on the story of jared kushner? what's

peter, build on what elise was saying there, inexperience, potentially youth, naivete in terms of why he may have done this. when you look at the answer to the why question, do you agree with that potential hypothesis? >> well, there's a wonderful saying, naivete in children is often charming, but in adults it's stupidity. in this case it may turn out to be criminal, as elise mentioned. i think what's remarkable is that mike flynn, who's gone through multiple national security clearances, who's been the head of a national intelligence agency, all along was skirting the law in some irrational belief that he was not only above the law but that he was beyond the intelligence gathering capability of the united states and he was a very, very close partner with now president trump in the campaign, in the transition, and with jared kushner. >> well, you know -- go ahead. >> the fact that -- well, just the fact that they relied on this gentleman who obviously somehow believed that he knew the intelligence agencies of the u.s. better than they did themselves has led jared now into what may be,

so the bumbling naivete explanation is often pretty persuasive to me. but in this situation, i think we have to layer in some other things that we know. we know that michael flynn did not tell the truth about his contacts with sergey kislyak. he didn't tell the truth to vice president pence and to others in the trump white house. we know that jared kushner, as i said before, did not disclose these contacts. so when you have, you know, all of this again, it might just be flynn forgot what he talked about. it slipped kushner's mind. when you have an accumulation of things that look problematic, that suggests more likelihood of a problem. and so my usual kind of belief that people are unorganized enough to be in a conspiracy -- i don't mean a legal conspiracy, i mean just kind of getting it together. i have to say my sense of worry and cynicism is kind of up here because of this accumulation of evidence. we're always told this meeting was nothing. it was no big deal. nothing of substance was discussed. it was just to say happy holidays, have a nice new yea

. >> general hayden, is this nefarious or naivete? >> right now i'm going with naivete, and that's not technically very comforting for me. what manner of ignorance, chaos, hubris, suspicion, contempt would you have to have to think that doing this with the russian ambassador was a good or an appropriate idea? >> let's bring in leslie benjamori from london. good to have you with us. >> morning. >> let's talk about this, this concept of a back channel. is this something that could be considered reasonable and common for an incoming administration looking to make a policy change? or is it indeed as just mentioned here, off the map? >> i don't think it could be considered reasonable. remember, the idea that you would establish a back channel that would be, prevent the fbi from being aware of a communication when you're a private citizen is not something that i think we can give a pass to in any dimension. it's very disturbing and certainly something that's going to be heavily investigated. and no, it's not something that i would also pass

there's a lot of naivete amongst the general population. did not expect this to extend to some of the highest level in government. >> the saga continues. jack barsky there. >>> coming up on "cnn newsroom" this hour, germany's past catches up with the present, forcing thousands from their homes in the city of hanover. we'll explain why after this break. ugh, no bars. oh no, looks like somebody needs a new network. when i got this unlimited plan they told me they were all the same. they're not. verizon has the largest, most-reliable 4g lte network in america. it's basically made for places like this. honey, what if it was just us out here? right. so, i ordered you a car. thank you. you don't want to be out here at night 'cause of the, uh, coyotes. ok, thanks, bud. bye. be nice to have your car for some shelter. bye. when it really, really matters, you need the best network and the best unlimited. just $45 per line for four lines. you won't see these folks they have businesses to run. they have passions to pursue. how do they avoid trips to th

could have been naivete or hubris as mike hayden has suggested. i don't know. but i think that both the intent and content of any of these engagements is crucial to the country to know what this was about. >> quickly, how long you think it takes? >> i have no idea. i hope it takes -- i hope it's sooner rather than later. >> mr. clapper, this was very helpful. thank you very much for joining us on "new day." you're always welcome here to discuss what matters. >> thanks, chris, for having me. >> alisyn. >> all right, chris, joining us now is former nato supreme allied commander, now the senior fellow at ucla center general wesley clark and cnn political commentator, former senior adviser to the trump campaign and former congressman from georgia. great to have you here. i want you to respond to what general clapper had to say. what's your take, general. >> i think the investigation is needed. i think we need greater transparency. from a nato perspective, my concern is the president's trip and visit to nato, which should have been a really strong reaffirmation of t

>> i would tend toward naivete. i think the main -- the name coming out before the british authorities was ready was especially important because at that point they hadn't made the arrest they wanted to. they were closing in on abedi and his network around him. by that name coming out around them, they feared the associates would scatter essentially. go to ground. they feared they may then forward some of that plans and carry out an attack. so it could have had serious consequences and obviously we hope it doesn't. >> so when we think of the other times we have seen some issues with classified information, whether it's president trump in the oval office divulging classified information to the russians concerning our allies in israel, what's more egregious at this point? the fact that the president has shared intelligence with that many or we learned about this in such a public and damning way towards this administration? >> i don't want to make the mistakes, but they were mistakes. i think it's important to remember

was it just truman's political naÏvetÉ? >> that accounts for some of it. it is a good question.oseville had vast expanse with congress and had enormous confidence he could get his way on most things. remember, truman did not know we had an atomic bomb. he is trying to appoint cabinet members, trying to figure out what is going on, because .oosevelt kept him in the dark plus, as a senator, he hadn't had that close of access to the executive branch so he's still learning the job and hasn't developed a political skills yet to be able to get what roosevelt might have been able to get. could roosevelt have gotten this? i'm not sure he would have been able to do so. what do you think? >> one thing that's interestings and we point this out is that fdr had lost a lot of clout in congress in 1939 and 1940. his court packing scheme in 1938 really angered a lot of peoplef , and he also tried to purge various members of congress and the senate. one of them was senator tidings from maryland, and if you notice in the book, tidings leads the filibuster to defeat several of the proposals that f

that's why he's in this position despite this naivete, an extraordinarily dangerous, possibly treasonouss that he is one of the only people that donald trump feels that he can trust. >> if one person is going to get fired, it's not going to be your blood. that's why the tmp boys are back in new york and ivanka is in d.c. and jared is there. thank you, sir. >>> thank you. >> dead on arrival. why so many on both sides of the political aisle say the president's budget goals are undoable. >> what line can be crossed before voters say, no, that's a bridge too far. (bell rings) with my moderate to severe crohn's disease,... ...i kept looking for ways to manage my symptoms. i thought i was doing okay... then it hit me... ...managing was all i was doing. when i told my doctor,... ...i learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of moderate to severe crohn's disease... ...even after trying other medications. in clinical studies,... the majority of people on humira... saw significant symptom relief... ...and many achieved remission. humira can lower your ability... ...to fight infections,

i think it could simply be na e naivete. we can figure it out better than these obama folks and intelligence folks so we'll have at it. you have kushner, no foreign policy experience, not the person handling this portfolio going about it in a naive way, arrogant way. in all of this, i think wherever the investigation takes us, it's hard to escape the idea there wasn't bad judgment being used here because you have a foreign power that we knew at the time had been trying to engage in tilting the election toward trump. we know this is a foreign power that manipulated or tried to manipulate two previous administrations in their own diplomatic dealings. so at the very least it seems naive and reckless to think you're not going to be used by the russians here. i think that's kind of the broad overview. this is where the special counsel of the investigation is plunging ahead. >> david sanger, whatalisyn, it the content of the conversation was. there's nothing illegal about back channel. i agree with david completely, it's very frau

the naivete comes in when it's presented as you just did. that in fact this means that he suggested would not be that solution. the other thing that i think is notable here is the presence of mike flynn. you mentioned jared kushner. maybe you can chalk it up to naivete. maybe he doesn't have a whole lot of experience. doesn't have any experience in government. doesn't have a whole lot of experience in dealing with international government leaders. mike flynn does. and mike flynn has a very well developed sort of theory of the cia and of the u.s. intelligence community. and he is deeply distrustful of it. and my intelligence sources tell me that they feared that this distrust for the cia and for other parts of the u.s. intelligence apparatus that flynn harbored was seeping into the broader campaign and the trump -- donald trump himself but also the trump brain trust you. could potentially see it playing out here, if kushner believes like flynn does that the cia is not to be trusted, maybe that would be one possible explanation for what otherw

was it just truman's political naivete? >> i think that that accounts for some of it. it's a good question. roosevelt, of course, had vast experience dealing with congress and had enormous confidence he could get his way on most things. the new deal revival was his plan for postwar america. of course, he died before he could do that. truman buys into this. remember, he didn't even know we had an atomic bomb. he's sitting there trying to appoint cabinet members, try to figure out what is going on because roosevelt kept him in the dark. plus, as a senator, he hadn't had that close of access to the executive branch. he is still learning in -- the job and he hasn't developed the political skills yet to be able to get what roosevelt might have been able to get. then the question is could roosevelt have achieved this? it is one of these counterfactual questions. you wonder if roosevelt could have been able to do it. i am not sure he would have been able to do so. i need a, what do you think -- anita, what do you think? >> one interesting side of this and we point this out is

the naivete comes in when it's presented as you just did. that, in fact, this means that he suggested would not be that solution. the other thing that i think is notable here is the presence of mike flynn. you mentioned jared kushner. maybe you can chalk it up to naivete. maybe he doesn't have a whole lot of experience. doesn't have any experience in government. doesn't have a whole lot of experience in dealing with international government leaders. mike flynn does. and mike flynn has a very well-developed sort of theory of the cia and of the u.s. intelligence community, and he is deeply distrustful of it. and my intelligence sources tell me that they feared that this distrust for the cia and for other parts of the u.s. intelligence apparatus that flynn harbored was seeping into the broader campaign and the trump -- donald trump himself but also the trump brain trust you could potentially see it playing out here, if kushner believes like flynn does that the cia is not to be trusted, maybe that would be one possible explanation for what other

. >> what makes the '70s so special is that there's still a sense of naivete, the innocence that musicreatest artists of our time to do some of their greatest work because they were really exploring. that's as deep as popular art ever gets. ♪ ♪ ♪ youb. >> it's day two of u.s. president donald trump's visit to saudi arabia. he's just hours away from a major speech on u.s.-muslim relations. we will give that to you live from riyadh. >>> also, old rail terrified this story of a woman in mosul. tense of thousands struggle to escape the violence there as the battle rages on into its final phase. >>> moderates prevail in iran. the iranian president wins a second term. >> we are

talking about the head of our government showing naivete. this would apply to everything in foreign policy. apparently he doesn't listen to his advisers. >> how is this -- >> they are running victory laps. they have succeeded beyond their wildest expectations. >> a.g. rosenstein has said he will brief everybody on the firing of james comey. do you think we will get clarity as to what happened? >> i think this scandal has so many layers. we're at the beginning of this. if you think about -- i'm not the first one to draw parallels to watergate. they've been floating in the air all week. it took almost two years from the beginning to the end, when mixon resigned. i think we're at the first weekend of what could be a very long process. what i think is ironic about rosenstein is he was an unheard of bureaucrat. people who know him say he made the d.o.j. his life. he was a faceless functionary in this giant apparatus. known to be impartial. his reputation was that he was impartial, he was a political. he was about the d.o.j. and the rule of law. a

. >> i think what was revealed is a certain naivete whehere we ignore very obvious problems of racial discrimination. we want to telell ourselves that it i is not happenening herere e esespecially wanant to tell ourselveves we are not the unitd states of america.a. amy: up until rerecently, desmod cole was a columnist at "the toronto star." its editors told him he had to choose betweeneneing a jojournalist or a black lives matter activist. he decided to stop writing his column. all of that and more, coming up. welcome to democracy now!,!, demomocracynow.org, the war and peace repoport. i'm amamy goodman. we are broadcasting from totoronto, canada. in new revelations about possibible collusion between t e trump campaign and alleged russian efefforts to influencece 2016 election, the "nenew york times" i is reporting g that u.. sponsored d senior russian political and intelligence discussing ways to use then-trump campaign chairman paul manafort and trump advivisr michael flynn in order to exert influence over donald trump himself. in the alleged conversations last summer, the russian o

i think, and it's not about sources, and it's about the naivete of trump. the fact that he thinks that since russia and america doesn't like i said us we can talk about this and maybe he thought that way and then he said something but as far as i can tell they are saying what he said was -- go speak of the world of intel is about nuance and complexity and you do have to tread carefully. they said he didn't know. why didn't he know, that's a problem too. if i could comment on nancy pelosi i don't think that the demo credits don't want to impeach him because i think the longer he stays they think that's actually there to get back to relevance. speak out your right about that. >> of course i was. >> right now the guys down to 36%, he'll be killed in the midterm. >> coming up to the washington mode post just admit that it's biased against trump? that story is next. speak of the washington that post erupted into applause last night after their story broke an online readership record what the report that president shared a highly classified intelligence with russ

him speak, this back channel with russia and what jared was trying to do, do you chalk this up to naiveteincompetence or something else? >> if we were playing football, we finished one-ups and are getting into the real game. because jared kushner is not a naÏve individual nor inexperienced. he is a businessman. but not only did donald trump try to deal with them as if it is a business transaction, you can't do that in government. there's a foreign policy that has to be maintained. and the key here, if kushner had done this and if michael flynn, the national security advise earn hadviser had done this when trump was inaugurated. he'd be okay. when you do this of about you are inaugurated without the knowledge of the obama administration, you're undercutting u.s. policy. that is an absolute no-no. and it does raise, as former cia directors have questioned, it raises questions whether that political transgression is one that goes further, that actual criminal activity took place. we'll have to wait and see. >> there seem to be so many tentacles coming out of the russia investigation. it's pr

he believes naivete about emp pervades the western democracies where nukes are kept mostly out of sightnd. >> for authoritarian states in the case of iran and possibly north korea, the use of nuclear weapons is not only unthinkable, but in their open source military doctrine, you know, they've written for years about being able to win a nuclear war, that you can fight a nuclear war. >> reporter: adding to worries, north korea's recent successful test of a solid-fueled ballistic missile which needs less preparation, meaning less warning time for those targeted. in addition, north korea also has at least two observation satellites that orbit over the u.s. at an altitude ideal for an emp attack. for years congress has struggled with many bills designed to harden the nation's electric grid against an attack, but none have made it out of committee. special interests often intervene, fearful of the costs of upgrades when the effects are still being disputed. trish? trish: thank you so much, doug mckelway. all right, we are coming back with much, much more. stay with us. >>> homeland security

. >> what makes the '70s so special is that there's still a sense of naivete, the innocence differenced someone put up a lot of money to have the democratic headquarters infiltrated and if so, why? >> justice will be pursued no matter who's involved. >> you have information implicating president nixon? >> i have no comment. >> the president of the united states demanded that the attorney general fire the special prosecutor. >> that is the definition of tyranny. people have to know whether their president is a crook. >> i don't think there was ever any discussion there wouldn't be a coverup. >> congress must move ahead with impeachment proceedings. >> there can be no whitewash at the white house.

, particularly, when we're talking about the head of our government showing a phenomenal level of naivete in this realm. that's not just about the russians, it would apply to everything especially in foreign policy. and apparently he doesn't listen to advisors, assuming they're actually talking to him. >> how is all this being perceived in russia, jack? >> they're running victory laps, absolutely are. this is what they're after. and they have succeeded beyond their wildest expectations. >> a.g. rosenstein has agreed to testify next week as to the firing of james comey, do you think we'll get any clarity as to what actually happened? >> i think this scandal has so many layers, i think we're at the very, very beginning of this. and if you think about, i'm not the first one to draw parallels to watergate. they have been floating in the air all week. it took almost two years from the beginning to the end when nixon resigned. so i think we're at the first week in what could be a very long process. but what's really ironic about rod rosenstein, he was a bureau cat, people who know him say that

there is a refreshing naivete. it should be simple. so let's give it a shot. >> he said in the past there is no reason there is not peace with these parties. no reason whatsoever he said. alisyn, every time you meet with a stake holder individually, they always make a good case to you. it is when you get them with the rival stake holder and making a deal and it gets tough. everyone can make their own good sell. donald trump and unlike north korea and give him credit, this man believed if he could speak to the chinese, he would convince them to solve the north korea problem. now he is saying he'll solve it without them. he always believed he could charm the chinese to take care of this. this is not happening on mid east peace. he has no answer. >> panel, thank you very much for all of the analysis. >>> another headline. there will be no federal charges against two baton rouge cops in the shooting death of alton sterling. those officers are not out of the woods yet. you still have the state case. what does that look like? next. [vo] the

on the russia thing, i assume incompetence, naivete in that the white house should have been leery that the russians may have a task -- the russian news organization as an arm of the government and that they may want this. we now know it was important to vladimir putin that lavrov have this meeting in the oval office with president trump. it almost looked like a signal to the world, like look at what i got, look at what i won, in that photo. so there should have been, to me, i take the white house at its word that they didn't know. the problem is, they shouldn't have been that naive, and they missed on the optics. >> and while we parse out all this stuff, we're not talking about health care or immigration or any of the significant problems opini problems. >> that has rattled congressional republicans. last week at this time, we were talking about a donald trump that had gotten his sea legs. not now. >> republican senator lindsey graham is chuck's exclusive guest on "meet the press" this week. he's supposedly got a copy of the certified letter about trump investments -- >> certified. >>

if you think about the white house as naivete in thinking that firing james comey would be no big deal, there would be in political blowback, that is a sign of incompetence as well. going forward, it is hard to see how this white house that doesn't seem to be able to get their stories straight, they are sort of messages on this, it is hard to see them coming out from under this any time soon. you add to that these friends of president trump, people in the white house clearly wanting to talk to the president and get the story out there. you know, he's a president who obvio obviously likes loyalty, but he's surrounded by people who leak. it's west wing people. people of the fbi. doj people. all wanting to correct the record in making the white house look bad, making president trump look like he is someone who is paranoid about this russia investigation and willing to obstruct justice in some ways to get this out of the news, get this off of the fbi's docket as well. so it is a real damning portrait, all of these stories coming out about the white house. >> it does seem as if the initial

i think, and it's not about sources, and it's about the naivete of trump.that he thinks that since russia and america doesn't like isis we can talk about this and maybe he thought that way and then he said something but as far as i can tell they are saying what he said was -- >> the world of intel is about nuance and complexity and you do have to tread carefully. they said he didn't know. why didn't he know, that's a problem too. if i could comment on nancy pelosi i don't think that the democrats don't want to impeach him because i think the longer he stays they think that's actually there to get back to relevance. >> you're right about that. >> of course i was. >> right now the guys down to 36%, he'll be killed in the midterm. >> coming up to "the washington post" just admit that it's biased against trump? that story is next. that's why i rent from national. where i get the control to choose any car in the aisle i want, not some car they choose for me. which makes me one smooth operator. ah! still a little tender. (vo) go national. go like a pro. ♪ pressur

it either shows an epic level of ignorance and naivete, or a suspicious of incredible proportion aboutrns of the obama administration. or maybe both, i don't know. if it is true, it is very troubling. >> you would think that someone like michael flynn, former head of the intelligence agency, an business guy, real estate guy from new york city, young guy with no government experience, you would think that if he was in all of this, and he was, that he would understand exactly what you just said. >> absolutely. hardly -- no one is smarter on intelligence that i work with and know personally than general flynn and i would assume if this is true, that that would be a remarkable as well for him to go along with that. >> it is interesting, pamela, the administration is down playing the report but the former cia director michael hayden describing this as off the map. how does this whole story fit into the entire russia investigation? >> well, it certainly is something that investigators want to learn more about. it raises questions and investigators want to know the circumstances surrounding c

it does feel like there's even naivete here. >> it's criminal. people in the intelligence community, prosecutors starting to sharpen their knives here. this isn't about kushner saying i never met these guys, which he did. wait a second. they were phone calls. wait, they weren't phone calls, they were face-to-face meetings. wait, they weren't face-to-face meetings, i was talking about a back channel at the russian embassy. let's think about where we are here. we're finally at a place where we're starting to not see lies but this starts to sound like the conspiracy people in the intelligence community are petrified about. what malcolm said, if this blows apart, goes to the pieces, what is it this man was trying to get to the russians. what is it that was actually coming out. the problem that we really have is that americans die as a result of this. people, including our allies, can die because of this. this is why you start to look at this from a criminal perspective. this is the reason you have to start contemplating why you prosecute people who d

from early on in the campaign you know there is a -- there is a level of includelessness naivete anding on. this is astounding coming from the president of the united states. just to -- to -- to not understand that he is playing chess with a queen down waus -- and you know apparently he doesn't listen to his own folks. that's why i was saying earlier on the wheels are coming off. i'm getting a little bit concerned. and i'm being very -- ierm taking very low key approach to this. >> no why are you concerned. >> >> well, as i said -- this is our -- our leader who doesn't seem to really know what's going on. and you know i'm not bramg him for the -- for the security lapse in the white house. however why didn't he fire those people? because you know if you're being duped by an adversary and you have people who were in charge of you know in -- he is so good at saying you're fired, why didn't he fire those people. >> matthew i have to ask you. -- i want -- let's talk more about the investigation, the senate. there was intelligence hearing today. the fbi director to be -- acting fbi directo

the naivete, hubris, ignorance, of wanting to fill in the russians on their intelligence assets is still most shocking to most people looking at this. so then i think it is fair to say there's legitimate reasons for there to be questions about jared kushner's motivations. i believe -- i don't know him. but the idea that he only has america's interests at mind -- in mind, i think it is fair to question that at this stage, because the connections on financial dealings with his family and other issues that have come up in this investigation and reporting, i think it is fair game at this stage to question jared kushner's motivations based on the actual actions and activities of all of this weirdness with russia. because of course, as we know, it wasn't just this incident. it was dozens of meetings that were not disclosed. >> would these questions also be grounds for pulling his security clearance? >> yeah, i think so at this stage. that's going to be a push politically. but i think if this weren't political, there would be absolutely no question that a man like this security clearance would

believes naivete pervades nuclear com democracies where kept out of site and out of mind. >> authoritarianan and possibly north korea. the use of nuclear weapons is not only unthinkable but in their open source military doctrine, you know, they have written for years about being able to win a nuclear war. that can you fight a nuke war war. >> adding to emp worries, north korea's recent successful test of a solid fueled ballistic missile. the solid fuel needs less preparation and less warning time for those targeted. in addition north korea has at least two observation satellites that orbit over the u.s. at altitude ideal for an emp attack. for years congress has struggled with many bills designed to harden the nation's electric grid against an emp attack but none of them made it out of committee. special interests often intervene fearful of the cost of upgrades when the effects of an emp attack are still being disputed. bret? >> bret: doug, thank you. the man in charge of homeland security says the terror threat is much worse than most people realize. secretary john kelly told steve doocy

. >> i would agree the most innocent would have to be naivete.how these things are done, wanting to find a discrete channel of communication with the russians, perhaps, again, being distrustful of the u.s. surveillance bureaucracy that exists. the most sinister, look, i've been surprised at just how nefarious some of these things have been that have been -- come to light in the past couple months. so, i think we could be surprised still -- >> like what, though? everyone has been talking about, back channel to the russians. then i think to myself, like what's the sinister thing that can be done? we all don't like it done that way or something? >> certainly the personal financial dealings. >> i agree with that, if that were to come to light. >> the idea of a quid pro quo. the idea that we will remove sanctions on ukraine. >> that would be bad. >> that would certainly be bad especially when they are not yet nan inaugurated. they should not be subverting the policy of the us government. we took actions, the obama administration took actions in late d

and it may be that out of naivete, they decided to do this. i'm not prepared to come to any conclusion here. we have an investigation ongoing. the fbi for sure will look into this as well as everything else. but from a larger diplomatic standpoint, there is this very restraining time, the 72 days between election and inauguration when one government is fully and 100% in control, but it's leaving, and another team is -- has no control whatsoever, but it will on january 20 at noon take full responsibility for everything that happens. >> let me ask one more question. malcolm, i want to come back to you on that. but let me just follow up one thing because you wrote, you know, part of the subtext here is that, you know, this candidate, candidate trump, was quite clearly more disposed to be pro-putin and pro-russia and that we should get along with russia and that was a public policy stance he took while the russian government was engaged in fairly significant measures to engage in criminal espionage and sabotage. but you wrote about the nato meetin

is -- this administration is there a naivete?standing of what it will take to deliver brexit? carsten: to me, the biggest problem is that it is an administration that is focused on a societal discourse in the u.k., which is totally different from the discourse in the rest of europe and specifically in brussels, of course. it is an administration that needs to cave to these extreme demands for a hard brexit, which represents more or less 52% of society. that is the main constraint we are facing here and the one factor -- let's face it, it has never been about parliamentary majority. it is this demand for populist, extremist, eurosceptic policies. that will pose the main risk to a orderly brexit. matt: what happened, carsten, longer-term if the u.k. populace this divide even more sincerely after the u.k. economy takes the heat from brexit? well, it could go either way through the benign scenario from the brussels perspective is of course that you are looking at a situation that is and where some people start to have second thoughts

cinnabon. [ light laughter ] of course the story of the first 100 days has been trump's child like naivetÉiding with reality. in fact, trump asked, without shame, admitted the basic aspects of the job have turned out to be harder than he thought. like health care or china's relationship with north korea. >> it's an unbelievably complex subject. nobody knew that health care could be so complicated. [ light laughter ] >> mr. trump said, he told his chinese counterpart he believed beijing could easily take care of the north korea threat. mr. xi then explained the history of china and korea. mr. trump said, and i'm quoting the president here, after listening for ten minutes, i realized it's not so easy. [ light laughter ] >> seth: the president is literally being tutored by foreign leaders. [ light laughter ] and ater he taught me about the history of china and north korea, he helped me with my math homework, which was very -- [ light laughter ] and while he's at it, maybe president xi could give trump an american history lesson too, because today when trump was asked about his supposed model

communications take place at the embassy or jared kushner was suggesting the embassy, does it expose naivete on his part to think you could have this going on? are you saying this is par for the course and what is done? >> i think that using russian facilities would not be par for the course. i would definitely advise against. that of course, we don't know whether that was something he suggested. other reporting suggesting it was the russians who brought up that. so that would not be the way to do that. i'm not sure that's what actually happened. there's a lot of different innuendo with the pieces. i think we will get the facts because there are investigations going on, and i just look back at all these stories, when people tend to get under oath, a lot of the smoke ends up clearing and not a lot of there there, this could be another example of that. trish: who do you think would be motivated to leak this, representative? who do you think would be trying to damage jared kushner right now to put the story out into the atmosphere, shall we say? >> well, there's been a concerted effort to leak

run for president, he tweeted that the report is quote treasonous activity, whether born of malice, naivete both. do you see it that way? >> we're chasing our tails as a nation when it comes to the russians. i don't know who leaked this supposed conversation. you've got the ambassador to russia reporting back to moscow on an open channel, hey, jared kushner is going to move into the embassy. i don't trust this story as far as i can throw it. >> in what way? why don't you trust it? >> it makes no sense that the russian ambassador would report back to moscow on a channel that he most likely knows we're monitoring. the whole story line is suspicious. i've never been more concerned and suspicious about all things russia than i am right now, so i'm not going to jump to the conclusion that mr. mcmullan jumped to. >> so you think that it is possible that with the ambassador said to moscow was on purpose because he knew he was being monitored and not accurate? >> well, look at this way. apparently, the fbi director intervened in the elections in july 2016 based on a fake e-mail generated by the rus

. >> i'm going with naivete. and that is not particularly very comforting for me., what manner of ignorance, chaos, hubris, suspicion, contempt would you have to have to think that doing this with the russian ambassador was a good or an appropriate idea? >> so you hear the former director of the fbi, right? naive, ignorant, hubris, contempt, chaos, suspicion. are any of these words you would use to describe jared kushner? >> no, not at all. and i think that's an outrageous characterization. and i think that's what you get from guys who have been in the government forever. the american people elected a president whose chief asset was that he was going to do things differently. he wasn't a lifetime politician. and he has appointed to his cabinet other people around him who are not sullied in the long-term ways of washington. and as you saw from the very personal, angry tone the former cia director just used in the clip you played, it breaks some china as you do it. >> it does. although another former cia director james woolsly si was just here on said and he also sai

why meeting with the head of the bank -- it just suggests naivete, that's one explanation. but the person that sent this letter, i think, thought that there was something more to it. i don't want to jump to that conclusion because i don't know that. but there's a lot of questions that i think we now need to know the answers. we need to know from mr. kushner himself why he was going to these extraordinary lengths. >> ambassador mcfaul, i know you to be a measured diplomat who uses words carefully. but i understand you to be speaking pretty starkly at least about the questions raised here in this story tonight. thank you for joining us. >> thanks for having me. >> appreciate it. >>> since we have come on the air tonight, there is more news, believe it or not, that has broken about jared kushner's contact with the russian ambassador and the reporter on that story will join us shortly. we'll also be speaking tonight with a member of the house intelligence committee about all this, because it is a big news night. stay with us. nice man cave! nacho? [ train whistle blows ] what?!