protecting the national security is at the highest priority of the department and the national security division is at the forefront of these efforts. although the thinking behind the division may seem obvious now, those of you who have worked these issues since before september 11th know that the reorganization that created the division was revolutionary. it brought together the lawyers prosecuting terrorism and espionage offenses with those working on intelligence investigations. and it created a strong link between the department and the intelligence community. more broadly, it recognized the effectiveness of this combination of law enforcement and intelligence efforts in combatting a variety of threats and the danger of drawing lines and building walls between criminal and intelligence investigations. since that time, the capabilities and the mission of the division have broadened to confront new manifestations of old threats. the women and men of the division have worked tirelessly with the intelligence community and the other parts of government to help guard our security, regardl

council and national security adviser were sort of freelansing foreign policy outside of the usual channels, the channels of extradition and the channels of the state department. so this raises a lot of questions. and again, it is a leak, it is an allege by "the wall street journal." so an awful lot of people will want to know where this goes. >> all right. as you know, president trump's former security chief, keith stiller, he testified before your committee, the sbhounlgs committ house intelligence committee, and during that testimony schiller said during the trip to moscow for the miss universe pageant, he waited outside trump's room for a little bit and left. he testified that the whole thing was a joke. did you get that impression that it was all a joke? >> well, first, i wasn't in that part of the testimony, even if i had been, wolf, these leaks outside of the investigation are not helpful to our cause. so again, i couldn't confirm that for you because i wasn't in the room. but it is disappointing that this kind of information is getting out there, because, of course, w

nation's highest priorities. how do you foresee furthering the cyber security efforts within the national security division? >> so i think the cyber security is the area that has changed the most since i was there last about nine years ago. now it seems to permeate all the work of the division whether it's on the counterterrorism side or espionage side. so whether we're talking about folks being radicalized or being radicalizing themselves. i note that in the priored a administration they developed a separate division. i'm going to be looking cleesly at that to make sure it's resourced correctly and the correct focuses on cyber security issues. i think they're going to be one of the biggest parts of the job going forward. >> great. thanks, john. vice chairman. >> again welcome, sir and as you're obviously aware one of the most important investigations this committee is involved in at this point is the russian investigation activities in 2016. i just want to get you on the record. do you promise to fully and completely cooperate with this committee's investigation into russia's interference in the 2016 electi

reporter: national security -related. section 702, any discussions whether with republicans on this and that expires at the end of the year. ms. pelosi: in the 702, which is about the collection, we thought we were in a good place with the judiciary, two committees of jurisdiction, judiciary and intelligence committee. the house select committee on intelligence. we thought we were in a good place. the republican side has put a poison pill -- public domain -- what they put in the bill. is poison pill in the public domain? so they put in something that was unacceptable to us and our ranking member had thought we ere in a good path until something in the end. reporter: what is it? ms. pelosi: it's about unmasking and not anything we could accept. but somehow or other, the chairman decided at the end he was going to put that in. this is a very big issue. nd a lot of equities to be raised and balanced when you are talking about surveillance and it respected privacy but enabled us to go collect and put the poison pill in. that'

none of my colleagues undermine the efforts to deliver the $634 billion base required for our national security. finally, i want to recognize ranking member joe courtney. he has been and continues to be a true partner in ensuring the sea power projection forces of our nation are properly resourced. i do not think that we would be anywhere required for our national security. finally, i want delivering the 355-ship navy or providing for our air force's deep close capabilities without his steadfast resolve and sincere efforts to realize bipartisan solutions. i also want to reflect that with the chairman and ranking member and their leadership and i urge my colleagues to support the national defense authorization act for fiscal year 2018. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas reserves his time. the gentleman from washington. mr. smith: i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the ranking member of the subcommittee on sea power and skpwrokes force, gentleman from connecticut, mr. court nifment the speaker pro temp

there are national security exemptions to the first amendment. ought to be cooperating more than they are? >> in any event the first amendment shouldn't apply to foreigners. that's an american protection. we need to be figuring out how to deal with these foreign actors in some way that's consistent with national security that does not violate the first amendment rights of americans. >> who figures that out? last question. i don't think the fcc is ready for it, i don't think the fec is right for it. i don't think the antitrust division is. i don't know where the regulation is right for it. i don't want congress to blunder in. what's your advice? >> we need to be careful and not do the wrong thing which is what

it does raise a national security issue. why the military is concerned is when you have these large deficits, will we be able to have a realistic budget for our national defense? will the budget deficit put such a pressure on reducing spending that we don't do what is necessary in order to protect the security of the people in this country? robbie: is that an argument you will push forward with republicans as you might try to convince them to draw back from this? sen. cardin: absolutely, but i think the primary message is this, our tax code needs to be attended to. it has problems. the only way we will get permanent tax reform is for democrats and republicans to work together. my message to the republicans will be, work with democrats. we will work with you so we do not have to borrow to give a tax cut. we will target the middle income families and work with you to do it in a responsible way so we can make sure we have the resources to take care of national security. niels: sen. cardin, the other piece of the tax package in

and operated by the commercial industry partners, but have implications to the safety and even national security of our country. so that is a collaboration between those sectors and the u.s. government as to how we improve security. this year the trend line continues that advantages going to offense and that's a scary thing when you think about critical infrastructure. we can't have our power grid being held at rick. we can't have questions as to whether the financial sector can stay free from intrusion. so what that means is, we have to have both security as well as resiliency in those critical infrastructure networks. >> it will always be with the attacker? red will always be ahead of blue given what you previously did. >> just one comment. i did t.a.o. but i also was -- >> assurance, there you go. >> i really encourage. people have to flow across that membrane for offense and defense. the phrase, i use with others is it takes a thief to catch a thief. >> absolutely. >> both of those jobs i thought differently about the way we needed to move forward because of the experience of the other -- >>

mcmaster, the general, national security adviser. general kelly to an extent as white house chief of staff but many say general kelly ideologically and personalitywise often clashes with president trump and doesn't necessarily encourage his behavior but likes some of his hard-line stances. and they really are looking to mattis and to mcmaster on national security matters especially to help guard the president and help guide him in a more centrist direction. >> we have theresa may and the president in a twitter war. we just saw theresa may speak for herself but i'll read what the president of the united states tweeted at her. theresa may, don't focus on me. focus on the destructive radical islamic terrorism that's taking place within the united kingdom. we're doing just fine. as a matter of fact, we're not. we just had a terrorist attack here on october 31st, and this is the second time that i believe theresa may has had to rebuke the president for using terrorism as a political issue in her country. >> the president consumes a lot of

robert mueller may be putting pressure on former national security adviser michael flynn. flynn and his son are both under scrutiny by mueller. is mueller trying to get flynn to flip and testify about russian interference or possible collusion to protect his son? >> well, first, obviously i do not know for sure. but having covered prosecutors over the years, it's pretty obvious that and juskel so that the mueller operation is trying to get various people to flip. and putting the pressure on flynn, frankly, don, for the last couple of weeks i've been saying to myself we haven't heard much about flynn. now it's out. you can bet that special counsel mueller and his people have been talking to flynn a lot more than is apparent in what we know from the public prints. and now we have this information that in addition to putting the pressure on flynn himself, putting the prush on his son. but a key question that needs to be continually asked as the mueller operation goes on is one thing to put the pressure on flynn and increase the pressure by mentioning his son as somebody who p

a bombshell allegation that former white house national security adviser michael flynn was offered $15 million to abduct a muslim cleric living in the united states and turn him over to turkey. what's the special counsel learning? >>> pivotal handshake. as investigators probe his campaign's russia connections, president trump shakes hands with russia's vladimir putin at an economic summit. will they sit down and talk? >>> and clamping down. secretary of state rex tillerson says sanctions are working against north korea, but president trump is calling for more and slamming what he calls kim jong-un's twisted fantasies of nuclear blackmail. how will north korea's leader respond? >>> i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >>> this is cnn breaking news. >>> breaking news. alabama republican senate candidate roy moore says the allegations of sexual misconduct against him are completely false and politically motivated. a stunning "washington post" report based on dozens of interviews says moore pursued several relationships with teens when he was in his early 30s. the most disturb

there are national security exemptions to the first amendment. ought to be cooperating more than they are? >> in any event the first amendment shouldn't apply to foreigners. that's an american protection. we need to be figuring out how to deal with these foreign actors in some way that's consistent with national security that does not violate the first amendment rights of americans. >> who figures that out? last question. i don't think the fcc is ready for it, i don't think the fec is right for it. i don't think the antitrust division is. i don't know where the regulation is right for it. i don't want congress to blunder in. what's your advice? >> we need to be careful and not do the wrong thing which is what we frequently do when we regulate speech. >> well said. thank you for your time. >> thank you. >>> stay tuned. i'll be right back with hugh's views. i'm ginny and i quit smoking with chantix. it takes a lot of planning to be a smoker. it's like when am i gonna be able to sneak out of here and go have a cigarette? i just knew i had to quit, a

his national security adviser calls him an idiot.s hard for the white house to muster a response to the white house. i think it goes back to what jennifer said. in the end, if it took the national security adviser eight months to figure that donald trump was an idiot then we need to introduce him to captain obvious because this is about the plainest fact about the trump presidency one could ever imagine. >> jennifer, you cannot dine out in america where more people voted for hillary clinton than donald trump and not here words like moron and idiot when people are talking about the president of the united states. that's one of the reasons these stories come with the credibility level that they have. >> absolutely. and you have to think that members of congress say the same thing. you know? you have people like wonderful paul ryan, man of a jell-o saying the president is a big help. don't you think in private he is saying i he's going to screw up the tax bill? what bothers me not that people say nasty things but lie to the american peo

our national security functions. -- a third of the budget is about our national security functions. another strength of america, a healthy education, the well-being of the american people and our system. that's all we wanted to say to him. here are some of the things that you might have learned. and those empty chairs. and the difference in the caps we're discussing now for those of you who are covering the cap situation, the difference would be money that we could pay to address the opioid epidemic. we want to sit in that chair people affected by the opioid epidemic. veterans. we need increased veteran spending in addition to what's in the domestic side. increased veteran spending. veterans would be sitting in those chairs. children, the community health septemberers, funding that is needed there. all of this -- centers, funding that is needed there. all of this agreed to in a bipartisan way and which we may in some cases have offsets. it's not just an increase. emergency disaster funding for texas, florida, puerto

that is a national security vulnerability. that is a major national security vulnerability.eing strong, it's a major weakness. . >> while we have, you lot me ask you one more question. this idea that bob mueller can be scared away by a mean tweet is so stupid to me. can you take me inside the strategy -- or how bob mueller might respond to some play run by steve bannon? >> yeah. again, someone i think jonathan or someone referred to as aggressive. actually, when you're aggressive, when you're fighting, it shows your weakness, shows your insecurity. they are not confident about the way this investigation is going to go. that's why they're lashing out around aiming for everyone under the son. >> is there anybody in the white house who the president mites list listen. you need to keep steve bannon. you fired him. but mr. president this will have no bearing of any legal disposition of your family or inner circle. >> perhaps the chief of staff although he himself has brk a source of controversy. you might suggest jared kushner or ivanka trump. >> tell me about jared curb her. >>

they all fall within the rubric of the national security requirements of the united states and foreign policy. steve, why don't you start with an opening statement that then sets the pace for us having this conversation. >> thank you very much, ambassador. i'd like to give a quote just to start off. we will reinforce old alliances and form new ones and unite the civilized world against radical islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the earth. that was -- that was donald j. trump a few minutes after high noon on january 20th 2017, his inaugural address. we will eradicate completely from the face of the earth radical islamic terrorism. now, there's a lot of confusion or misinformation, fake news, about who wrote that inaugural address. president trump at the time president-elect trump wrote it. steve miller and myself were honored to help him out as were jared kushner, hope hicks, kellyanne conway, jason miller, some other folks as well who maybe crafted or structured it, but he wrote it. he particularly -- he wrote that sentence. and i remember -- i think

the national security adviser is not a one-man team. house for several years, and i can tell you that every phone call that the national security adviser has, every meeting, is scheduled by someone, staffed by someone, someone helped the national security adviser prepare, and typically if there's a high stakes meeting, the national security adviser is giving readouts, at least to senior staff, if not the president. so if michael flynn was involved in some kind of illegal activity, whether the transition or while at the white house, be very unusual to me that no one had any idea what he was up to. >> and it may not just be the, you know, potential illegal activity that the investigators are looking into in terms of, you know, doing work for turkey, not disclosing that, but simply being present and being on that national security advising team in the transition, and then just that first month or so in office. he may have been eyewitness to listen to, overheard, seen documents, et cetera, that the special counsel would be very interested i

what empirical data do have that suggests this would create a national security incident? because you are just talking. i find your logic fascinating. you are just talk about how the palestinians were pushing back against this security agreement and yet the embassy is an tel aviv. so why would -- i mean -- there is something to the logic that does not seem to mesh. >> i think there are number of issues regarding jerusalem that affect national security both for us and for israel is. the embassy is one of them. not the only one. as general, as i noted in my testimony, things that occur in jerusalem tend to be the spark -- >> you were saying the very presence of a building in jerusalem is going to create a national security issue? >> i think it very well made. >> ok. and you don't have any empirical data to support that comment that is just your feeling being a doctor from georgetown in political science, right? >> aced on the fact that there is other violence in jerusalem -- >> could you possibly be wrong? >> absolutely. >> ok. ambassador bolton. >> on this question of physic

had been nominated, then became the national security adviser.hen fired by the president. so yeah, the tas pretty remarkable allegation that's being investigated by the fbi and being investigated rather seriously. >> attorneys for flynn responded in a statement. out of respect for the process of the various investigations regarding the 2016, we've intentionally avoided responding to every rumor or allegation raised in the media, but today has brought allegations about general flynn that are so outrageous we're making an exception to our rule. they are false. a lawyer for flynn jr. declined to comment. it's unclear if any agreement was reached on the plan or any money changed hands, but former cia director had previously told cnn b about another e meeting with turks he heard part of in september of 2016, again, how to remove gulne outside the u.s. system. >> it looks as if there was at least some strong suggestion by the americans present at the meeting to the turks that we would be able, the united states would be able through them, to get hold o

as far as i know his dance card on the national security council is full right now. >> okay. and on russia, as a member of the senate intelligence committee, have you seen anything that's helped you determine how credible this trump dossier has been? >> well, i think some of the key points about its credibility are unknown. as senator burr said at a press conference a couple of weeks ago, as anybody who's followed the matter closely knows, fusion gps has gone to the greatest lengths possible to try to conceal who paid them, which makes me think it's a democratic political office or russian intelligence service. right now you've got -- their employers or officers have taken the fifth in front of the house of representatives and are now fighting in the district court here to quash a subpoena of their bank records. they have a constitutional right to take the fifth. we have a common sense right to draw what inferences we will from that. likewise, i don't think we know anything about what the sources of this is. this former mi 6 officer about whom we know little, chris steele, i

so, flynn was sitting right there in the midst of all these national security decisions. the discussion that occurred over this cleric who lives somewhere in pennsylvania and is suspected by erdogan, i think it was director woolsey, former cia director woolsey, who reported in a meeting it sounded as though they were talking of forcibly removing him from the united states and what would amount to, in my old world, a covert operation. so, that would be way beyond the pail in terms of what a national security adviser or one intending to be would ever contemplate doing. >> it was right after that woolsey precipitously quit transition. >> one other thing about the issue, what we know investigators are looking at is once michael flynn got in the white house, did he use his position as national security adviser to push for, somehow, the return of goulen to turkey under the hopes if he was successful, he would receive millions of dollars. >> in fact, erdogan repeatedly pressed the previous administration, joe biden to his face told him in public he couldn't do this, it wasn't le

and it puts us all at severe risk, national security risk. and sally yates going to the white house again, that was right around the time of the comey loyalty dinner. so i think when steve schmidt said, when we put this in a time lapse, it's all going to make a lot more sense when more facts are known. >> and when you go back in time, there's a reason why we had michael flynn even in this conversation, because we had no one else. there are no major foreign policy minds wanting to attach themselves to the donald trump campaign. donald trump campaign, he doesn't know how he was elected. >> he may just hear those voices. >> nonetheless, he was stuck with flynn in some ways. and he had gone out and picked someone else. but there are so few options that the fact that flynn's even at the table is an important thing to mention. >> let me come back to this story that zerlina mentioned. let me to get you to contribute some of these data points. according to this nuclear deal, this came under scrutiny around the time we learned it was michael flynn sr.

. >>> and we are live with a new report on former national security adviser michael flynn. his alleged plan to extradite a turkish citizen from the u.s. and the payday flynn and his son were hoping to cash in on. >>> but we'll start this morning in alabama and the explosive allegations rocking the senate race there. nbc's gabe gutierrez is there. he's live in roy moore's hometown, gadsden, what is the latest there? >> reporter: hi, kristen. we're at the courthouse where the accuser told the judge she met roy moore 40 years ago. the allegations are shaping up and could impact the senate majority. and overnight, president trump weighed in on the controversy. this morning the alabama senate race is in turmoil. roy moore, the republican candidate, firing back against allegations report in "the washington post" of sexual misconduct with a 14-year-old girl almost four decades ago. three other women telling "the post" moore pursued them while they were ages 16, 17 and 18 and he was in his 30s. the age of consent in alabama was and is 16. moore calls the allegations completely fals

that federal investigators have gained enough evidence to bring charges against donald trump's national security advisor and his son according to multiple sources familiar with the investigation. it's high noon in the eastern u.s., 5:00 here in britain and 2:00 a.m. in japan where president trump is right now. here to discuss the latest development with me, chief white house correspondent and nbc anchor halle jackson, barbara quade, former vermont governor and bruce duvall. we begin with carol lee, one of nbc's reporters who broke the story. carol, what have you learned? >> well, what we have learned, sources tell nbc news that the special counsel robert mueller has compiled enough evidence to bring charges in the investigation into former national security advisor michael flynn and his son. what that means is they have found enough in their investigation to potentially bring charges. now we may not actually see the special counsel bring charges against michael flynn or his son, depending on whether, either or both decides to cooperate with the special counsel or perhaps already is cooperating w

are these investigations p pre being named national security advisor or while he was national security >> our sources are telling us that it's absolutely both. you'll recall when the coup happened last july, flynn spoke publicly in favor of that coup. once he began being paid by a businessman with ties to the government of turkey he completely changed his views and published an op ed on election day condemning the coup. the fbi is examining whether he took any action to try to facilitate the removal of this cleric that turkey accuses of fu fullmenting this coup. there was an attempt to have the fbi look into once again whether the justice department should extradite this person and the reply back was we just don't have the evidence to do it. that's the position of the u.s. government. a lot of questions about what flynn did while he was in the government. i also want to make a point that we ran all of our reporting past flynn's lawyer, rob kellner, and he declined to comment. did not say a word. this is the same lawyer who a while ago at within poione poin client has a story to tell an

is that what you're saying or geopolitically it makes a national security less viable? > i have no doubt that we'll be able to secure our embassy in jerusalem the same way that we secure our embassy in-- i agree. >> so what em -- empirical information do you have, the embassy is a tel aviv, there's something to the logic that doesn't seem to mesh. >> i think there are a number of issues regarding jerusalem that affects national security both for us and for israel. the emmy is is one, but not the only one. things that occur in jerusalem tend to be the spark for-- >> you're saying the very presence of a building in jerusalem is going to create a national security issue. >> i think it very well may. >> and you don't have any empirical data, but that's your feeling being a doctor from georgetown in political science. >> based on other violence sparked by-- >> could you possibly be wrong? >> absolutely. >> okay. ambassador bolton, one quick point on this question of physical security for american diplomates, i think anybody probably, many people on the committee have been to

we review this over a periodic basis to make sure our multilateral efforts are our national security interests. think this is important bill and i applaud you for your work. one last point, if i might. when this point. we are y getting near the end of this work. and we e only have one work. remaining before we adjourn for the year. there is an extremely important bill that senator rubio has been working on which will require additional state farm and reporting on european government efforts to return or provide restitution for property wrong during the holocaust. i said this before but time is running out on this issue. people are getting older and fewer are surviving becoming much more difficult to deal with prostitution. i applaud the work that was done on this bill and i know there are many members of this committee that are cosponsors including johnson, menendez and i would urge the delicate staff to get together with sponsors to see what we can move this bill directly this year. i paid the chairman that thank you. i'd like to ask him if possible, because i know we have conflicts

the criminal agent not doing anything related to national security, he's not looking to find some national security hook for his case, he's just trying to make sure -- let's say he's got a cigarette smuggling case. one thing we know is they've used things like cigarette smuggling to finance their activities. there's instances the department of justice has brought over many years. it's a crime. it could be handled one way but if it turns out designed to support het support hezbollah, that's different and needs to be viewed differently.

or you're just saying geopolitically, it makes a national security less viable? >> i have no doubt that we would be able to secure our embassy in jerusalem the same way we secure our embassy in tel aviv. >> i agree. what empirical data do you have that would suggest this would create a national security incident? because you were just talking, because i find your logic fascinating. you were just talking about how the palestinians were pushing back against the security agreement, and yet the embassy is in tel aviv. so why would -- i mean, there's something to the logic that doesn't seem to mesh. >> i think that there are a number of issues regarding jerusalem that affect national security, both for us and for israel. the embassy is one of them. it's not the only one. but in general, as i noted in my testimony, things that occur in jerusalem tend to be the spark for -- >> you're saying the very presence of a building in jerusalem is going to create a national security issue? >> i think it very well may. >> okay. and you don't have any empirical data to support that.

our chief national security correspondent jim sciutto has been working his sources for us.re you learning? >> wolf, the key signal was wolf cutting off white house lawyers, an investigation that flynn's team is at least discussing the possibility of making a deal with prosecutors. to do so, flynn would need to make clear exactly what information he could provide to the prosecution. tonight the legal fate of michael flynn, once both u.s. national security adviser and loyal supporter of president trump -- >> donald trump to be the next president of the united states! >> reporter: -- is an open question. flynn's attorneys have cut off ties with trump's legal team and other defense lawyers involved in the ongoing russia probe, telling them they would no longer share information as they had been doing for months. that change could mean that flynn is cooperating with prosecutors or negotiating a deal that could end with flynn pleading guilty. >> when flynn notifies the others in the group, i'm no longer aligned, it means he's got something different going on. in this case, it's e

security committee we know this. weir in classified meetings about this. but it is embarrassing not to acknowledge the pain of a particular nation. and to associate a ban that's been ruled unconstitutional, but also the wall. as a member of the committee, i want a safe and secure nation in the northern and southern board erbut there are ma m ways to look at it. more technology, training, and enhancing our numbers. but to mix that with the desperate act that is happened and the loss of life in e equipment i think jipt is apples and oranges. my sympathies again to the egyptian people. >> we all share in that. we're going to take a break. but when we come back we want to talk about the assault allegations in capitol hill. we'll be right back. from our family to yours... may all your wishes come true this holiday season. >>> we're back with democratic congresswoman sheila jackson lee from texas. we want to talk to her about the allegation of groping and harassment against two lawmakers but first let's get the latest from our cnn congressional correspondent. let's start with senator al franken, who's now issuing something of a new ap

been on the national security council staff. >> how many women have served as national security adviser before you. >> none. [applause] >> okay. so, let's talk about this book. democracy." why did you feel compelled to write a book about democracy. >> i think i wanted to write this book for a long time because it is in some ways an expression of my own life. i am a firm believer that there is no other system that accords the kind of dignity that human beings crave than to be able to be free from the knock of the secret police at night to say what you think, worship as you please, and have those who govern you have to ask for your consent if think growing up in segregated birmingham, where my parents and relatives were half citizens, but still fundamentally believed in this american democracy, relate one story in the book issue was with my uncle alto, and he picked me up from school it and was election day in alabama, and i was sixish years old or so and i knew in my own six-year-old way that this man, george wallace, was not good for black people and there were long, long lines of peopl

and if we don't stand by that american dream, it hurts not only our national security, it hurts what so if protection for these dreamers is so important, should democrats be willing to compromise on some sort of border security measure that the president has proposed like the wall or family-based visas that have been suggested by other republicans? >> well, you know, i spent a good part of my life in the congress. and i understand what the give and take is all about when you try to get something done. i think that's part of the process. the important thing is that the dream act ought to be part of the continuing resolution that the congress has to pass by december 8th. that's the bottom line. we need to get this undid. we need to get the dream act made a part of our law in order to protect these young people. and so, if there's some give and take, i understand that process. but the bottom line is that we need to pass the dream act. period. >> and december 8 is of course that deadline that you guys write in the letter and we know is also the deadline for the spending bill in congress t

i worked for two national security advisers and i can tell you the national security adviser is not ary phone call that he or she has, every meeting is scheduled by someone he or she prepares with the member of the staff and at the same time once a meeting concludes, particularly for a high stakes meeting, like for example, with the russian ambassador, a readout is prepared and delivered at a minimum to senior staff so it would be very unusual to me for the national security adviser to be up to something illegal or illist its and no one else know what was going on. >> you think that this could have all kinds of tencles. >> i think it would be very unusual for this could be contained. >> i want to ask you about this upcoming trip ivanka trump is taking to india. we know in the aft high levels state department officials have participated in this but rex tillerson isn't sending any high ranking officials with her. our sources are telling us at cnn that it's because it's ivanka leading the delegation. who's the big loser in all this? >> i think the big loser is the state department. i've

because normally, the republican party for a long time felt they owned these national security issues, were the party that was for peace through strength during the reagan era. now you have a republican president of the united states siding with a foreign adversary over these intelligence services that work so hard to defend this country. do you expect to hear any outrage or umbrage from the other side of the aisle? >> joy, i don't have to predict what they'll do. i saw this past week what they'll do. in a judiciary committee hearing legislating around the section 702, foreign surveillance. our first time in a long time to update that, and taking a lesson learned from our own investigation into russian interference i wrote legislation that said if we observe any foreigners trying to meddle in our elections we immediately have to notify congress. i wrote this because one of the failures of the obama administration they didn't tell congress or the public soon enough and this is one way to make sure congress knows soon as something like this were to happen again. every single republican

so as a national security lawyer, do you see any laws broken?, there's certainly some difficulties with the foreign agents registration act which basically requires anybody -- regardless of whether they're a lawyer or a lobbyist or a media outlet or even a professor -- to register with the attorney general and identify the fact that they're taking money from a foreign government and advocating on behalf of a foreign government. eric: but is that small potatoes compared to, you know, collusion are or espionage or the allegations that we've heard like selling out your country? >> you know, so if you look at those allegations and you look at the way things are actually charged in court, fara violations are one of the ways that the u.s. government will pursue espionage-like charges against somebody without having to disclose the secret information that would be necessary in order to bring a true espionage charge. so fara is sort of like a lesser violation that's easier to prove without having to go to secret evidence. eric: a lesser violation, as yo

what empirical data do you have that would suggest this would create a national security incident? you were just talking -- i find your logic fascinating. you were just talking but how the palestinians were pushing back against the security agreement and yet the embassy is in tel aviv. why would -- i mean, there's something to the logic that doesn't seem to mesh. >> i think there are number of issues regarding jerusalem that affect national security for us and for israel. the embassy is one of them. it's not the only one. in general, as i note in my testimony, things that occur in jerusalem tend to be the parks -- >> you're saying the very presence of a building in jerusalem is going to create a national security issue? >> i think it very well may. >> okay. and you don't have any empirical data support that. that's just your feeling, being a doctor from georgetown in political science. >> based on the fact that other violent incidents in israel are generally sparked beijings in jerusalem. think one can assume this -- >> could you possibly be wrong? >> absolutely. >> okay. ambassador

james mattis, treasury secretary steven nguyen who i had dinner with in my house two weeks ago, national security advisor hr mcmaster, homeland security advisor tom, cia director mike pompeo, director of national intelligence, and as a director and ambassador to the un nikki haley, deputy national security adviser gina powell, senior advisor steven muller and vice president mike pence will be welcome soon. [applause] many others have come as well and on frequent occasions i find that my colleagues senior advisor jared kushner and special envoy jason greenblatt. my friends -- jared kushner leads our negotiations as a deep commitment to the state of israel unlike any other official ever assigned to this task. he is the grandson of holocaust survivor and he does not just understand the importance of the us israel relationship but feels it soundly within his heart. [applause] you don't just have every senior member of the administration traveling 3000 miles to a tiny state on the other side of the world if it is not a critical ally, and of course it is. i have been committed to the safety, security a

figures, national security advisor, defense secretary. i often have to look up what the partisan affiliation is, it's just often not that important. and there's a certain continuity and inertia in national security policy that transcends partisan wins. is that also true at justice? >> yes. and justice department officials have gotten in trouble when they have forgotten that the justice department really different from other agencies. i remember senator lei i had say, you're not the secretary of justice, you are the attorney general of the united states. and there has to be a wall between the justice department and the white house even though you're a part of the administration. put up kind of an interesting thing between me and a president who i was a friend with. certain things we couldn't discuss. certain things we didn't discuss. but i think that's an appropriate way for an attorney general to think of himself or herself and it's an appropriate way for the justice department to be run. >> is there more discontinuity between the justice

also want to know how the national security community is reacting to this. >> some of the top nationaltol hill are definitely concerned about this. there was a letter sent to the state department earlier this month actually asking for a briefing about this exodus and what impact it's having on u.s. diplomacy. by senator john mccain sent a similar letter on the senate side calling it very troubling that so many top diplomats are leaving the state department. so it's definitely something the top national security lawmakers on capitol hill are watching closely. >> and finally i know you reported this week that the air force is looking into a failure to report service members to the federal database used for firearm purchase background checks following the texas shooting that happened there. what did you find out? >> so the air force has actually found several dozen cases like the case of this texas church shooter's past where his domestic violence conviction was not reported to the proper civilian authorities. so he was able to buy a firearm. as the air force has found these, they have co

and the link between steel and national security because you-- the last time you talked to us, i think, was in the spring and you said that that's when the president had started his 302 investigation into steel and national security and you said at the time that your recommendation was going to be imminent or within a month or two. now, that's been put off, obviously, for many months. what's the holdup and when can we see that? >> well, the president has indicated that he didn't want that to come out until after the tax legislation is dealt with. and so that's the principal holdup in publishing the report. there is a statutory deadline from his executive order and that's january 28th. >> so you have at least until then to do it. and just in thinking through that steel decision, one of the things you've often talked about the pressure that u.s. steel companies are under, but as i look at the record, it looks like, i mean, there's about 150,000, 160,000 employees in the united states of steel companies, a lot of people, obviously, but there's something like 15 or 16 times that t

national security agency we actually had a statement from the u.s. homeland security secretary regarding kaspersky laboratory this is what she said. their risk that the russian government by their action on its own but in collaboration with conspiracy could capitalize on access provided by kaspersky products to compromise federal information and information systems directly implicates u.s. national security. but we have a response from kaspersky laboratory they said the company has never helped with nor will ever help any government in the world with cyber espionage or offensive cyber efforts that was their response they say they're a software company they're not involved in spying or cyber espionage or any of that kind of thing and now we have this release this hive in vault eight from wiki leaks showing that the cia had a program of imitating disperse the laboratory leaving centrally false digital fingerprints to look as if it was a laboratory there are three examples listed in the wiki leaks documents showing examples of a fake certificate on antiv

let's talk national security. how are our national security interests affected if the person running national security can be bought for pennies, as far as turkey's budget is concerned? >> well, a couple things. first, let me put it in the context of the overall mueller investigation for a second. this is like watching giant an could understanda slowly -- an anaconda slowly wrap itself around its prey. the details he are chilling. what is happening here, it is a subset of the overall effort to squeeze michael flynn and his son, by the way, who is also in legal jeopardy. it is the guy who will be the national security adviser. who is already slated to have enormous power, looking apparently, at least considering at this meeting a gigantic bribe to get this guy, the cleric in pennsylvania, back to turkey. now, i know a lot of turkish officials over the years, i have a lot of sources here that are turkish. they hate him. there's no higher priority for erdogan. it sounds like, if the reports are correct. they were try

but there's no doubt in my mind that's not in our national security interest. so what should we do? i don't think we should immediately impose sanctions, that's not a necessary step, in some ways it's a backward looking step, since iran has gotten many of the front loaded nature of the deal. we're focusing on what president obama should have focused on from the beginning which is stopping iran from developing their nuclear capability. that means having more robust inspections of iran's nuclear program to include military sites. that means enforcing strictly the centrifuge restrictions, that means restrictions on iran's ballistic missile program. especially icbms which are not known for carrying nuclear warheads. we don't need to negotiate with iran by the way, that's something that can be done by national security council action, or at least action in conjunction with the so-called eu three, united states, france and germany. we should at least give that a chance, we may not do that in weeks, but we can't wait years, we can't wait until 2025 to resolve all that. and we -- all of who

it says you are now the national security adviser. no interview, no nothing.last year and a half was with president reagan, became extremely close and strong relationship. >> you went back into a military position, but not long president george herbert walker bush says i need you to be chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. atlanta, georgia, great command, beautiful house, and i'm at a conference where all the army senior four-star , nowals, secretary cheney secretary of defense wants to see you. pentagon in chinos and a polo shirt and go into his office and he says, president bush was to make you the chairman. ♪ sudden when you're peopleour book tour, said this man should be president of the united states. >> it had never occurred to me. the book came out and it caught media attention. lots of people were coming to me saying you need to run. >> any regrets about not having run? >> no. why? >> some people say it is a good job. >> prove it. ♪ ♪ early in the bush administration, saddam hussein invaded kuwait, and was it clear to you that we should go in and try