national security.what i want to do in the couple of minutes is delve a little bit deeper into the implementation plan and let that plan contain and try to explain those a little bit more in-depth, the three lines of effort that she mentioned and to remind you, those three lines of effort are prioritizing strategic competition, organizing for success and creating conducive environments. so the implementation plan that we were tasked with putting together in the cat policy is -- is an effort by us to really carry out the president's vision, it's an effort to better align our convention arm's transfers with our national security and national economic interest. so under this first line of effort the prioritizing strategic competition we are trying to take a more proactive approach to arm's transfers, specifically we are trying to improve our ability to compete with our adversaries by providing our partners with viable alternatives to foreign products in order to maintain influence in key regions throughout

for the purposes of national security. john? >> thank you, sarah. i was going to ask about turkey but based on your opening statement, i have to put out that the attorneys for former director james comey and former deputy director mccabe, stated that their passes were automatically demagnetized the day that they were separated from their offices. two others, mr. klapper and general hayden have said they do not use them at all. and also, it is my understanding from a historical standpoint, this would be the first time the president himself removed the passes from anybody that it has normally done by an agency head or immediate superiors. have you considered all of these things in the process that you say you're going through? >> again, the other individuals -- those are being reviewed. that determination will be made at a later date. those that have already been revoked it would be for the purpose of reviewing whether or not they should be reinstated or not. [inaudible question] >> is that the only standard by which this administration is concerning

poses to our national security. nothing. a fine when you're backed by the chinese government, a multibillion-dollar fine is nothing. and you can put all the business people you want on their board. it is not the business people we should be concerned about. it is the technical people in these companies. the ones that can get z.t.e. routers embedded in american telecommunications, steal our research from the universities, to our communications systems so they can intercept our communications in military and economic affairs, conduct cyber espionage, commercial espionage and potentially denial of our command-and-control in the military one day, if left unaddressed. think about embedding these trojan horses inside of our telecommunications systems and networks in america, any company that he is toes that threat should not be allowed to operate, much less remain in business. and z.t.e. is one such company. even if z.t.e. tells the chinese government, we don't want to do this, they have no choice, or they will cease to exist or t

but it fails on one important front to be a significant and serious threat to national security that we are beginning to wake up to. for the first time since the end of the cold war united states is engaged in a geopolitical competition for the adversary. 1991 no other nation on earth can ary project power of the united states until now. unlike our country one that leads with victimhood but also to believe they have a preordained destiny. this is what they mean when they constantly use the phrase of historical determinism. they say they are predestined to be the world's most powerful country therefore they believe they are predestined to surpass the united states i mean geopolitically and economically and militarily. this is not a new ambition by the way but for two decades they have followed a strategy called biding their time but that change last year in october as a president for life laid out a vision for china and a very clear nationalist terms. that's mighty invincible force and infinitely vast age of our historical heritage and we have arrived at a new era china is in a leading

we are finally taking a big step to address the national security threat imposed by china, which has grown dramatically, as others have said. i believe china represents the foremost national security and economic challenge to our country of any other country in the world -- president trump: not russia? senator cornyn: in the long term. in the belligerency in places like the south sea, south china that senator rubio pointed out, they have engaged in outright theft of our property.al this addresses the problem of foreign investment to exploit gaps in the committee on foreign .nvestment my appreciation to secretary mnuchin and secretary ross, and yourry entire administration for your partnership. we could not have gotten is done without each of these people at the table, and certainly the .eadership of chairman crapo this is a great accomplishment. now we need to make sure it is implemented. it is on the top of secretary mnuchin's list to make sure congress operates as intended to accomplish these goals. president trump: we want to have a big focus on russia. not enough focus is on chin

so congressman, do you believe the national security officials or the president? >> here's one thing, serving on the homeland security committee, here's one thing we can all agree on, the biggest threat to the united states are cyber attacks and it's not only russia trying to hack into our elections it's china, iran. the biggest threat, alisyn, is a cyber attack to the power grid and i think we need to focus more on being prepared from from the federal government standpoint but to the local government. being a former mayor i think it's very important. this is a challenge everyday that attacks to the united states, cyber attacks is something we have to deal with. >> the d ni says the lights are blinking red, it sends a shiver down people's spines. so why does the president call it a hoax? >> i think what he's talking about is there was some good that came out of the meeting, if we can stabilize syria, to get syrian refugees to go back home, if we can get to a point of denuclearizing the world then everybody's better off and you know -- >> but to be clear, i'm sorry

president the friday before i was there to witness first hand when the president directed his national securitym to go and tell everyone what's happening. i think also earlier last week, you saw secretary of homeland security kiersten nielson and vice president mike pence in new york hosting a cyber security conference where they made very clear cyber and election security were important priorities. the number one topic this calendar year by the main steam media on television is, in fact, russia. and the election. and yet, when the president said russian hoax, he's not talking about meddling, he's been clear, like he was clear in ohio thanks for playing the clip. when he says russia hoax, he means the investigation and some others on tv under oath wanting to suggest somehow the russia wrestling and we know that the judge in the manafort trial specifically instructed folks to not mention russia, trump or collusion. and trump. . >> brennan: i hear you and the message from the podium was very clear. which is why the question is why is the red not drawing the more clear distinction to what you just

there is at least one source, the president and the national security advisor, suggests that vladimir putin says election interference is the first issue that president trump brought up. list let's go to kaitlyn collins. >> it was quite a show of force yesterday when the nation's top advisors were very candid, and they athe president has not been as forceful as they have. >> i had a great meeting with putin, we got along really well. we're being hindered by the russian hoax. it's a hoax, okay? >> president trump downplaying the russian threat once again. just hours after reporters were briefed in the jom coming midterm elections. >> we continue to see a messaging campaign by russia to weaken and divide the united states. >> our democracy itself is in the cross sqhairs. russia continues to try to malign operations to this day. >> this in stark contrast from the president himself. >> russia's meddling in the 2016 election took place, could be other people also. still, administration officials insisting that they take this seriously and they have instructed their national security offici

national security.what i want to do in these couple minutes is delve a little bit deeper into the implementation plan and what that plan contains and try to explain those a little bit more in depth of three lines of effort that we mentioned. to remind you, those three lines of effort are prioritizing, strategic competition, and creating conducive environment. it's an effort by us to really carry out the president's visio vision. it's an effort to better align our conventional arms transfer with our economic interest. under this first line of effort for the prioritizing strategic competition, we are trying to take a more proactive approach to arms transfers. specifically we are trying to improve our ability to compete with our adversaries by providing our partners with viable alternatives to form products in order to maintain influence in key regions throughout the world. we will be working with our partners and allies to identify critical capability requirements that they have, and trying to expedite tr

i have talked to people, a national security lawyer who says that there's no reasoning, no cause here. you would need cause to revoke someone's security clearance and to take such a step, right, you have to show did the person leak classified information? is the person under some kind of investigation, criminal or perhaps an internal investigation. we have nothing, nothing to suggest any of this certainly by the former cia director. so it is unprecedented, for the white house to meddle in this, to go ahead and make decisions for the sponsoring agency and here probably was the cia, to circumvent the cia, to go ahead and do this on their own and from the podium. right? nonetheless, before the american public, before the people there who watch these beliriefings. >> josh, let's talk about the timing of this. not only when the white house is within something of a controversy with the former aide omarosa but also exactly one day after john brennan the former director of the cia criticized president trump in a tweet. i'm going to read it now. he said the following. it is astounding how ofte

investment and the new love that challenges the kind of transactions that can be blocked for national security reasons. this is 15 minutes. president trump: thank you very much for being here this morning, and thank you to secretary mnuchin for joining us, and congratulations. you have done a great job. i especially want to welcome senators john cornyn, who has been working so hard lately, and especially at the border, doing things nobody else but we could do, very bad legislation. we are going to get that changed. tom cotton, mike crapo, marco rubio, and jeff hensley. i want to thank you all. this is been a tremendous thing that we are sort of announcing today, but people found out about it. interview was instrumental in passing the foreign investment risk review modernization act, so important, which was included in the national defense organization act that i signed into law earlier this month. this will enhance our ability to protect cutting-edge american technology and intellectual property vital to our national security. we have all been reading that intellectual property and all sorts o

all the top national security intelligence officials, they were there.y spoke about what russia did in 2016, what they're doing right now looking ahead to the midterm elections. it was a powerful statement, very coordinated. then a couple hours later, the president spoke at a big political rally for more than an hour in pennsylvania and said this. >> now we're being hindered by the russian hoax. it's a hoax, okay? i'll tell you what. russia's very unhappy that trump won. >> even though putin said that they wanted trump to win. it was a very, very totally different attack that the leadership of the national intelligence community gave than what the president said. he didn't even refer to what they said earlier in the day. >> this must be the rare occasion when president trump was tuned in to television, because that. the was on every channel streaming live for the american people, but the president didn't get the message. it's kind of amazing to think about. and at the same time, that briefing couldn't have happened without the president's endorsement in

you can't just say "national security," etc. it was the dilemma for the the wto. if it sides with the united states and the minute you say ational security, no one can judge, everyone else in the world will say every other product in the world is essential to their national security. socks are essential to mine, boots are essential to my national security. whatever the product, everyone can do the same thing the united take has done. that is an issue of concern because you don't have a rules-based system. on the other hand, if the panel says no, you are not correct nited dates. you don't fit into any of these boxes. these tariffs are not as a result of national security. the trump administration will say, who are you, wto to judge our pullout? we are pulling out of the wto because you overstep your ounds. a huge issue of concern about how this national security defense gets raised. i will skip a lot of this but just to understand that the wto dispute settlement system is, with the sole exception of the european court of human rights, he busiest international court

and the most powerful member of the united nations security council, which all five permanent members are responsible for full implementation of the u.n. security council resolutions passed by themselves. now, not only the u.s. is violating the deal itself, but pushing the other international -- other countries, other members of permanent security council, to violate the u.n. security council. this is really something unprecedented and very, very strange. and at the same time, very dangerous for international peace, order, and security. amy: and can you talk about the effects of the sanctions reimposed last week by president trump against iran? >> i would say there would be an effect on iranian economy. iranians definitely would be harmed. i have no doubt about it. already we have seen some negative consequences on the iranian economy. however, i need to mention perhaps three points. the first point is the fact that iran has been under u.s. sanctions for 40 years. therefore, i can say the iranians are the most experienced country and nation on the u.s. sanctions. they have been able t

new jersey, thanks very much. >>> joining us now, anthony frante, the former director of the national securityncil cyber response team. anthony, thank you very much for coming in. we saw the nation's top national security chiefs yesterday make a very powerful case about russian interference in the u.s. elections in 2016. what they're doing right now towards the midterm elections. we heard a very different line, though, from the president last night. does that hinder the effort right now, the very different line from the president, does that hinder the effort to counter russian aggregatission? >> yes, absolutely. first, i want to say that i was very happy to see the intelligence officials make that announcement. i think that was a huge step in the right direction, as far as educating the american people about the cyber threat we're facing from nation states. this isn't an election cycle threat, this is an ongoing threat to undermine our way of life here in the united states. and yes, absolutely, the conflicting messages, it's exactly what it does. it introduces so much doubt and it sends mixed

a couple months out from the election saying to all the candidates with a national security background, watch out. a new threat that goes specifically to you. it is a remarkable story. we first learned this candidate's security application had been obtained. and then by paul ryan's pack thanks to this article which broke tuesday night. she was working on counter terrorism issues shelf also worked on the law enforcement side of the u.s. postal service. what has been clear from the beginning of this scandal, cynic it first broke is that abigail's security application really has been circulated by this paul ryan super pac and they have really used it againster in her campaign despite that it is not legal for them to have it. what has not been clear until today is how they got it in the first place. candidate abigail spanberger wrote and put in it blunt terms, quote, it has come the my attention that the congressional leadership fund, this pack, has somehow retained a full unredacted copy and has kiss seminatd it for unknown that you recall. it not aware of any legal way your group could h

so for more than two weeks, the white house knew he might pose a threat to national security, but chose to do nothing. joining us now, a man whose security clearance is set to be under review by the administration now. former cia and nsa retired air force general hayden. how do you interpret the actions by president trump on what he is threatening to do to you and others? >> first of all, anderson, with regard to john, it was personal and it was vindictive. and frankly, i think it was an overall judgment that john was being somewhat effective. you can tell i'm here at dulles. i've been traveling all day. so that tape you just played of sarah sanders describing why the president did it, i could translate for you, anderson, is that john brennan's life experience gives him legitimacy to say a lot of the things he is saying, and the white house couldn't stand for that. so you've got the misuse of power here i think with regard to john. now you've got -- there is myself included. that was a threat that was put out there from the white house press room. in essence, we're under review, that's

is of a personal nature, but it's also of, it's also of a sensitive nature when it comes to national security. that's why, for example, all journalists know you can't file a freedom of information request to get somebody's security clearance application. i mean, you can try, but if you get anything back from the agency you are footing, whatever you get back will be redacted to within an inch of its life to protect the sensitive information in that document and rightly so. at least that's the way it's supposed to work. but for some reason, the trump administration responded to a request by this republican group looking for information from this excia officer abigail spanberger and what the trump administration sent a republican route was spanberger's complete totally unredacted security clearance, including her full security number. her entire medical history. right? everything. the reason abigail spanberger found out this had happened is thereafter the republican party and a pac run by house speaker paul ryan happily started shopping this document to reporters and started using it in politica

president, under your administration we are finally taking a big step to address the national security threat imposed by china, which has grown dramatically, as others have said. i believe china represents the foremost national security and economic challenge to our country of any other country in the world, in the long-term. president trump: not russia? senator cornyn: in the long term. in addition, it's military transformation and its belligerency in places like the south sea, south china sea, that rubio haveapo and pointed out, they have engaged in outright theft of our intellectual property. this addresses the problem of foreign investment made strategically to exploit gaps in the committee on foreign investment. so that requires a know-how on the intellectual property they need to gain a foothold in this country. i just want to express my appreciation to secretary mnuchin and secretary mattis, the attorney general secretary , ross, and your entire administration for your partnership. we could not have gotten is done without each of these people at the table, and certainly the lead

because we have this national security finding. and those are actually not justifications for doing what they are doing. it is a huge issue. like i said, i think there will be a bigger effort to try and get more of a consensus. the consensus will give a lot of pushback towards the united states to stop engaging in this behavior. the second thing is they have filed many cases themselves. seriesve filed a whole of challenges to the retaliatory tariffs. which i regard as a good thing. if they are still involved in the settlement process. so if you think back to when the 301 case was filed about china. for what it is worth, it is an excellent report. , andal and evidence-based talking about these broad systemic things about technology that,er, property subsidies and purchases that lead to the made in 2025. trying to get dominance in various fields, so be very careful report. andy trump administration says what they will do is impose ,ariffs, file a case at the wto and put restrictions on foreign direct investment. which, as a result of

that's not how a democracy is supposed to function and it's dangerous for national security to say people who don't agree with me cannot participate in any way, shape or form in certain discussions about securing their country when they're qualified to do so. >> ben rhodes was a deputy national security advisor. ben, the question was asked if the president is going after people that are not supportive of him. to that point here's what john brennan said last night on msnbc. >> i think donald trump has badly sullied the reputation of the office of the presidency with hiss invective tendency an his relationships to benefit himself as opposed to the country. i do think that america's standing in the world has also been tarnished. but i think even more fundamentally what he is doing here in the united states is very polarizing and he is, i think, the most divisive president we've ever had in the oval office. he is feeding and fueling hatred and animosity and misunderstandings among americans. >> ben, this is john brennan talking about what the president is doing. in revoking these security cle

and national security project. my name is alex johnson, and i'm the senior policy advisor for europe and eurasia in the open society policy. we partnered with vested strategies to develop this insightful report we are launching because inclusive foreign policy is a matter of strategic capability. unfortunately, that capability has remained underutilized in our country and policies to change that should deserve partisan support. leadership from the house and senate have recognized this as a priority in government, including measures lake s-924 the senate security diversity and workforce act of 2007 and other measures included over years in state department and national defense authorization acts. leaders like bob menendez and ben cardin have called on administrations to make diplomacy look like america. in october of 2016, the obama administration issued the presidential memorandum promoting diversity and inclusion in the national security workforce. this expanded professional development, advancement and retention

threats from countries that have actively worked to undermine our economic interests and our national security interests. according to the national defense strategy, china is using what they refer to as an all-of-nation long-term strategy. all of the resources of the nation of china, according to that blueprint, in a long-term strategy of leveraging military modernization, influencing operations predatory economic efforts to coerce neighboring countries to reorder the structure of the indo-pacific region to their advantage. it is not to our advantage or the world's advantage for china to be able to restructure that part of the world to their advantage. it also classifies china as a strategic competitor that seeks to shape the world toward their authoritarian model through destabilizing activities that threaten the security of the united states and its allies. to counter china and reassure our allies and partners, this bill takes action to prohibit telecom companies with links to chinese communist party intelligence apparatus from doing business with the u.s. government. many of us on the intel

there are genuine national security risks. what does it mean for u.s. national security?ow do u.s. adversaries look at an administration, the most powerful man in the world, where you have people taping each other? you have apparently lies going back and forth. there was back stabbing. very public comments from the president on people who very recently served in very senior roles. is that a threat to u.s. national security for outsiders to see this very public display of dysfunction? >> look, our adversaries who collect information, who collect intelligence on the united states look at an administration like this as divided against itself, an administration where there's all this infighting, all this distrust. it's a treasure-trove of potential information for our adversaries. it is a target of opportunity. when we talk about taking these devices into the situation room, look, there's absolutely no doubt that there are national security implications here. it's not for the reasons that people might think. certainly it is the case that we are concerned about people potentia

so people would say it is a national security issue. >> and jonathan, talking more about the washington post report on how white house officials are planning to use letters like the one they wrote to revoke the security clearance as part of a roll out to distract from negative stories. so how calculated are these efforts? >> i think everybody got a little bit of a window in that earlier this week when the statement on john brennan was dated late july and so despite that having -- that decision having been made earlier, they held on to that and rolled it out as omarosa getting a lot of attention for the book that she's written about her time in the white house and her time with president trump. so like i said, i think we have a window into that. obviously it sounds like we'll see more of these security clearances pulled. but this story line is not a good one for the president either. before you saw all of those national security officials come out, you saw william mcraven the man who masterminded the bin laden raid, a four-star admiral come out in "the washington post" in defense of john

retentionded in national security agencies. but we are here today because we are looking at how do we build the bench to fill those positions. reflecting the diversity of america. ans simple site has essential role. in april of this year, more than a state foreign policy practitioners -- more than 60 foreign policy practitioners wrote an open letter. this included inclusion for a national security coalition, which the open society policy center facilitated. regular meetings create space for civil site is to create the inclusion among various initiatives and projects that they are working on. such capacity helps civil society lee by example. from the perspective of the open this is howdation, we walk our truths, and this is not always convenient. it is a society long thought to and power of the some power. it is a matter of justice to ensure that the voices of those reached by policy policymakers. our discussion today is to help reach policymakers. we will discuss how we bring experiences to bring cultural policy to diplomacy. t

do you believe it endangers america's national security if there's this brain drain, if people who were involved in making plans to capture bin laden are stripped of their clearances and not able to be a resource for the current administration? >> well, security clearances are certainly a privilege. i don't consider it a right. i think all of us who had to go through the security clearance process had to demonstrate that we were worthy of holding this nation's secrets and keeping and preserving them. and so i am concerned that if security clearances are now going to become a political tool in the hands of individuals such as mr. trump, that, i think, will send a very, very chilling message to individuals in the government currently, maybe former officials who still hold their clearances, as well as the future generation of intelligence and national security professionals. so this -- i am very concerned about the principle here. i'm very concerned about what this might portend in terms of the revocation of other clearances and this is something that i believe that the press needs to shin

under your administration we are finally taking big steps to address the national security threat posed by china, which has grown dramatically. china represents the foremost national security and economic challenge to our country, of any other country in the world, not russia in the long-term. in addition, it's military transformation and belligerence like places in the south china engaged inave outright theft of our intellectual property, and this addresses the problems of foreign investment made strategically to exploit gaps, for them to be able to acquire the know-how and the intellectual property to gain access to this cutting-edge, dual-use technology. i want to express my thanks to secretary miniature and, secretary mattis, the attorney general and secretary ross, for your leadership. we could not have gotten this done without each of these people at the table, and the leadership of chairman crapo on the senate side and chairman hence our link -- chairman on the house side. and now we make sure this operates as intended. president trump: not enough focus has been put on china. and

national security. there is no denying the significant flow of migrants from honduras has created complex challenges. a key concern to many senators on this committee. honduras is addressing those -- conditions. including the lack of jobs and economic opportunity, high levels of crime and sometimes corrupt government institutions. with important assistance from u.s. congress, government institutions and social services will research -- will improve. honduras is strengthening its border controls to prevent humant trafficking and smuggling. a national dialogue is vital to address the violence that occurred following the november 2017 election. process, the electoral and to reconcile a deeply divided country. if confirmed, i will also make it act regarding to assist the national police make reforms. i learned during my service in a how effective a police force is to a country. i will continue working with the honduran attorney general and the public ministry to expand its capacity to investigate and prosec

of course, coming just hours after his full national security apparatus speaking there from the white house in a way we have not seen before. to have the director of the fbi, the intelligence director, the homeland security secretary, and others speaking about this, it seemed that the white house was turning a page on russian election meddling. then the president, of course, with the biggest megaphone of all not talking about that, not amplifying that message. the white house says they are on the same page. they say privately the president is giving this directive for his officials to say on this, and he is taking it seriously. wolf, publicly he's doing anything but. by calling it a hoax yet again, it is certainly sending a message that the u.s. is not taking this seriously. there's no other way to draw attention to something than to have the president talk about it in public. and so far, the president has been unwilling to do that. when you talk to supporters of his and long-time friends of his and ask them why he can't do this, they say this is the one thing the russian election med

nationals are. she worked for secret service and had access to a lot of information going on at the embassy. and officials at the embassy, regional security officers started to realize that all of these foreign service nationals have some relationships with russian government agencies. they seemed to find that a lot of information was going to the main russian security apparatus. and they realized they were getting a lot more information than they should have. the regional security officer found this about 2016, reported it up the chain and seven months plat later she was dismissed. >> she was a russian citizen working at the u.s. embassy, not a u.s. foreign service officer. >> a russian citizen. >> how exactly was she caught? >> she was caught basically they did a sting on her. they started giving her information and she ended up giving it to the fsb. once they caught her red handed she was quietly dismissed. they weren't able to arrest her because she was a russian citizen. certainly the russian government wasn't very happy about it. >> when she was suspected of being a spy presumably they gave her information to see if she would distri

nation, state or dangerous actor. last year, the president signed an executive order to strengthen and review the cyber security of our nation and its critical infrastructure. last week the president chaired , a meeting of his national security council to address ongoing threats. we asked officials standing next to need to break the american people on the work he's done to protect the integrity of our actions. efforts are underway to provide cyber security for authorities to investigate, prosecute and hold accountable those who legally to interview process. i want to welcome director of national intelligence, dan coats, fbi director stephen wray, secretary of homeland security here samuelson, director of the national security agency general called tony national security pfizer john bolton to make comments and questions on the . as you know we address during the election numerous times in rhetoric the purpose of today's briefing is about what we are doing now to protect the integrity of our elections and we ask that you stay on topic. in order to this run smoothly we ask you direct your attention and questions to ask f

more former national security leaders condemning the president, accusing him of playing politics with the nation's safety. the new names being added to that letter this morning and who may be next on the president's list. >>> plus, could omarosa have up to 200 tapes? white house officials rattled and trying to get out in front of the former staffer and reality tv star, as she releases yet another secret recording on msnbc. >>> our team is here and ready to go on this very busy, want where jury deliberations are continuing in paul manafort's financial crimes kri s trial. julia ainsley has been on top of every twist and turn. what's happening this morning? >> reporter: the jury is back for their second day of deliberations, kristen. we just went inside the courtroom where the judge was speaking to both sides without the jury there. they were going over some administrative things, what he could lift from under a seal after this is over, but he made some comments i thought were interesting. he says, i'm no stranger to criticism, but this case brought it to a new level. no doubt that judge

he's now saying that the president never talked about former national security adviser michael flynn with former fbi director james comey. this is a consequential discussion so why is the story changing? also, security gaps expose what we're learning in the days after that plane was stolen off the tarmac in seattle. and one year after clashes in charlottesville, white nationalists outnumbered by counter protesters this weekend. is change coming? we'll ask the woman set to break one big diversity barrier in congress. fidelity is redefining value for investors. introducing zero account fees for brokerage accounts. and zero minimums to open an account. we have fidelity mutual funds with zero minimum investment. and now, only fidelity offers two zero expense ratio index funds directly to investors. because when you invest with fidelity, all those zeros really add up. ♪ so maybe i'll win, saved by zero ♪ today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care servic

top intelligence and national security leaders coming together to warn of new election interference. >> our democracy itself is in the cross hairs. >> we acknowledge the threat. it is real. it is continuing. >> within hours, the president went back to this. >> we're being hindered by the russian hoax. it's a hoax, okay. >> no, it's not and he knows it. and just in this morning, the brand-new jobs report. as apple joins a club of its own, blasting past a market milestone to cross $1 trillion in value. we're going to break it all down. we've got a lot to cover this morning. but i want to begin with president trump undermining a major show of force by america's top national security officials. his officials. the top intelligence officials say the russian threat is very real. vowing to protect american elections from a pervasive campaign by russians to interfere in this year's midterm elections. but to the president, everything related to russia is still a big hoax. i have a great team here that's going to break all of it down. first, i want to walk you through the tail of two administra

it's not about national security, and on the subject of giving away the nation's secrets, there is zero evidence that john brennan has ever done that. but president trump gave away national security information to the soviet ambassador and soviet foreign minister in the oval office right after he fired james comey, so the danger does not reside with john brennan. there is every reason to believe the danger is residing in the white house. >> and there's also some talk, laura, in terms of danger that would be relative to robert mueller's security clearance. that that could be the next thing on the chopping block. what is the likelihood something like that could happen? are you hearing anything on that front? >> at this point, i think it's extremely likely. trump is trying to signal to all current and former civil servants, public employees that if they criticize him that they can be directly punished by him. i think this is -- the other thing i think number two that he's trying to do is distract from very unflattering news cycles. from the omarosa news cycle. it's bad for him. "the washin

and our concern is that this is about our national security interests. n you talk about security clearances, security clearances are used in order to help protect our national security. there are 4 million security clearances out there, largely in our intelligence community, our military community, and others that are serving our national security and trying to protect this country. to use our security clearance process, which is related to national security, to use that now as a political weapon, to go after people whose political views you may not like, whose speech you may not like, whose support for investigations you may not like, turns our national security interests into a political weapon. i think this is kind of trump's approach of wag the dog, where he is using national security issues to divert attention. and i feel that that undermines not only our national security, i think it undermines the office of the presidency. >> there's an article, an important article in the new issue of the new yorker magazine that says that president trump even onc

political party advocating independence from china leading to accusations that he's threatening national security due to the nature of how the chinese propaganda machine works the national party was instantly demonized as some sort of

is of a personal nature but it's also of -- it's also of a sensitive nature when it comes to national security. that's why for example, all journalists know you can't file a freedom of act request to get somebody's security clearance application. you can try but if you get anything back from the agency you're toiaing, whatever you get will be redacted to protect the sensitive information in that document and rightly so. at least that's the way it's supposed to work. for some reason, the trump administration responded to a foia request by this republican group looking for informationing abouting this democratic congressional candidate ex-cia officer abigail span berger and what the trump administration sent that republican group in response to their foia request was span berger's complete totally unredacted application for a security clearance including her full social security number, her entire medical history, right? everything. the reason abigail span berger found out this had handed is because there after aipac happily started shopping this document to reporters. and starred using it in po

people with experience at the cia and military and national security council and elsewhere. they released this letter to the director of office of personnel management and director of national intelligence. it says "neither we nor national security law experts we've consulted are familiar with any previous case of an sf 86 being released in full to include this history. we have yet to hear why her personal information was released and subsequently made public by paul ryan's political action committee. each year thousands of aspiring public servants file the same document hoping to be their country just as we did. they must be confident that their information will be handled securely and never released pursuant to a political agenda. her security application is being used now for a political agenda against her. we still don't know why this incredibly sensitive document was released to a republican opo research firm. as noted as far as we can tell, it is a totally unprecedented breach. as of today we do know how that firm and paul ryan's pac did obtain it. the u.s. postal servi

but his comments have been political, not this is buputtin at risk national security treatments. and the statement referred to social media outbursts. and a reason for pulling national security clearance which the last one was just 24 hours earlier, referring to trump's response to omarosa. >> and again the president was asked why there are no supporters of yours on this list right now. michael flynn still has his security clearance, and he of course has plead guilty to lying to investigators and he made many political supporters outload. how did the president justify that? >> you know, we didn't ask specifically about michael flin, but one of the reasons he want today keep omarosa on, behind the recommendation from his chief of staff, is that she said great things about him. that sort of loyalty to the president is of supreme importance. and we have not seen michael flynn say anything. >> thank you for hanging on with us, working through our technical difficulties. again as to what the president said outloud when he acknowledged when you revoked his security clearance. >>> comin

the problem of our national security. the nation is in danger. he reminded the president that peace does not come from weakness or retreat. it comes from the restoration of america's military superiority. reagan did pretty well on this national security team. he won the primary in texas, alabama, georgia and a few other states. when reagan went in texas, ford's advisors were scrambling to stop the bleeding. ford continued to shift to the right focusing on how he was going to increase defense spending if he had to nt -- the administration promised to be struck -- tough on communism. he abandoned any talks about a new arms agreement with the soviet union. the shift helped and he regained his footing winning in ohio and new jersey. ford would win the nomination but barely pick even when the primary ended neither reagan or ford had enough delegates to secure the nomination. they took the behind-the-scenes negotiation in the months leading up to the convention for ford to get enough delegates and ford hired a lawyer named paul manafort who led the eff

he has done more for national security over 35 years than well -- i'll leave it at that. >> tony, hold on one second. if his security clearance is revoked, what do we lose? put that into plain and simple language? was he using that security clearance? were people calling upon his expertise in this white house? >> so, look, there are two things that are at stake here. one is at least the ability and potential for current officials to seek someone like john brennan's expertise on a particular matter and makes it more complicated if he doesn't have a security clearance. they can always declassify something if they need him in on an issue but it does make it more complicated. i'm more concerned about the chilling effect he has and the fact that again it's an absolute abuse of authority to revoke this security clearance, revoke authority to have one for political purposes. because the president didn't like what he was saying, not because he was doing anything wrong. >> go ahead, jen? >> allison, i want to add two more points. by the way, i love being on the show with tony. two more points,

, fbi director christopher wray, and national security advisor john bolton. >> since january 2017, the president has taken decisive action. this includes measures to heighten the security and resilience of election systems and processes, to confront russian and other foreign maligned influence in the united states, to confront such aggression through international action, and to reinforce a strong sanctions regime. >> in regards to russian involvement in the midterm elections, we continue to see a pervasive messaging campaign by russia to try to weaken and divide the united states. >> our democracy itself is in the cross hairs. free and fair elections are the cornerstone of our democracy and it has become clear that they are the target of our adversaries who seek as the dni just said to so discord and undermine our way of life. >> make no mistake. the scope of this foreign influence threat is both broad and deep. >> facebook revealed it discovered ongoing efforts to influence american voters, including a covert campaign to spread divisive political messages. that has raised questions a

up until now, no one has raised the national security defense, sort of the third rail of trade law. because everyone was worried you didn't want the wto settlement system, what the trump administration called nameless faceless bureaucrats in geneva opining on essential security. who wants people in geneva telling me what my essential security is. so far no one has wanted to go down the road of raising this defense, everyone has walked away from it. it is coming up right now, right now in geneva a big fight between russia and the ukraine. we are going to see this dispute, russia has put all these restrictions on ukrainian trade and they violate the wto but russia is saying we will invoke article 21 defense so the chairman of the panel went out saying this is the first time we interpreted this position, how should we think about it? what the united states and russia said is it did not judicial. it is up to us, it considers necessary, essential security, totally self judging. as soon as anybody asserts this defense the panel has to not do anything further. most of the countries take tha