i mean, talking about the national security council, right? have only named two people under the national security advisor so far. they've only named two people and one of them had to withdraw, had to lose the skbrob because of the the multiple substantial plagiarism allegations against her, some of which had been known and publicly reported for years. but apparently the trump folks had no idea about those allegations, the subsanative the allegations against her. it took them completely by surprise. and now they've had to withdraw her name from the national security council which, as we were discussing earlier, otherwise basically has no staff at this point. the national security council thing is a big deal. there's a few different ways you can look at this whole thing. there's the kind of personality driven way of looking at this. politico.com had this headline on it today "trump set to take office without most of his cabinet." yes. yes. exactly. because they did not prepare to have a confirmable cabinet so he doesn't get one. he is going to

the shakeup on the national security council. president trump's chief strategist, steve bannon, getting a seat at the table while the white house denies any down grade for the national intelligence director. we'll look at the facts. let's get to it. first from the news deck, if president trump is trying to divert attention from the backlash over his extreme refugee vetting plan by announcing he will reveal his supreme court nominee tomorrow night, it's largely not working. the news of his executive order led to massive protests at airports across the country. the detentions of travelers from overseas and an outcry from lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle. president trump has defied the backlash and rimmed into his critics, including chuck schumer. >> i noticed that chuck schumer was cheering. i know who his acting coach is. i don't see him as a he is, he. i think there's fake tears. >> 5% chance. in reference to a news conference where the senate minor any leading while standing up next to refugees. >> this executive or

here it is. >> adding people to the national security council never really bothers me. my biggest concern is there are actually, under the law, only two statutory advisers to the national security council, and that's the director of central intelligence or the dni and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. i think pushing them out of the national security council meetings except when their specific issues are at stake is a big mistake. i think that they both bring perspective and judgment and experience to bear that every president whether they like it or not, finds useful. >> listening to him, jeremy, the two people he said that need to be on that council, the director of national intelligence and the chairman of the joint chiefs, they've been pushed out. so give us your thoughts on this and also your thoughts on steve bannon's role. >> well, this has always been the problem with candidate trump and now with president trump the question of whom does he listen to? and it's going to be a constant struggle inside this white house. we know he listens to steve bannon. we

republican senator john mccain called the national security council changes a, quote, radical departureador susan rice. president obama's former national security adviser described the decision as, quote, stone cold crazy. jeff zeleny joins me. the white house pushed back saying they're welcome at any meeting when want to come to. >> reporter: white house press secretary sean spicer said they could come to any meeting that they wanted to, but that's not what the memorandum said. it said steve bannon is a member of the principles committee and the others you mentioned, the generals are not part of that. it goes to show how much influence steve bannon has. in previous administrations political advisers have not been invited. as we are seeing, stephen bannon, his portfolio extends far beyond politics. steve bannon is the white house chief strategist, but even that title may not do justice to his influence in the west wing. he is driving decisions on every piece of president trump's agenda, domestic and foreign, including the president's immigration order and travel ban that sparked a globa

. >> i want to turn to the national security council. the national security council executive order that has now been put in place removes the director of national intelligence, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff from the nsc principals meeting. they are now only invited when, quote, issues retaping to their responsibilities and expertise are to be discussed but allowed instead in all of the meetings white house chief strategist steve bannon. former national security adviser susan rice tweeting this morning, this is stone cold crazy. after a week of crazy. who needs military advice or intell to make policy on isil, syria, afghanistan, dprk adding chairman of joint chiefs and dni treated as after-thoughts in cabinet level principals meeting and where is the cia? cut out of everything and retweeted this. trump loves and trusts the military so much he just kicked them out of the national security council and put in a nazi in their place. >> that's clearly inappropriate language from a former ambassador. look -- >> stone cold crazy. >>

national security team. the one thing is, the national security council, that is by law, the national security act of 1947, sayshat is comprised of the president, vice president, secretary of state, defense, et cetera, like a mini cabinet. one thing that general flynn and i did prior to taking office was we interviewed a lot of the former national security advisors. we started with henry kissinger, my old boss, who set up a national security council iteration system and we talk to other people who had had the roles for other administrations, including the obama administration. several things that came up, one, there were too many meetings. the agendas would often blur one to the other. it often decisions weren't made. what it was doing to people who are participants of it, the cabinet officers, in some cases, the deputy cabinet officers, they were running their own agencies come up with their primary responsibility. we did a little bit of streamlining. the streamlining was to say, if they are going to be some meetings that the chairman of the joint chief of staff doesn't need to come to, you don't have to come

you worked for a number of national security councils and presidents. what makes a good national security advisor and effective, smooth-running nsc? >> well, good morning, everybody and good to be with you. let me put it like this. i think many in washington and in the audience would regard the model for national security advisor as scowcroft. and i worked for brent and let me say how did brent do the job? well, first of all the national security advisor obviously has to have a close relationship with the president. has to have a temperment that is congenial to the president. he doesn't necessarily by the way, have to know the president when he takes his position as national security advisor. curiously henry kissinger had one--minute meeting with richard nixon at a cocktail party before he was offered the job. so, but he certainly over time has to have that relationship. second we assume you have to be very smart, but second, it is a big management job because getting getting before the president he needs to make and making sure the decisions he makes ar

trump has made another unprecedented decision adding his top adviser steve bannon to the national security councilhile simultaneously removing the director of national intelligence and chairman of the joint chiefs of staff from their regular duties at that council meeting. susan rice, president obama's national security adviser was shocked at trump's decision and she tweeted her feelings about all of this. rice saying, "this is stone cold crazy after a week of crazy who needs military advice or intel to make policy on isil, syria, afghanistan, dprk." take a listen to how trump press secretary sean spicer responded to her tweet this morning on abc. >> with all due respect, i think ambassador rice might want to wait and see how we handle this. so far they have an expert team of folks that have come in to understand the intelligence systems and how modernize -- >> streamlined without the chairman and without dni. >> we have an unbelievable group of folks that are part of nsc. the president gets plenty of information from the joint chiefs of staff. he gets briefed by the secretary of defense. what the

national security and national security decision-making and the most effective way possible. on the national security council we will serve for primary functions. we would buy suppressed on national security issues. we will formulate national security policy and in coordination with the interagency process. we will monitor how policy is carried out and we will also ensure that the president is properly prepared and staffed with the many national security related events that we are like the two encounter. i would add one additional function. i want to add that president-elect trump, we need to help them work with our partners in congress on both sides of the aisle despite the difficulties that we will face. serving as the national security advisor is an awesome responsibility and it gets to the very essence of protecting and defending the american people, our homeland and our constitution. given those responsibilities it is our mission to ensure that the president the national security community and the american people continue to be well served. in order to achieve that we are absolutely committed to continu

the director of the national security council is not supposed to be a person who has his fingers in every pie. and it remains to be seen whether he can macro micro machining everything on the security council and take away authorities from the other cabinet members. that remains to be seen. but based on flynn's background and everything that we've read about him, that is exactly what he intends to do. that do create a lot of may help. on the other hand, let's talk about the defeating isis. blast august donald trump claims that the last book he read was my book called "defeating isis." i find it interesting since -- it's 544 pages. however, that being said, there has been if place a strategy to defeat isis which has actually brought isis to the brink of defeat. we're about to eliminate isis in iraq. isis is on the ropes everywhere else. all that remains is a coalition of forces to go in and destroy isis on the ground and raqqah. and that coalition has existed for over 2 1/2 years. so what more he can do, there are only so many bombs we can put down range. because you actually have to know

so you're saying every national security council meeting should include the chairman of the joint chiefs and the chairman of central intelligence. so it is not correct, then, because in the order it said as needed. >> if you read the order, they are invited as attendees to the security council at any time. >> we had a l

joint chiefs of staff who by law is the principal military advisor to the president and the national security council so, seems to me if it's national security, most of the issues are going to involve things that the current chairman joe is going to be concerned about. >> sure. you would know, sir. you would know. general richard meyers, thank you so much for your time. appreciate it. >> thanks, brooke. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> next the pentagon has identified a navy seal killed in a special forces raid in yemen. what we're learning about how he died. tomorrow's the day we'll play something besides video games. every day is a gift. especially for people with heart failure. but today there's entresto... a breakthrough medicine that can help make more tomorrows possible. tomorrow, i want to see teddy bait his first hook. in the largest heart failure study ever, entresto was proven to help more people stay alive and out of the hospital than a leading heart failure medicine. women who are pregnant must not take entresto. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace

i think pushing them out of the national security council meetings, except when their specific issues are at stake, is a big mistake. >> well, what they have done is modernized the national security council so that it is less bureaucratic and more focused on providing the president with the intelligence he needs to make decisions. >> and steve bannon, what does he provide? >> he's a formal naval officer and understands the geopolitical landscape that we have now. >> so he's giving military advice in there? >> no, part of this is analysis. the data comes in and how we synthesize the data to make the best decision for the country is not just about intelligence, but about the intelligence and the analysis that comes out of that. having the chief strategist for the president in those meetings who has a significant military background to help make, guide, what the president's final analysis will be is crucial. >> the white house is standing by its statement on holocaust remembrance day but didn't specifically remember jews that were killed. instead, it offered generic victims, survivors an

he has set them aside and supplanted them on the national security council. that in, america, that is who is running or heavily directing national security policy of the united states. we'll bring maria back later. thanks to raul. thank you, guys. >>> coming up, the travel ban is drawing some uncomfortable comparisons like the ones you just heard for donald trump. no matter how the markets change... at t. rowe price... our disciplined approach remains. global markets may be uncertain... but you can feel confident in our investment experience around the world. call us or your advisor... t. rowe price. invest with confidence. when you hit 300,000 miles. or here, when you walked away without a scratch. maybe it was all the times it got you safely out there. or all the times it got you out of there. maybe it was the day your baby came home. or maybe the day you realized your baby was not a baby anymore. every subaru is built to earn your trust. because we know what you're trusting us with. subaru. kelley blue book's most trusted brand. and best overall brand. lov

you've worked for a number of national security councils and presidents. what is it that makes a good national security adviser and an effective, smooth running n.f.c.? >> good morning, everybody, and good to be with you. let me put it like this. i think many in washington and the audience would regard the model for national security dvisor as brent scowcroft. and i work for brent. so let me just say, how did brent do the job? first of all, the national security advisor obviously has to have a close relationship with the president has to have a temperament that is congenial to the president. i doesn't necessarily have to know the president when he takes his position as national security advisor. curiously, henry kissinger had one five-minute meeting with richard nixon at a cocktail party before he was offered the job. but he certainly over time has to have that relationship. second, and of course we assume beverage to be very smart, but second it's a big management job. because getting before the president's decision he needs to make, and then being sure th

where you have a principals committee chaired by the national security advisor and whose members are all the members of the national security councilinus the president and sometimes the vice president. so you have the senior cabinet figures coming together on a regular basis, chaired by the president's national security advisor. you then have the deputies committee, number twos and sometimes number threes depe depending which department you're talking about trying to manage the process almost on a day-to-day basis and is the crisis management facilitator. third, you have, this is whewhere it changes from administration to administration you have the assistant secretary level int interagency working groups which get renamed under every president because that's the president's prerogative. currently, the interagency policy committees, ipcs sometimes get chaired by departments and sometimes get chaired by the nsc. there's always a big fight about that issue on whether a department gets to chair it. over time, the reality is because the central mechanism is in the white house, it tends to be chaired by the nsc. even in the obama admini

it was the national security presidential more memorandum, the structure of the national security council. steve bannon would not only attend nse meetings. he would be a regular member of the committee. that means he joins an exclusive inner circle that includes the secretaries of state, treasury, defense, homeland security, and the attorney general. a-10 acknowledgment of van enz contribution as an advisor to the president. some democrats on capitol hill are already calling for bannon's dismissal. bernie sanders tweeted we need experienced people, not an extreme right wing political operative. others question the language in the memorandum, specifically "the director of national intelligence on the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff shall attend where issues pertaining to their expertise shall be discussed. "former national security advisor quipped the chairman of the joint chiefs treated as afterthoughts. where is cia? cut out of everything. white house officials call that blatant hypocrisy after all former obama advisor david axelrod is also attended meetings. >> i know there was a

you've got the national security council unstaffed. i think you and i would agree the national security council is pretty important, right? >> well, the national security council is pretty important but it's more important to get the right people in the right positions and to do so in a deliberative way if that's what is required than it is to rush and get the wrong people in those positions. so i think donald trump and his administration is being very deliberate in making sure they get the right people and the right places even if it takes more time than it might otherwise. >> and you think even if in the case of general mattis asking for folks to stay on, even if it means getting rid of people so there are empty desks in the pentagon because those folks may have been appointed by the previous president? >> i'm quite comfortable our new secretary of defense will be able to handle the circumstances as they are presented and i have not seen anything that suggests national security is at risk because of the way the transition is unfolding

while he praised some of the president's national security team members, he also expressed concern about who will and won't be sitting on the national security council meetings. >> i think the national security team around president trump is very impressive. i think you couldn't ask for a better one. general kelly. general flynn is great. general mattis. and the ones they are bringing onboard on their team. i am worried about the national security council who are members of it and who are permanent members? appointment of mr. bannon is something which is a radical departure from any national security council in history. remember karl rove when he sat in on one. axelrod when he was supposedly -- look, that is -- the role of the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff has been diminished, i understand, with this reorganization. one person who was indispensable was chairman of the joint chiefs of staff in my view. it's of concern this "reorganization." >> for more on this i'm joined by cnn washington correspondent ryan nobod nobles. this is the white house approach to modernizing systems that have customarily been in place at the white house. >> a depart

thought-out way, especially since he had it very tightly held and he put steve bannon nail in the national security council team. it seemed to be done more for political reasons than national security safety and done in such a rushed way that it detracted from what i would assume are the more important things he was trying to do -- do the regulatory reform, maybe the tax reform. >> nick, it struck me that the trump administration gave tech ceos no cover in this situation. these are people -- there was a big photo op with him sitting around the table with him. elon musk has met with him twice over the past several weeks. all of them seemed blindsided. anybody who's been paying attention would know they're under extreme pressure from their employees over the way they interact with president trump. what's the fallout from this likely to be, nick? >> i don't know. look, i think the way that trump has interacted with the tech community, he doesn't care about it. you know, he really truly -- >> so are they going to keep meeting with him like that? >> i think they will, but i don't think it's going to help them.

the addition of white house aide steve bannon to the national security council. of bannon tonight, "the new york times'" editorial board wrote this, "a new executive order politicizing the process for national security decisions suggests mr. bannon is positioning himself not merely as a svengali but as the de facto president." let's bring in jeremy bash whose background is in national security, after all. he remains with us as do nicolle wallace and ed rollins. jeremy, how unsettling, again, to career men and women, at the pentagon, in langley, is mr. bannon's presence in that room at that table? >> i think that "times" editorial is overstated, brian, but let me break down for you what is of concern. inside the national security council, there are multiple layers of meetings that occur. the most important one is called the principals' committee or p.c. in government parlance. all of the cabinet secretaries and national security adviser and tee up the big decisions for the president and when the president walks into the room, it confirms into a nsc, national securi

structure where you have a prims committee chaired by in the national security advise evers who hose whens are membered of the national security council, minus the president and the vice president. and so you have the senior cabinet figures coming together on a regular basis, chaired by the president's national security adviser. you then have the deputies committee, which is the number twos in most of the departments, sometimes number throw, depending on what department you're talking about. that is trying to manage the process almost on a day-to-bay bay day and is the crisis management facilitator. then you hearchanged from administration to administering -- you have the aassistant secretary elf enter allege -- currently the enter agency policy commit years, ipcs, that sometimes get chaired by the departments and sometimes get chaired by the nsc. always a big fight about that issue. on whether the department gets to chair it. over time, the reality is, because the central mechanism is in the white house, it tends to be chaired by the nsc. so even in the obama administration, where initially there was an -- one the first memorandum by

national security council. so what happened yesterday? well, the president, which he has a right to do, re-organized the national security council. and two gentlemen or two people that have traditionally been on the national security council hole seem to know a little bit about the national security were previously in what is called the principals. these are the handful of people that meet with the president, the key national security leaders. the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff is one of them and director of national intelligence organization. two of them. so, the president said, i don't need you in my little inner circle, go away. you can be part of the larger thing and when i want you, i'll call you. the person responsible for the collection of our national intelligence, pushed him aside. but who came in to take the place of the two people? the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the director of the national intelligence? guess guess who, mr. bannon. is he a national security expert me? spent a few years in the military. dec

i'd like to start with the investor blackwell who have worked for a number of national security councils and presidents, what is it that makes a good national security advisor meant an effective -- >> good morning. in it is good to be with you. you may put it like this, i think many in washington and in the audience with regard to model the national security advisor -- i worked for him and let me just say how did brent do the job? first of all, the national security adviser has to have a close relationship with the president and has to have a temperament that is congenial to the president. he he doesn't necessarily have to know the president when he takes his position with national security advisor, henry kissinger had one five-minute meeting with richard nixon at a cocktail party before he was offered the job. but he certainly, over over time has to have that relationship. seconds and we will assume he has to be very smart. second, it is a big management job. get in before their president decisions he needs to make and then being sure the decision he makes are implemented is a big manag

to every decision nsc makes. >> appointing steve bannon is a radical departure from any national security council. it's of concern this, quote, reorganization. >> deputy national security adviser under president obama said bannon's presence on nsc is risky. >> concern is decisions on national security and foreign policy should be a politics-free zone to the greatest extent possible. >> national security council created after world war ii for the president to be able to handle immediate threats facing the country. >> it was designed to stabilize presidential policy and constrain the president a little bit so he wouldn't talk to anybody. >> core members were president, vice president, secretaries of state and defense, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. sometimes other secretaries like treasury or energy have been added in. the secretaries make up the principle's committee. >> the security council does not make decisions, the president makes decisions. he doesn't have to follow their advice. >> reporter: if president trump's nsc it would have included dan coates and chairman of chief of staff bu

the addition of white house aide steve bannon to the national security council. on tonight, the new york times editorial board wrote this. a new executive order politicizing the process for national security decisions suggests mr. bannon is positioning himself, not merely as a svengali, but as the de facto president. let's bring in jeremy bash whose background is in national security. after all, he remains with us, as do nicole wallace and ed rollins. jeremy, how unsettling, again, to career men and women at the pentagon in langley, is mr. bannon's presence in that room at that table? >> i think that times editorial is overstated, brian. let me breakdown for you what is of concern. inside the national security council be there are multiple layers of meetings that occur. the most important one is called the principles committee or the pc in government parlance. that's all of the cabinet secretaries and the national security advisor, and they tee up the big decisions for the president. and when the president walks in the room, it converts into a nsc, national securi

we have a great group of folks in constant contact with national security council and homeland security council. you have general flynn, tom bausert. as i mentioned there are several individuals within homeland security council and national security council that are held over in critical positions. there are a lot of individuals who are detailed and staying on board. the contact and level of support pack and forth with national security council alone has been tremendous. we have had reams of briefings and people that have come over and met with the incoming national security council. that is one area where frankly they have been very, very aggressive and robust with both meeting with counter parts and insuring that the team is ready to go day one. >> ethics experts and former white house lawyers have expressed deep concern over donald trump's plan to separate himself from his business. the o.g. director said handing over control is not enough. given that he hasn't released his taxes, given that 74% of americans want him to release his taxes, will he at least give a list of who he is in

those countries. >> i quickly want to get your thoughts on the sort of restructuring of the national security councilthe principles, the top national security advisors, at least removing formally, although they can participate, the chairman of the joint chiefs, the director of national intelligence steve bannon, top strategist in the white house. he is now going to be a permanent member of the security council. you were a member of that national security council. were you one of the principles? >> i was at one point. as deputy secretary of state i was written into the order as someone who participated in all the meetings. >> was david axelrod who was a strategist during the first term, did he participate in those meetings? the administration seems to suggest that he did. >> it's wrong. i mean, what happened at the beginning of the obama administration is that certain other officials, including david axelrod, robert gibbs at the very beginning -- >> robert gibbs was the press secretary. >> they were not -- >> did they participate from time to time? >> the first few months of the administration they ba

president trump is giving his chief political strategist a seat on the national security council. steve bannon's appointment is part of an n.s.c. shakeup that reduces the role of the military's joint chiefs of staff and the director of national intelligence. their attendance at meetings of the n.s.c. principals committee will now be optional, according to the trump executive order issued yesterday. today, arizona senator john mccain called the elevation of bannon, a one-time navy office"" radical" and said he was concerned about a diminished role for the joint chiefs. jeff green field here to discuss the political fallout of the trump executive order 57bd other actions he has taken in the first ten days in office. jeff, let's separate out legal issues from the political ones. what-- how significant of a political week has this been? >> yeah, you're quite right about that, legally some people have argued that the president has very wide latitude to determine who does and who does not gain entry to the united states. jonathan tu rly at george washington says he doesn't like this plan

, wait a minute, is it true that the joint chiefs chairman is not a steady member of the national security council response has been that they insist that the order and the way that it was worded and the list of national security council members is exactly as it was in the obama administration. we have to see if that's actually true, but they insist that the role of the chairman of the joint chiefs is no different in this administration than the obama administration. now, that doesn't answer the question about steve bannon. >> and the joint chairman also was briefed on the memo before the president of the united states went to his house, the pentagon, to sign it. before you jump in, i want to get to the point you were talking about earlier. the president is on pretty good ground when he looks at the american people and says i'm trying to keep you safe, but it's also the -- if you listen here, there is -- during the eight years of the obama administration, there were no fatal terrorist attacks from any kind insighted by someone who came from the united states coming in this order, and yet, if you l

the addition of white house aide steve bannon to the national security council. tonight, "the new york times'" editorial board wrote this, "a new executive order politicizing the process for national security decisions suggests mr. bannon is positioning himself not merely as a svengali but as the de facto president." let's bring in jeremy bash whose background is in national security, after all. he remains with us as do nicolle wallace and ed rollins. jeremy, how unsettling, again, to career men and women, at the pentagon, in langley, is mr. bannon's presence in that room at that table? >> i think that "times" editorial is overstated, brian, but let me break down for you what is of concern. inside the national security council, there are multiple layers of meetings that occur. the most important one is called the principals' committee or p.c. in government parlance. all of the cabinet secretaries and national security adviser and tee up the big decisions for the president and when the president walks into the room, it confirms into a nsc, national security council

. >> the united nations security council -- the united nations security council was created after world war ii to create stability and to maintain security in the world. and yet as we look around the world today, it is failing in its cause of peace and security. we can only look to syria where over a half a million people have been slaughtered, people have been tortured, chemical weapons have been used against people, and yet the united nations security council has been able to -- unable to do anything to counter what has happened there. russia has remade the map by invading georgia in 2008 again and ukraine and yet the united nations has been unable to deal with that issue. china is violating all kinds of international norms in the south china sea and yet the united nations security council is unable to do -- deal with that issue. matter of fact, united nations security council has been unable to deal with the issues that is agreed upon, its own resolutions, whether it is north korea and the violations taking place and the half-hearted efforts that have taken place by members to really

senator john mccain slammed the move as radical. >> it's a radical departure from national security council >> i'm joined by my panel. gentlemen and lady. putting a person on national security staff with joint sitting here and secretary of treasury secretary of state all -- what do you think we ought to do, the big bull is going to be steve bannon. >> first of all, it's weird. >> you have to look at what type president there going to be. as political operative they should do drug testing at the white house. steve bannon is former naval offer, master degree from georgetown -- >> suppose hillary clinton wanted to put -- >> robert gibs go to the meeting -- >> they are not ideology kals. >> jared and steve bannon. he is starting to say these are the people i listen to, these are the people i trust. >> that's not about politics. it's not political advise. jay. >> the question thinkig, we're excludeing the chairman of the joint chiefs and dna are busy people, don't pertain to them, they tonigdon't need to spend t- but steve bannon should be there at all times. >> yes. >> he idea log from breitbar

he wants to be on the national security council. the president is bringing in politicaled advisers is not unusual. what was unusual is the decision to make the chairman of the joint chiefs and the director of national intelligence less than full-time members. now, the chief of staff, to me, said no, no, no, they can go to my meeting they want. okay. that does not seem to be what the order said. there was some confusion there. perhaps he's saying they can come to any meeting and that's going to be how they manage it. that, to me, was the more striking aspect. bringing on an aide, that doesn't surprise me. david axelrod would be there informally all the time. >> we always say you need more time. today you need more time. >> between mexico, the wall. >> phone calls with russia. there's a lot to talk about. >> the media, tim kaine wait until you hear from tim kaine. he spent a lot of time on steve bannon. >> it's all coming up in ten minutes. chuck, thanks for stopping by. a reminder, you can see "meet the press" every sunday at 10:30.

united nation security counsel -- united nation security council was created after warld war 2 to create stability and maintain security in the world as we look around the world today it's failing in its cause of peace and security. we can only look to syria where over a half million people have been slaughtered. chemical weapons used against people. the united nation security council has been unable to do anything. russia remade the map invading -- united nation has been unable to deal with that issue. china is violating all forms in the china sea and united nation is unable to deal with that issue. it's own resolution. whether it's north korea in violations taking place and half hearted efforts taken place by members to push and enforce strongs sanctions. in iran the same issue where an agreement has been reached and yet iran continues to violate especially on ba histic missiles. anti-sematic measures. the permanent five causing less to be -- russia and china. we have a build in issue any of the five members can very toe the action of the rest and keep united nation from deeping with i

who will be the chief not only domestic but looks like national security adviser to the president and we're putting him on the national security council, taking off the joint chairman of the chiefs of staff and director of national intelligence. you couldn't have i think a more concerning development in this one but plainly bannon is driving this train and this train is headed off the cliff. he drove the train i think on the executive order and to take off these military leaders and intelligence leader when making decisions about war and peace ought to give every american enormous concern about the future. >> and finally, the holocaust day remembrance friday was holocaust remembrance day and there was no mention of the jewish tragedy, the losses. there was pushback against that by reince priebus on "meet the press." i think we have that clip available. and we will have it in a few moments. we can talk about the fact reince priebus said of course jews and others lost their lives in the holocaust. is that an attempt to diminish the main targets of the holocaust? >> it is. this is exactly the kind of approach that breitbart and steve ban

national security team. secretaries of homeland security and defense. so i voted for them. why? because the national security councilportant to our thinking about challenges and the national -- the council sadly has some really questionable people on it. the national security adviser general flynn is a pro-russian conspiracy theorist. the administration added steve bannon with his ties to a news organization that traffics in anti-semitism and white supremacy of the national security council. so we put general kelly and general mattis in place, many democrats supported them because we want to save this country. will there be other areas where -- here's another example. >> okay. >> eight years ago, democrats and president obama made a major investment in the infrastructure in that country, no republicans supported it, but democrats did it and it helped the country and if president trump wants to do that we'll work with him on it. hopefully maybe a republican will vote for it this time. we're not closing the door on doing what's right for the good of the country, but right now we think this administration poses a real

to booktv.org for the complete we can schedule. >> next, discussion about the role of the national security council as potential changes during the trump administration. the council the council on foreign relations hosted this hour-long event. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] >> good morning.