0 president lula has to make. >> reporter: i wanted to follow up on a question i asked in september. in light of the chinese spy balloon incident does this administration consider chinese land purchases near u.s. military bases a national security threat? >> we are always concerned about potential foreign collection near or around our military sites, and you're right, last week is a good example of that. we take that seriously, whether that's terrestrial related or whether it's from the air. and i think i'll just leave it at that. >> reporter: would you work with congress to put in place legislation to prevent that -- >> we are always willing to work with congress to address our national security interests and threats as best we can. >> reporter: real quick, is there a time line for recovery of this object? >> you would have to talk to the pentagon. i don't know, guys, this just happened within the last hour and a half, and they're still assessing where this thing landed and the degree to which they can get to it. >> reporter: the president is going to meet with leaders of the eastern flight nato countries. are other european leaders, nato leaders expected to join the president on the trip. >> we're putting the agenda together. the predominant reason to meet with them, the bucharest nine is to talk to the nations who are literally on the eastern flank of the nato alliance, i can't rule in or rule out there will be additional attendees. >> reporter: back to lula, is there going to be any commitments to the amazon fund by the united states during this? >> let's have the visit occur here shortly, and we'll provide you a readout. i don't have anything specific on that. >> reporter: so, john, the u.s. special presidential coordinator for global and infrastructure energy is in angola, so he met with president lorenzo, can you elaborate a little more on this visit. >> i don't have any information on that. we'll take the question and see if we can get you a better answer. >> reporter: was the president briefed on the object last night when the track first came to the administration's attention? >> he was. as soon as the pentagon had enough information, they did. >> reporter: thank you, madame, thank you, john. as far as russia's war against ukraine is concerned, one year now, did president believe that when prime minister modi of india told president putin to stop the war, and you think there's still time for prime minister modi to stop the war or president putin? >> i think there's still time for mr. putin to stop the war. i think there's still time for mr. putin to stop the war. >> and mr. modi can convince? >> i'll let the prime minister speak to whatever efforts he's willing to undertake. i want to stress it again, certainly the united states would welcome any effort that could lead to an end of hostilities in ukraine. that's in keeping with president zelenskyy's objectives and his leadership, his determination of what is acceptable to the ukrainian people. nothing about ukraine without ukraine. so president biden has said this, gosh, dozens of times. we think this war could end today, should end today. the single person responsible for what the ukrainian people are going through is vladimir putin. and he could stop it right now. instead, he's firing cruise missiles into energy and power infrastructure, and trying to knock out the lights and knock out the heat so the ukrainian people suffer even more than they already have. he could end it right now. and since he's not willing to do that, clearly, we've got to make sure that we can help the ukrainians succeed on the battlefield, so that when president zelenskyy determines it's time to negotiate, and he's the only one that can make that determination, he can do it with the strongest hand possible. >> reporter: 4 billion people in india are waiting for president biden to welcome, when is the next trip? >> i don't have any information on travel. >> now for the boring part of the briefing. we just have a few minutes, guys, we don't have a lot of time. let me go over the week ahead. >> you see it on the box in the small corner of your screen there, the pentagon set to brief reporters and the nation on the extraordinary information that was announced from the podium at the white house that the u.s. military has shot down what's being described as an unidentified object over alaska, just within about the last 90 minutes or so. they're not calling it a balloon. nobody is saying it is a balloon. they are saying it was traveling at an altitude, high enough, that made it a potential threat to planes in the sky, civilian planes in the sky. you heard from john kirby of the national security council saying president biden ordered the military to shoot this down out of an abundance of caution. courtney kube is with us, along with allie raffa, "new york times" white house correspondent, and msnbc political analyst, peter nicholas, along with retired four star general, barry mccaffrey, an msnbc military analyst. let me start with what we know, and what we do not know yet about this object. we know it was spotted in the last 24 hours. it was taken down, we think, roughly 1:30 eastern in the range between 1:30 eastern and right now, 3:00 eastern. president biden ordered it to be shot down. there is an expectation that because the debris ended up on frozen water basically, they can recover some of that, it is much smaller than that chinese surveillance balloon. they're not even saying when we talked about what we don't know who owned this object, where it came from, and they don't know the purpose of it. not calling it chinese, not calling it a balloon either. presumably, and you heard john kirby reference this a couple of times, more details could come from the pentagon briefing set to start truly any minute. >> a couple of things i know will get asked at the pentagon briefing whether we get the details or not is tbd. one is what kind of air craft was used. what kind of missile was used or how was it brought down, shot down, and then i think we'll get more questions, detail about what this object was. one of the big differences here that i suspect was one of the determining factors for the pentagon recommending to president biden to take this out was the altitude it was flying at, somewhere around 40,000 feet. that gets into a potential problem for commercial and military aircraft. the difference between the chinese spy balloon we have been talking about for the past week and a half, that was more in the 60 to 65,000 feet range. it didn't present a direct threat to aircraft. that's a big difference here. also one thing i'm sure will get asked at the pentagon briefing. if this went down on frozen water, that's a different impact. they may be able to recover stuff. if there was some sort of a structure in it that could be broken, falling from 40,000 feet, it may not be recoverable in that they may not be able to determine exactly what was it. i know we'll get those kinds of questions. whether we get the answers, just by virtue of the fact that this all has happened in the last 90 minutes or so. we'll see. >> general mccaffrey, can i ask you this, the white house is being careful not to call it a balloon. we know it's the size of a small car, seen at 40,000 feet altitude. what could be it be? what are the possibilities that are out there based on your expertise here? >> i assume it's a balloon. i assume it came out of either russia or china. the fact that it was smaller means it potentially could be just a metro device, not an intelligence device. it was easily shot down. i think the key question for us to find out is was it chinese? was it launched subsequent to the last balloon being identified, meaning they were ignoring u.s. feedback. the whole notion of the previous shoot down was the unbelievable brazenness of collecting intelligence in a manner that was easily could be discovered by the united states. so we got to be concerned. what is going on in china. is the people's liberation army and the intelligence services out of control? disease xi still have control of his own forces? >> peter, the significance of whatever the answers are to those two questions that the general just laid out, tell us a lot, right? they have a major impact on the geopolitical drama here. was it china and when was whatever this was launched, and the answers to those two questions are going to tell us a whole lot about what, for example, secretary of state tony blinken is going to have to do over the course of the next several weeks, how the president is going to handle this, et cetera. >> that's exactly right. look, the biden administration, after the first balloon was hoping to keep the relationship from rupturing for too long. you know, they had to cancel the meeting that secretary blinken was going to have in beijing. they had to shoot down the balloon, issue protests. there were hopes they could keep it from escalating. if china has sent a second object, and we don't know that they have, but if they have, that's the question general mccaffrey has asked, that's a different beast. if we know they have done so, deliberately knowing what has happened, that seemed particularly brazen, provocative and hostile. it changes the whole diplomatic dynamic if that's the case. still a big if. could be completely different. those are the questions you're going to hear at the briefing. the questions u.s. policy makers are going to ask themselves. >> general mccaffrey, peter is saying, and listen, we don't know the answers to these questions. we're asking them. we're in the position to ask them live on television as we wait for the pentagon briefing here. one of the key points will be where did this balloon come from. if not china, would the next likeliest option be russia? what else or who else could be behind this? >> the thing that jumped out at me is a much smaller device at much lower altitude was picked up at norad. i imagine after the first balloon outrage that they went back and relocked their censure package, if they're airborne or ground based to try and pick up on future softer, higher, slower, flying objects. obviously they have solved the problem. they found it at night out over the ocean. pretty remarkable. so that's another thing that we are obviously changing the dynamics or intelligence surveillance. >> the timing of this is notable too. they did not wait. there was no waiting for this object to drift over the continental u.s., for example, or to see where it might drift at this point. they took action, it sounds like, they found out about it very quickly. >> that's right. and i will say, another question we should be asking is there any closure of airspace, given the nature of where it was flying, the altitude, and remember, i'm not saying this is a sign of who was behind this object, but remember the balloon last week flew down over the aleutians, it's very plausible this was on a similar track to the one that we just saw last week. another question that we'll be asking. another big difference here, the balloon from last week, we were told the u.s. was tracking it prior to this. >> the pentagon briefing is about to begin. we're going to listen in and hear anything more on these answers. >> first of all, to add to information already provided earlier by the white house at the direction of the president of the united states, fighter aircraft assigned to u.s. northern command, successfully took down a high altitude airborne object off the northern coast of alaska at 1:45 p.m. eastern standard time today within u.s. sovereign airspace over u.s. territorial water. on february 9, north american aerospace defense command detected an object on ground radar and further investigated and identified the object using fighter aircraft. the object was flying at an altitude of 40,000 feet and posed a reasonable threat to the safety of the civilian flight. u.s. northern command is beginning recovery operations now. u.s. northern command's alaska command coordinated the operation with assistance from the alaska air national guard, federal aviation administration and the federal bureau of investigation. we have no further details about the object at this time including any description of its capabilities, purpose or origin. the object was about the size of a small car, not similar in size or shape to the high altitude surveillance balloon taken down off the coast of south carolina. northern command continues their recovery operations in report of the surveillance balloon. recovery teams have mapped the debris field and are in the process of searching for and identifying debris on the ocean floor. debris that's been recovered so far is being loaded on to vessels, taken ashore, cataloged and then moved on wards to labs for subsequent analysis. and why i won't go into specifics due to classification reasons, i can say that we have located a significant amount of debris so far that will improve helpful to our further understanding of this balloon and surveillance capabilities. of note, due to less than favorable sea states right now, teams will continue to conduct underwater survey and recovery as conditions permit. the department wants to thank our inner agency partners from the u.s. coast guard, fbi, and state and local authorities. in other news, i think this is important that we remember a lot of folks, people in turkey and syria right now are suffering. we want to, again, express our support for the people of turkey and syria as they respond to the deadly earthquakes that struck there earlier this week. in support of ongoing u.s. assistance efforts, spearheaded by the u.s. agency for international development, u.s. european command has positioned personnel, equipment and a range of assets to aid the government of turkey in its continues search and rescue efforts, includes the u.s. navy's george h.w. bush carrier strike group, to provide logistics, medical, and rotary air lift support. to transport first responders to the most affected populations and on february 8th, uh-60 black hawks transported injured civilians to a local medical facility. u.s. european command has designated u.s. naval forces europe and africa as the lead component command overseeing the disaster relief efforts. to aid in that coordination, u.s. marine corps brigadier general, u.s. naval amphibious forces europe commander and commanding general arrived in turkey february 9 to lead military coordination efforts with u.s. agencies involved in the humanitarian aid and disaster relief efforts. we'll continue to provide you with updates as we receive them. issuing a press release with further details. we offer our thoughts and prayers to the people of turkey and syria during this tragic and difficult time. . the secretary expressed his thanks and appreciation to minister anon to the cooperation, in the surveillance balloon that violated the sovereignty of both countries. during the meeting, they reaffirm ld the close defense relationship between the united states and canada and a readout will be available later today in defense.gov. i'll take your questions. we'll start with associated press. >> reporter: thank you for doing this. a couple of questions on the latest shoot down. first, what type of u.s. fighter aircraft were used and what type of munition did they fire? do you already have navy assets or coast guard assets out involved in a recovery process, and i have a few more? >> thanks, tara. so the aircraft that took down the object was an f-22, it employed an a9x to take down the object. in terms of assets that are currently involved, in terms of recovery, we have hc130, hh 60 and ch 37 aircraft participating in that recovery effort. >> reporter: you mentioned there was a reasonable threat. was there also a threat to potentially this object detecting some of our more sensitive radar capabilities that are based in alaska? and then what hasn't been said is where this object has come from. is there any indication that this was also a chinese surveillance balloon, object, whatever it is? >> at this point, we don't know the origin of the object. again, we will know more once we're able to potentially recover some of those materials. but the primary concern, again, was the potential hazard to civil flight. again, we'll know more later. >> the perceived threat to any of the radar installations that we have based in alaska? >> again, right now, we'll know more once we assess it. we'll just leave it at that. thank you. liz. >> reporter: thanks for taking my question. what made this threatening enough to shoot down? what is different about this object than the last object that was over alaska because it was chosen not to shoot the last one down over alaska? >> so, you know, the important thing to understand here, anytime we detect anything, we're going to first of all observe it, and then make a decision and take appropriate action. so you have to look at each individual case on its own merits. in this particular case, given the factual that it was operating at an altitude that posed a reasonable threat to air traffic, the determination was made and the president gave the order to take it down. >> reporter: was there a specific threat or specific air civilian traffic that could have happened? >> as you know, civilian air traffic operate at a variety of ranges up to 40 to 45,000 feet. there was a reasonable concern that this could present a threat to or potential hazard to civilian air traffic. >> reporter: has secretary austin reached out to his chinese counter part or any other counter parts at all since this has been tracked? >> since this particular object, no. let me go here, and then i'll come over to lauren. >> reporter: previous balloon had been recovered, what additional information you have now about the capabilities of that balloon? >> yeah, so we're continue to go assess that. again, i'm not able to go into more detail other than in addition to learning a lot about the balloon and the capabilities that it has while it was over the continental united states, we have identified or located a significant amount of debris on the ocean floor that will be very beneficial to us learning more about it. but at this point in time, i'm not going to have more details. >> manufacturing label on these or the balloons indicated that they are manufactured in china? >> i'm not going to have details to provide at this time. >> reporter: other countries have indicated they have seen balloons in their territories. sharing information from the pentagon to these countries, are the capabilities who how you shot them down? >> the state department has talked to this in terms of our international outreach. the department of defense plays a role in those relationships. we will continue to work with our allies and partners to share information along with our state department colleagues. let me go to warren. >> reporter: two questions, first did this object show signs of maneuverability or propulsion, and you made a big deal about how much intelligence was gather bid letting the other one float across much of the united states, and let you shot this one down before it entered the united states, is that the pentagon bowing to political pressure? was there nothing to gain from this one? >> so again, we're going to judge each of these on its merits. no indication at this time that it was maneuverable. but again, we'll know more. and in terms of entering the united states, it did enter u.s. airspace, and we took it down. >> reporter: did you gain intelligence from this as you did the previous one? >> we're going to recover what we can and more to follow. >> reporter: was the decision to take it down before it entered too far in u.s. airspace, the pentagon bowing to political will? >> we're going to judge each object on its own merits, it entered in u.s. air face. we set up aircraft to saesz aesz -- assess what it was. the president gave the order to take it down, and we took it down. thank you. laura, and then dan. >> reporter: thanks for taking my question. a couple of questions. first of all, has anything like this happened before with an object this size, this shape, and this particular height, the 40,000 foot range, has it happened before? and second of all, why did you -- can you say more about why you knew that last balloon or object was from china whereas this one you don't know? >> so in terms of this particular object, again, as i highlighted, we don't know where it's from. it posed a reasonable threat to civilian air traffic, and so the determination was made to take it down. in terms of the other balloon, as i mentioned in our previous briefing, we have learned a lot about the chinese surveillance high altitude balloon program. we've gathered a lot of information over the last couple of years, and so we were able to based on that information detect it at a very early stage as it approached u.s. airspace, we had a good understanding of what it was. as i mentioned we were able to monitor closely, track it over the continental united states, learn a lot about it, and take it down at the appropriate time. >> reporter: so would you urge us to put this in a different bucket than that? >> i think i was pretty clear. this was traveling at about 40,000 feet which posed a potential reasonable threat to civilian air traffic and the decision was made to take it down. dan. >> reporter: when the pilots approached it and they determined, i understand, that it was not manned, how did they determine that, and at that point, wouldn't it be possible to at least describe what they were looking at? did it resemble a balloon or airplane or what? >> again, we'll know more and have more information once we've recovered this. i will give credit to our pilots that they are very capable in terms of looking at an object, assessing whether or not this had the potential to be manned. at that altitude, very small, very unlikely to be manned. presented a reasonable threat to civilian air traffic, we took it down. >> what speed was it traveling at by the way? >> i don't have that information. >> reporter: on the chinese balloon if we could go back, is it still in the pentagon's view plausible or maybe even likely that it was not necessarily intentional when that balloon blew eastward, that it seemed to have not had some technical problem. >> what i would tell you is based on the information that we have, it was being maneuvered and purposefully driven along its track. again, recognizing that winds do play a role, because of the maneuverability of the balloon, it's our assessment that this was a purposeful mission. in terms of the chinese motivations, again, i would have to refer you back to china to talk about that. ma'am and then come to nancy. >> reporter: we e-mailed you police body camera footage showing a national guard general in ohio pushing my colleague and having to be escorted away from him this week. we asked the ohio national guard for comment, but do you as a spokesperson for the department of defense condone such conduct by a commissioned officer of the u.s. military against an american journalist? >> let me be clear, the answer is no. that's not acceptable behavior. the secretary of defense, the department of defense absolutely supports, strongly supports a free and independent press. so, again, i would refer you to the ohio national guard for any comment about that particular incident, but i can assure you that that is not acceptable behavior. >> reporter: face any conduct unbecoming charge. >> i'd have to refer you to them. i'm not going to make those kind of policy comments here from the podium in terms of what they may or may not be doing to address it. it would be inappropriate for me to comment on that. >> reporter: let me go to nancy. i just had a couple of clarifying questions. you said the pilots are able to see it. it wasn't the same shape or size as the balloon. can you say definitively it was not a balloon? >> at this point, considering the fact that we're still assessing the object, i don't want to get into characterizing. so just leave it at that. >> reporter: you mentioned you didn't know how fast it was traveling, can you say if it was traveling faster or slower than the balloon? >> i don't have that information so i don't want to make it up. >> reporter: try a couple more. did anyone try to, within the administration, contact their chinese counter parts before the decision was made to shoot it down? >> in terms of when you say the administration, if you're referring to the white house, i would have to refer you to them. the department of defense, to my knowledge, did not. again, we don't know the point of origin of this object. so yeah. >> reporter: was there any effort to jam or somehow disable this object before such that it would pose less of a threat? >> i don't want to get into specific tactics or techniques that we may or may not use when observing these types of things. again, norad sent up aircraft to observe, to see what it was, and the ultimate decision was made based on the reasonable threat to civilian air traffic to take it down. so thank you. tony. >> reporter: you mentioned you recovered a significant or located a significant amount of debris. is it fair to say you've located a significant amount of the payload? >> you're talking about the prc high altitude? >> reporter: as well as the one today. >> tony, at this point, i'm not able to go into more detail other than we've, what i would describe, we've discovered or located a significant amount of the debris associated with the balloon. again, we'll have more details to follow. i'll leave it at that. >> reporter: but you haven't recovered and pulled out of the ocean for forensic analysis, is that right? >> great point. the way to understand how this is unfolding is as we map out the area where the debris field would be, it enables us to figure out where the places that we need to prioritize the search, recognizing that we're talking a wide area, and so as that happens, diverse are able to go down and depending on the size of the debris, they're able to tag it. so debris that can be brought up quickly is brought up, put on a vessel, taken ashore. debris that's going to take more time and, again, especially given the current sea states, it may take a little longer. we know where it is, we tag it, and then we'll go back and eventually recover that and bring it up. >> reporter: you found the titanic but haven't started pulling up degree from it. >> exactly. >> reporter: i want to ask about the overall program. you said you've been learning a lot about the balloon program over the last couple of years, yet the annual china report doesn't have a peep about balloons in there. you spend a lot of money and effort but no balloons. we learned about taiwan and china's balance of power and satellites and jets, no balloons, why not? >> tony, what i would say on the unclassified china power report, there's going to be certain elements, intelligence aspects in the unclassified version that may not be included in that particular report. in terms of what's in that report and what's not in that report, again, we can go back and look at that, but i can tell you, i can assure you that there are a lot of activities that we can continue to monitor to include this balloon program, and we've learned a lot over the last couple of years. >> the classified version has balloons in it. >> i would have to go back and look. i don't have the answer to that. thanks, let me get a couple of other folks here. mike. >> reporter: the only reason the american people know about the first balloon is a couple of guys in montana spotted it, and it leaked out. my question is if it had remained secret and not become a spectacle, and arguably an embarrassment to the white house, would you have shot it down or allowed it to continue on its way in. >> you're asking me to speculate? so, mike, i'll kind of just push back a little bit at the assertion there. so first of all, again, what made this balloon different was the length and duration that it was over the continental united states. look, we track activities all over the globe on a daily basis. some of which will remain classified because, again, we don't want to reveal sources and methods. in this particular case, i can tell you that there were efforts underway to make that public. you know, montana journalist reporting notwithstanding. all that to say, look, there are going to be times when there are activities happening that we're monitoring that are not going to be public, especially when it doesn't present a particular or pose a significant threat to the american public. but again, as we monitored that balloon, there was an effort underway to ensure that folks understood what this was. especially given how visible it was. and i'll just stop there. thank you. yes, ma'am. >> reporter: thank you, general. first, a really quick follow up on tony's question. at this point is the pentagon reassessing the need for counter balloon or counter object capabilities at that altitude at this time? >> so what i would tell you is not, you know, in the air force sometimes we talk about don't get platform specific, right, so what we're talking about is monitoring the domain, and having domain awareness. as i highlighted, a couple of days ago, probably last week, we're continuing to learn more about this program, which enables us to identify and track objects, and so and thus ensure that we're continuing to protect our skies and airspace. >> and then real quick, first, do you and admiral kirby know the shape of this new object, and if so, what is sort of the reason for why you can't share its shape before it was shot down, and then separately, how is the recovery efforts of this new object downed over ice different from the one downs over the coast and water and are you using unmanned systems for the new object as well? >> in terms of the shape, i don't know. i have not seen imagery of it. i'm telling you the verbal characteristics as it was described to me. in terms of the difference in the recovery effort, again, so this literally was, what, an hour and a half, two hours ago. that's underway right now, so more to follow on that front. right now i think they're moving to the site. we'll have more to follow in the days ahead. let me go to a few other folks here. new folks back here. and we'll go over here to mike. >> reporter: the object was spotted yesterday. is that the first that we saw it? or did we see it coming in a couple of days before? >> we spotted it yesterday. >> reporter: and follow up, what we learned about the first balloon last week, did that help us detect this object? >> i would say that, again, we detect, when we detect objects, let me just back up. so what you're asking is did what we learned from the prc balloon help us track this? kind of a little bit of apples and oranges, right, in terms of norad maintains the ability to track objects, again, they track this as it approached and entered into u.s. airspace. we're still assessing what this object was, so i don't know that we learned anything new as a result of that, other than, again, i think we're all to include the media and the public, very attuned to balloons at the moment. so thank you. yes, sir. >> reporter: thank you so much, sir, and just to clarify, this was first identified when it flew into u.s. airspace, is that correct, or was it identified before? >> it was detected yesterday, and then again, norad sent up aircraft to observe it, see what it was, and the decision was made to take it down. >> reporter: do you have any information whether this object flew over any other sovereign nations or countries? >> i do not. i do not. >> caller: time for a few more. let me go to joe. >> reporter: another question about the recovery effort. i think you mentioned at the outset that it was going to involve rotary wing aircraft, because it landed on ice as opposed to water, that's why there isn't water craft being used? we'll get more information on that front. this happened a short while ago. these are the assets that were being used to go out and do the initial recovery. but we'll have more information terms of the various roles and responsibilities of this. >> reporter: to get down in the weeds for a second. any idea what units are involved in the recovery effort or in the f-22 that shot it down is this. >> we can get you that information. thanks. phil? >> reporter: just a couple of clarification questions. first off, when you first identified it, was it traveling at the same altitude, around 40,000 feet? did you at that point know its velocity, and secondly, doesn't northcom have the authority on its own to shoot down unidentified objects entering u.s. airspace if they pose a threat to civilian air traffic. if so, why was the president's authorization required in this case? >> yeah, thanks. so my understanding is it was at 40,000 feet when it was detected, and ultimately taken down. the norad, northcom commander does not have the authority necessarily to take down an object if it's not posing a potential hostile intent or actions. however, given the fact that this aircraft, or this object was operating at an altitude that pose add reasonable threat to civilian air traffic after consultation with the secretary and the president, of course the president on our advice gaifr gave the order to take it down and we took it down. >> reporter: is his authorization required in a situation like this? >> again, it's kind of a moot point at this point because the president gave the order, but he has the authorization to take action against anything that presents a potential threat to the american public or people on the ground. in this particular case it was determined that this posed a reasonable threat to air traffic. again, i'll just leave it at that. thanks. tara. >> reporter: just a couple of clarifiers, was it a single f-22 orr a -- or a pair that were up for the shot. when norad sent the initial aircraft to see, was there any type of hailing or warning given? typically when an aircraft makes an incursion into protected airspace, there's a whole lot of procedures that have to be followed before it would escalate to something like this. >> this was an object, right, it wasn't an aircraft, per se, and to answer your earlier question, it was a two ship of f-22s, but one aircraft took the shot. got time for one more. liz. >> reporter: really quick, when it was started to be tracked last night, were you able to tell what direction it was coming from? >> this was traveling in a northeasterly direction when it was taken down. >> reporter: and then one more, the aircrafts that were observing it, what type of aircrafts were those? >> i'll have to come back to you. i think i know but i don't want to make it up from the podium. we'll come back to you on that one. thank you very much, everybody. i appreciate it. so some answers there, but not all the answers we were looking for from the pentagon briefing, specifically that they have located what they described as a significant amount of debris from the object. they're still not calling it a balloon, but from the object that was shot down above alaskan airspace. we know now by an f-22. we know the pentagon, white house considered this object a potential hazard to civilian planes, civilian flight. no indication this was maneuverable, likely unmanned. again, nobody's calling it a balloon, but that does seem to be one of the possibilities for this unidentified object at this point. we know members of the senate intelligence committee have been briefed about this. again, the object shot down just within now, about the last two hours. i want to bring in nbc's courtney kube. capitol hill correspondent ali vitali, and retired four star general barry mccaffrey, and msnbc military analyst. the big question we don't know, where did this thing come from? was it china given what we saw with the chinese surveillance balloon last week. still no answer to that key question. >> we don't know who sent it, who it belongs to or what it was. there's a couple of big differences we have been learning about. one is the altitude. this one posed a threat to civilian and military aircraft, and people, there were some questions there about how it was detected and when. remember, norad and northcom, one of their major jobs and responsibilities is to track aircraft over north american airspace. that's about the same altitude aircraft are flying. stands to reason this would have been more easily tracked potentially. it was a lot smaller than the chinese surveillance balloon we learned about last week. that means two things, number one, if they were to take it down, it wouldn't have a debris field that would be over such a large distance. that was one of the concerns that led to the pentagon not recommending to shoot the original one down last week. initially they were worried about the debris field that would be expansive over miles. smaller balloon, smaller debris field on the ground. also they shot it down over water, frozen water now. that would also mean there would potentially be less likelihood of civilian casualties or injuries or infrastructure damage down below. i suspect those were three of the reasons this was taken down much faster. another thing i was interested in, and i don't have the answer to this is the fact that it was flying in a northeasterly direction. i don't know. that's something i'm going to be asking questions about. remember, the one we initially learned about came over canada and entered the u.s. in idaho. it was flying south, southeasterly, just another question that i'll have about this one. >> general mccaffrey, i package you picked up on that as well. take us your other take aways from what we learned from the pentagon. >> that's sure an impressive dod spokesperson, very objective and tried to be very responsive. i'm very impressed by him. the only important question we don't have an answer to, was this a chinese attempt to collect intelligence? for a variety reasons, it sound less likely by far than we may have assumed. maybe it's a meteorological balloon. maybe it came from russia. who knows. when they get the debris field off the ice, i assume within a few days, they'll know who manufactured it and what kind of information it was collecting. more to follow. >> you believe it's less, and let's be very clear, we done know. you have watched the same briefings we have watched. behind the scenes, courtney, and allie, and everybody else are working their sources. at this point, we know what the facts are as they have been laid out to us from the white house and pentagon. you have suggested that you think based on what you have heard, it is less likely that it's a chinese supply balloon. is that because it's smaller? flying lower? is that because of the direction it was seen traveling in? >> first of all, if it was a follow-on chinese intelligence collection operation, then it would be either a level of political affront by president xi beyond belief or the pla was out of control. set that one aside, and then secondly, it was operating at a lower level, going as courtney picked up in an unusual direction, northeast, appeared not steerable. was a much smaller object. those f-22s, the unclassified ceiling, the air force said 50,000 feet. many sources say it can get up to 70,000 feet. so the f-22 has got eyeballs at very close range to see what it was. and they didn't detect a manned object. they didn't detect hostile intent, so it sound to me as if we just have to wait until the debris field is picked up in the next 72 hours and analyze. that will tell us pretty much for sure what it was. >> we know that as far as the response from capitol hill when the chinese spy balloon, the one last week and the days before had been discovered, there was some consternation on getting more information. they wanted to know more about what was up. senate intelligence committee, staff for that committee, today is friday. senators are largely not in the building but there are staff members for the committee that have been briefed here, which is fairly fast, given that it was last night that this high altitude object was detected. >> fairly fast but it tracks. when you think about when the chinese spy balloon first came to the public eye. that was happening on a senate flyout day. right after that came in view and started getting publicity, staff for at that point, the gang of eight were briefed. now we're finding out staff for the senate intel committee have been briefed. of course we don't have more details on what that briefing was on, what they learned, it's important to note yet again, lawmakers are out of town. it's friday but technically that's the equivalent of saturday and sunday for senators and house members who are not in session today, and frankly are supposed to be out of session now for the next few weeks because february is kind of a weird month with the schedule around here, and so i'm wondering now at this point with another instance of an unidentified object shot down over the coast of alaska, if this is going to prompt folks to want to come back to town. i expect to hear they're going to want more briefings. the fact that there was one chinese supply balloon and it prompted, i think, three hearings and two classified briefings, one for all house members, one for all senate members is important because it sets the precedent, we're probably going to see more things like that. it's important when we consider what we heard from senators and lawmakers at the middle of the week when they were doing all of these briefings and hearings, especially when it came to the alaska senators, they were clear, they want their borders protected, respected, they're probably going to be pleased about the way this was handled and the quickness and speed with which it was handled. >> ali vitali, thank you very much. courtney kube, i will release you from your camera position so you can make your phone calls. general mccaffrey, great to have you expertise as well. president biden expecting president lula, make remarks on this. we got it covered for every second the cameras are there. we have other news in the last 47 minutes. since we have been on the air with this breaking news. it comes from the person you're seeing, former vice president mike pence and apparently an additional classified document we're now learning that's been discovered and removed from his home in indiana. we're going to bring you that late breaking news in just a second here, 60 seconds on msnbc. a second here, 60 seconds on msnbc. think he's posting about all that ancient roman coinage? no. he's making real-time money moves with merrill. so no matter what the market's doing, he's ready. and that's... how you collect coins. your money never stops working for you with merrill, a bank of america company.