I am totally blind. And non24 can throw my days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do. Talk to your doctor, good afternoon. Im Chris Jansing in for ali velshi. We are waiting for the start of White House Press briefing. Its the first chance for the press to ask questions about the president s attacks on kiersten jill brandt. Just this morning, the president tweeted lightweight senator kristen jill brandt, a flunkie for Chuck Schumer and someone who would come to my office begging for Campaign Contributions and do anything for them is now in the ring fighting against trump. Very disloyal to bill and crooked. Used. Jill was having none of it. It was a sexist smear attempting to silence my voice. And i will not be silenced on this issue. Neither will the women who stood up to the president yesterday. And neither will the millions of bem who have been marching since the womens march to stan up against policies they do not agree with. If trump wanted a fight hes getting one. Elizabeth warning tweeted do you know who you are picking a fight with . Good luck with that. Democrats are outraged. What took place this morning when the president tweeted about our colleague, senator kiersten jill brand is grotesque. It took my breath away. And it represents the conduct of a person who is ill equipped to be the president of the United States. The president s tweet this morning against senator jill brand was a disgraceful sexist slur that has no place in our dialogue and diminishes and shames the office of president. That was an ugly suggestive tweet. We all know what he was trying to say there. And its beneath the office of the presidency for him to conduct himself that way. Joining me now, nbc White House Correspondent kristen welker. Give us a preview. What are we expecting at the brief, certainly one of the questions is going to be what did the president mean by that tweet . I think thats going to be the first question put to Sarah Huckabee sanders. We just got a two minute warning. Im expecting she will be coming out any moment now. President trump stepping up his attacks trying to change the conversation away from they allegations of Sexual Misconduct which he has all denied. This is what he tweeted early today, chris, he tweeted despite thousands was hours wasted and millions of dollars spent the democrats have been unable to show any collusion with russia now they are moving onto the false accusations and fabricated stories of women i dont know or have never met. Fake news. Now, of course there are some pictures of President Trump with some of his accuser. We know that one did the apprentice with him. That might be another topic of conferring as well here, once this briefing gets underway. Certainly i think you are going to see a real focus on the backlash of the tweet you started off talking about as well as the fact that you had 100 democrats lawmakers today calling for an investigation into these allegations. Again, the white house has been defiant. The president has been defiant insisting their all false. I want to go to alana because you have this sort of show of party unity all these democrats are saying there should be an investigation into the president on the allegations of Sexual Misconduct. To what end . Its important you only see six Democratic Senators saying the president should face this kind of investigation. The backlash is happening in the house. Schumer said the tweet was nasty and unbecoming but declined to address the calls for trump to resign. I think you are going see push back from the left in congress but not necessarily from leaders. Karen, your colleague points out, outside republicans close to the president said they are increasingly about his ability to withstand a revived pot sleight on his behavior toward women amid the dramatic attitude shift. A number are wary of the political costs if the president goes on a sustained attack against his accusers. But it certainly seems ifst there is that concern and its expressed to him, based on what he tweeted to kerstin jill brand he doesnt seem worried about it. Although picking senator jill brand as a target is sort of interesting because until now the president has also argued that not only are the accusers lying but he says this is all partisan politics. The fact is, senator jill brands that spoken out on this issue regardless of party. She dealt with a lot of it regarding the military. She a few weeks ago caused a stir said that president clinton should have resigned when he faced these kinds of charges. She led the sort of turnaround that forced al franken to resign. She is someone who has gone into the arena an those issues kind of with no regard to partisanship. Again, i think that is one of the reasons that the backlash on this tweet has been so strong. And now, perfect timing, here is the press secretary. Lets listen in. United states citizenship and immigration services, hes here to provide a briefing on the attempted suicide bombing in new york and how it was engabled by flaws in our immigration system. After he speaks and takes some of your questions i will be back up to answer questions on other news. And as always, if you can stay focused on the topic at hand, that would be great. Thanks so much. Director. Hello. Im here to talk to you about yesterdays incident and kind of give you some of the context and perspective in the immigration system, how it works or how it didnt work in this case, and what are the sorts of things that our administration is proposing to change to make it better. So as you all know, yesterday the suspect akayed ullah was arrested in an attempted bombing in new york city. There is an immigration aspect to this. The aspect is that he was a green cardholder, lawful permanent resident. He came to this country based on a Family Connection to a u. S. Citizen. He was a national bangladesh. The u. S. Citizen in question was his uncle. And that u. S. Citizen many years ago came to this country originally as a visa lottery winner. So this is the general background. I now want to try to explain what all that means, where those terms come from, what the significance of all that is. First, i would explain that for those who arent aware, our immigration system has two principle components. There is a familybased component through which the suspect in yesterdays attack alleged bombing incident came through, and there is an employment based component. In any given year we have about 1 million immigrants. One Million People come here, get green cards, immigrant visas. In fiscal year 15 of that one million about 72 of our immigrants came based on a Family Connection. And only 6 or about one out of 15 came based on employment or job connection, job offer. So you can see the immigration system is heavily weighted towards family migration. There are other categories of people that immigrate as well, including refugee, asighlies and visa lottery people that i just referenced but those are very small compared to the two larger categories. Want to talk about these in particular. The family base, employment based and visa lottery. In the family based migration category there are multiple categories of people. The principle category of family based immigrant are called immediate relatives. These are people who are the spouses or children, Nuclear Family members of u. S. Citizens. In a given year, you have about half a Million People in that category. In fact, i have better numbers than that. In fiscal year 16 in that category, these are people who are the Nuclear Family members of u. S. Citizens, there were about 566,000 people that immigrated. An additional category this the family based universe are what are called preference categories, more extended Family Connection. These include unmarried the first category, unmarried sons and daughters of u. S. Citizens. Second category, us spos of green card holders, unmarried sons and daughters of green card holders. Third category, married sons and daughters of u. S. Citizens. Fourth category is brothers and sisters of u. S. Citizens and their children. Thats the category that yesterdays suspect came in under. So the suspect in yesterdays bombing came in under the most extreme, remote possible family based connection that you can have under current u. S. Immigration law, that being the child of a sibling of a u. S. Citizen. Under the employment based categories, thats a much smaller number, only 140,000 slots are allocated in a year to that category. But you are really only getting about half of that number of actual workers because the spouses and children doesnt count towards that kachlt there you have a number of categories including extraordinary ability workers, people with advance degrees, you have people who are skilled professionals. And immigrant investors. Multiple categories but much smaller number than the family based categories. Again, remind you only 1 out of 15 of our immigrants come in or those skilled categories. Let me turn to the diversity a, the other visa program relative to yesterdays events. The diversity visa or visa lottery as its called colloquially is a program that was established in 1990. There were precursor programs before that, but basically the program as we know it was established in 1990. That lets in 50,000 people a year based on an immigration lottery. The qualifications for registering for the lottery are that you have to be in a country that had low immigration in the previous five years and the person who is applying for the lottery has to either have a High School Degree or if they have no education at least two years of experience in a job that requires two years of training. So the criteria are very low. The problems with the visa lottery are various. First, because the criteria are so low either you have no education at all, and very little skills, or you have a minimum of education and no skills at all. Because it is a lottery, pretty much anybody on the planet who is from a qualifying country can take advantage of this. The state department in 2003, the state departments Inspector General office observed that this low Eligibility Criteria to lead to exploitation by terrorists. They warned about this in 2003. The gao in 2007 echoed that warning, again warning the terrorists could take advantage of the Diversity Visa Program. Also its racked with fraud. In 2003 the state department ig 15 years ago noted that the program was arrive with pervasive fraud. The fraud, the low eligibility standards all this contribute to potential exploitation by terrorists and other malified actors. The country of bangladesh, the country the terror suspect came from. That country was a high user in the Lottery Program n 2007, which was the peak year of that countrys use of the visa lottery, 27 of the immigrants came through that program. Use back stan, the country of origin of the alleged that the truck driver from october 31st in new york city, in 2010, 70 , 70 of immigrants from use back stan came through the Lottery Program. That program is used as a prime avenue for immigration for many countries. Finally let me touch on the subject of chain migration. When i use that word what im talking about is is person who comes to this country and who in turn employs one of these many avenues that i just described, principally family based, to sponsor relatives who are in the home country to come and join him or her. Because the categories that we have that i just described in family based migration is so extensive, its not just Nuclear Family. You also have as i say adult unmarried children, brothers and sisters, nieces and nephews. You can sponsor a person like yesterdays alleged terrorist at the extremity of that chain, and then that person in turn and sponsor people, and so on and so on, indefinitely. Hundreds of thousands of people come into this country every year based on these extended family migration categories. And it is my view, it is our administrations view, that that is not the way that we should be running our immigration system. A system like that, that includes Something Like the diversity user program, the extended family categories are not the way anybody would design the immigration system if we could start from scratch today. We want an immigration system that is selective. We want to select them based on criteria that ensure success, criteria that enhance their ability to experience success in our country. I appeal, we appeal to the coming as they consider these matters as we speak and in the coming weeks to seriously take into account these concerns that we have with the way the immigration system is stirred and its vulnerabilities as i just described, and correct that. At that point, my formal comments are concluded. I will answer questions you have. Quick question. Yeah. Thanks a lot, sir. I want to ask you a question about what you are suggesting. Is it your belief that the only changes that can be done to the immigration system are ones that need to emanate from congress . Are there any things that the president can do on his own, by executive action executive order to change the process for either chain migration for the visa lottery. Well, thats something we are looking at right now in uscis, my agency, which is the agency that administers all these visa programs. And there are some things that we could do. There are some things that the president has directed us to do by executive order, in particular with the temporary visa categories. We are talking about green cards here. But if you look at temporary visa categories, yes there is a lot of things we can do and we are going to do for example, to increase protections of american workers. In the green card domain it is a little harder. Congress has kind of occupied that field more densely than it has in the temporary visa area. But there could be, there could be some things we can do to clarify how these categories are administered. Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. Would daca legislation. Do you think any daca bill would have to be tied to bring in a merit based system . Well, i mean, about two months ago the president announced his immigration priorities. You can find it on the white house website. It is a long list of several dozen priorities that we, career officials at dhs and at the other relevant immigration agencies at the time i was a career official came up with as the things that we need to be able to do our jobs n. That list there are these fixes that im just talking about, including getting rid of the Diversity Visa Program because of its it just degrades the integrity of our immigration visa programs generally, ending chain migration. These are all things we have suggested in the priorities that the president advanced. So we hope we we hope and expect that congress will take those priorities seriously and will do as much as they can to accomplish the goals that we set forth. [ inaudible ]. The president signed the daca bill it would have to have a merit based system . I cant speak for the president s priorities and what he does or doesnt want in a bill. I know what i want is something that i can implement and that i can implement well to get at the priorities we set forth as something we need to do our job. Yes, sir. Would you be in favor of extending the blanket travel ban as far as the countries are concerned such as bangladesh, which isnt on the list currently . My position on that is that my agency needs as much information it can get from these other countries to be able to vet and screen people adequately to be sure that malified people dont enter the country. To the extent it can be deny by executive order im for it. I im not in a position to describe whether the blanket ban can be extended or not. How do you deal with people who have been here for years and become radicalized once they are here . How would that change what happened in new york . He had been here for years . The criticisms we have over the visa visa program and diversity and chain the vulnerability of exploitation by terrorists because of the low Eligibility Criteria and because of the prevalence of fraud thats not changing. Thats a sad fact of that program. For that reason, regardless of when the person became radicalized i just want that door shut because it is a vulnerability, its been recognized for 15 years. Now, with respect to that person in particular and what do we do with people who radicalize afterwards, my agency in particular is focused very much so on ensuring that immigration doesnt some when the person gets the green card. Its an ongoing process. I view it that way. I think that we have how so . Because what you want is the immigrant to become a citizen. Citizen is in the name of my agency. You want them to become a citizen and its one of the best signs of assimilation and one of the best guarantors of that persons success in our society. We want people to naturalize. My agency is seeking to do everything they can to ensure that people are enabled to do that and succeed in that request. Timetable on it. Just to follow up, is it your understanding that the pt is was ral callized before he came here . Or do you think it happened here . If it was before he arrived was something inherently missed. I have no idea. Can you give us any idea where he i truly have no idea if he was radicalized at all. I dont know about that part of the investigation. You just said because of the criteria how low it is, that chain migrant immigrants or diversity visa immigrants are more susceptible to be radicalized. Do you have data on that. Where it is a outright lottery you are not selecting for the types of people that we want in this country according to criteria that will ensure their success in our nation, that will ensure that they will assimilate well. I guess as a matter of priority you want to select the immigrants not just have them come in. I get that part. But you are saying these types of immigrants are more likely to become terrorists. No. What im saying is that if you have a system that doesnt select at all or barely selecting anybody we dont know what we are going to get. Its better if we take an active affirmative role in your immigration process and establish criteria that correspond the things we want to see in our immigration pool. Following from that. Data shows that immigrants actually committed fewer crimes than native born americans. Other than these isolated incidents, is there any data behind this claim. I dont know where your data came from. Incarceration rates would be one example. Thats a bigger debate that i dont know that we have time for here. But based on my questioning the validity the premise of our question, i dont know that i want to engage in that dialogue at this time. Will this Administration Believe that immigrants are more dangerous than u. S. Citizens . I dont know that anybody has said that. Two points of clarification. I have you said with the Diversity Visa Program there is a certainly vulnerability because of the low Eligibility Criteria. By that i think you mean because there is no Higher Education standard required. What is it that makes these people more vulnerable to radicalization and becoming terrorists . Well, there is two parts of that. The my criticism of the Diversity Visa Program is that the Eligibility Criteria are minimal or next to nothing and there is a random element to night vulnerability. The program is vulnerable to exploitation by terrorists because it is a combination of the low Eligibility Criteria and the ability the defraud the system. Fraud is per swais vasive in the system. If you want to come to this country its easy to fake a High School Graduation certificate. This suspect was radicalized in 2014, and entered the United States in 201. That is why we are asking this question. It sounds like you are implies that u. S. Intelligence or Homeland Security missed something and this guy was radicalized. Im not implying that at all. Ill talking about immigration programs. I am not talking about one guy. You are saying when they get here, because these people are more vulnerable, if they come in on this program, they are then subject to exploitation more easily . No. What im saying is that what is the nexus to terrorism . The nexus to terrorism is if office visa program that is easily exploited by malified actors, to terrorists. You dont know if he did that. He came in as a family immigrant. That program as the state Ig Department found 15 years ago and confirmed in 2007 exploitable by terrorists or malified actors because the criteria are so low and easily faked. It is and a lottery. So there is multiple levels its an open door, problematic, it needs to shut. Thats what im saying about that. With respect to the individual in yesterdays attempt, i would say i dont know. I dont have a command of the facts relating to the investigation as to whether or if he was ever radicalized. When im saying is if you have any sort of visa program which is minimally selective, which is based solely on chance or lottery or low Eligibility Criteria then we as a government arent doing our job in picking the people that come to this country in a competent and careful and intelligent way. If we are not doing that, bad guys can come in. One last question. Are lottery winners vetted . Yes, oh, yes, yeah, yeah. They are screened. They are screened like any other immigrant. So it is an intelligence failure. I dont know there was any failure. Yes, last question. We any from your confirmation hearings, testimony, that both your brother and your motherinlaw are immigrants. How did their experiences shape your thinking on this position . And do you have any reason to believe that they would both would still have been able to come in under the tightening that you are looking at now . The fact that my own mother and my motherinlaw are both immigrants has indeed influenced everything. Thats one of the reasons why im interested in. Why im interested in it by i passionately carry out my duties every day. I think a policy maker or a citizen examining all of these issues should not be handicapped or shackled from previous immigration systems every has benefitted from Immigration Law of the past. That doesnt mean every generation doesnt have its own duty to look at the situation we have now and determine for itself, ourselves, whether the Immigration Law should be changed. Its perfectly remarkal. Moving forward, maybe well change things. Thank you so much. Thank you director. Continuing with National Security theme, as many of you saw this afternoon, the president signed the National Defense authorization act. This legislation which was approved with bipartisan support represents an important milestone in the president s plan to rebuild our military and bolster our National Security. For the first time in seven years, we are increasing rather than shrinking the size of our forces. This ndaa also provides our military Service Members with the largest pay increase they have seen in eight years. To put into Historical Context it authorizes one of the largest defense spending increases since the days of robl reagan. Previous administrations sadly everysaw deep cuts to our armed forces with serious implications to our readiness and capabilities. This hindered the fight against isis and other enemies of freedom and made our people less safe n. Signing this bill today the president once again made it clear that we are serious about enhancing military readiness, expanding and mrnizing our forces and providing our incredible men and women downrange with the tools they need to be able to do what they do best, fight and win. President trump also called on obstructionist democrats in congress to stop threatening to shut down the government. As the president said at this time of grave Global Threats congress should send a clean funding bill to his desk that fully funds our great military. We certainly hope that will happen. We look forward to that taking place. With that i will take your questions. Sarah, the president said today senator jill brand would do anything for Campaign Contributions. Many, many people see this as a sexual innuendo. What is the president suggesting . I think that the president is very obvious. This is the same sentiment that the president has expressed many times before when he has exposed the corruption of the entire political system. In fact he has used similar terminology many times when talking about politicians of both party, both men and women in certainly his campaign to drain the swap. The system is clearly broken, clearly rigged for special interests. This president is someone who cant be bought and its one of the reasons that hes president today. You are saying this quote, senator jill brand would do anything is a reference to Campaign Contributions in washington, the swamp, has nothing to do with her being a female. What is he alleging happened behind closed doors with her. Hes not alleging anything. He is talking about the way our systems is. Politicians repeatedly beg for money. Thats not something new. And that comment isnt new. If you look back at past comments this president has made he used that same terminology many times in reference to men. There is no way that this is sexist at all. This is simply talking about a system that we have that is broken in which special interests control our government, and i dont think that there is probably many people that are more controlled by political contributions than the senator that the president referenced. Dozen the president want roy moore to be seated in the senate if he wins tonight . And does he plan to call him tonight . In terms of calls im not aware that anything is scheduled. Win or lose. In terms of being seated, i cant speak on a hypothetical, certainly not one that could potentially influence an election one way or another due to the hatch act. John. Sarah, does the president agree with his outside Legal Counsel that a special prosecutor should be appointed to look into the goings on at the department of justice during the election of 2016 since the revelation of the former society attorney general. I think it causes concern not just for the president and the administration but i think probably for all americans. And something that if we are going to continue to investigate things, lets look at something where there is some real evidence and some real proof of wrongdoing. And this looks pretty bad and i think its something we should certainly look at. Dave. Would he support the appointment of a special prosecutor to look into this . I havent asked him that directly. I know he has great concern about some of the conduct thats taken place and something that we certainly would like to see looked at. Dave. Thanks sarah. Congressional lead remembers saying that they have no plans to reimpose sanctions on iran by the deadline tomorrow. That the president initiated back in october when he dessertified irans compliance with the nuclear deal. Is the white house okay with this no action . And if so, where are the teeth in the president s move to dessert phi them from compliance . Look, the administration continues to make encouraging progress with congress to fix the u. S. iran deal and address long term proliferation issues. There was actually no deadline to act by this week as the administration did not ask that congress introduce legislation to reimpost jcpoarelated sanctions. Jordan. Thanks sarah. Senator grassley said he advised the white house to reconsider the nomination of jeff mckeer in texas and tally in alabama. Has the president spoken to grassley about his concerns . Im not sure if they have spoken direct let me ill have to check and circle back with you. Assad and duterte recently used the term fake news. A state official in myanmar said the Muslim Minority rohingya doesnt exist and called it fake news. Is the administration concerned about them adopting this term . I think the white house is concerned about false and inaccurate information being pushed out and to mislead the American People. I think i made that clear yesterday. In terms of other leaders, i would have to look at their comments to be more specific on what theyve said. But our concern is making sure that the information that the people receive in this country is fair and accurate. And when it isnt, that its corrected and corrected in the same fashion in which it was first presented when it was wrong, which is very rarely the case. When you hear autocrats using the term fake news to describe events that reflect poorly on their regimes that doesnt daus concern here . Look im not going to speak to specifics of other countries when i dont know the countries. What i can talk about are the problems that we have in this country of the inaccuracies that happen frequently within news stories. That i feel comfortable speaking about. Without that information and that detail in frop of me i dont want to weigh in too deeply. The president tweeted today that the accusations against him are false fabricated stories of women who i dont know and or have never met. Fake news. Yet the relate is he is pictured with a number of the women who accused him of the misconduct. Do you concede that that part of his statement is not true. The president is preferencing three individuals that were part of a press conference yesterday. And simply stating that you dont know someone means that you dont have a relationship with them. Wasnt referencing all of his accusers. Correct he was referencing three from yesterday. Members of Congress Called for an investigation into these accusations. If President Trump is confident they are not true would you support such an investigation . Look, the president has answered these questions. He has spoken to these accusations. And denied and pushed that they are all false and fabricated accusations. Frankly, i think if Congress Wants to spend time investigating things they should probably focus on some of the things that the American People would really like them to investigate how to secure our borders, how the defeat isisings how to pass tax reform that actually impacts them. If you look at the issues in poll after poll after poll taken by a number of the outlets in this room and pushed out regularly, the issues that are top mind, number one every single time, the economy, jobs, National Security, immigration, health care. Yet we never talk about those issues. In fact, 90 of the coverage that is hold on. I let you finish im going to finish this statement. 90 of the coverage that comes out of the media is negative and rarely covers those topics. Those are the things that American People want to talk about. If Congress Wants to investigate something i think they you this look is at some of the priorities of the people that they actually represent. All across the country there have been a number of people who have been fired about this. Why not allow the congressional investigation to go forward if the president is confident. The president addressed these concerns, addressed them directly. You spent months talking about them on the campaign trial. And the American People voted for this president. They have confidence in this president. And they wanted him to lead our country. And they wanted him to focus on things like the economy, focus on health care, focus on fixing our broken tax system, focus on fixing or borders, and focus on National Security. Thats what were here to do. Thats what we are focused on. These questions have been asked and answered and we are ready to move forward and focus on the questions of the day that the American People have, april. Is jill brand owed an apology for misunderstanding of the president s tweet this morning . Because many including the senator thinks that its about sexual innuendos. I think only in your mind is in the gutter would you have read it that way. And so no. Hunter . So its not . What he said was open, and it was he was obviously talking about political partisan games that people often play. And the broken system that he talked about repeatedly. This isnt new, isnt a new sentiment. Isnt a new terminology. He used it several times before. As i said a few minutes ago he used it several times before referencing enin of both parties, in fact. So i think that there if you look back at the past comments he made his very clear what his reference was. Hunter. Looking at this issue with the system, the president gave almost 8,000 to senator jill brand over the years. His daughter also gave her 2,000. What specifically did they get for these contributions when she was i think oftentimes what you do, you are getting access a member of congress will take your phone call. They will take your meeting. And if you are driving as a businessman that the president may or may not have been driving at that particular point you can talk to that individual about it. Sometimes they carry your water. Thats the reason we have a broken system. Thats the reason special interests often control our government more than the people do. Thats one of the reasons this president ran to be president. Its one of the top reasons i think that he won and that hes sitting in the oval office today and Hillary Clinton is not. Because he couldnt be bought and everybody knew she could because they had seen it time and time again. Bought access in a corrupt way . I think he is admitting he is participating in a i go ready system. He said that on the campaign trail. He knows how the system works. I think it would be disingenuous for anybody not to understand that but i think this president is being honest about the process and his wish to fix it and drain the sbamp. Jill brand called for him to resign and the next day he wakes up and you are saying he is tweet being the Campaign Finance system . I am talking about the fact she is controlled by special interests, about the thakt she is a wholly owned subsidiary of people who donate to her campaign, a puppet for Chuck Schumer a number of issues she has none of which make her an independent individual but a pup etd of those who contribute to her cause. What does the president want . The president has been talking about the need for us to put a stronger ban on lobbyists participating in the government process. We have taken a stronger ethics pledge under this administration than previous administrations. I think those are some of the first steps and something we are going to continue working on over the next seven years. John. Thanks a lot, sarah. You are familiar with the president s tweets, he tweets pretty often. In this ive noticed that, too. Yeah. In this particular case, his criticism of senator jill brand was very personal. Why must he criticize on such personal terms. He called a sitting elected u. S. Senate lightweight, why go after her in such a personal manner . I dont think thats all that personal. If you want to look at personal look at the comments she made about this president over the last several months. Look, the president is always going to be somebody who responds. We have said that many times before. And hes simply talking about a system that doesnt work for the citizens this country. And he wants to fix it. Trey. Two quick questions, one following up on johns question from earlier about a Second Special counsel. Does the president have confidence in the fbi as it exists today . Look, the president has confidence in director ray, and his ability to clean up some of the mess left behind by his predecessor. I have addressed that before. And he certainly has confidence in the rank and file members of the fbi. A followup on foreign poll he soochl bloomberg has an article out about the Trump Administration encouraging saudi arabia to consider bids from u. S. Companies as it relates to Building Nuclear reactors. Does the presidency this as an opportunity to bring up human rights in yemen during those thauks in saudi arabia . I am not aware of conversations in this process. I would have to ask and get back you to. One last question. Margaret. Thank you. Mcmasters made interesting remarks at a luchlgon earlier today and spoke in really scantron terms about china and russia and said they were unminding the ininternational order and stability and sovereign rights of their neighbors under the law. He went on to talk about russia in particular. He didnt use the words election medaling but he talked about subversion, disinformation, propaganda, and basically pitting people against each other to try to create crises of confidence. What i want to know is does the president agree with all of general mcmasters statements . And is that a foreshadowing of a National Security strategy that will take a harder tack on russia and china than the administration has before. We have been hard on russia. Increased sanctions, increased energy exportation from this country and we have asked others to put pressure on russia asking them to be tougher on common enemies that they face. General mcmaster certainly is someone who understands and knows the president s feelings and our relationships with foreign partners, and something that we certainly feel confident in him speaking about. Thanks so much, guys. Can we get the president out here on the podium. Could we please see the president out here sarah. Sarah Huckabee Sanders getting one last shouted question which she ignored about whether or not the president would answer some of these questions. Clearly the big question of the day was about him going after the new york senator, kiersten jill brand, someone who has called for the president to step down in the wake of these sexual harassment, Sexual Misconduct accusations dating back in some cases decades. Her explanation for this tweet where he says that kiersten jill would come to his office begging for Campaign Contributions and would do anything for him, not sexist, not slut shaming but a phrase he used in reference to people who took Campaign Contributions many times. Its very obvious, she said, what the president meant. Let me go to kristen welker, among the questioners there. Let me get your headlines from this. You heard Sarah Huckabee sanders pressing back forcefully when she was pressed a number of times on what specifically if president mant when he stweeted that the senator would do anything for a campaign contribution. She said he was making an obvious point about the swamp, the fact that politicians ask for all sorts of donations from people, and that is part of the super interests and the problem of the involvement with special interests in our politics. Chris, you heard her get this question over and over again and the fact that on capitol hill there seemed to be a very different understanding of what the president was talking about. You have a number of lawmakers, democrats who criticized him very shrply saying that his language was, quote, unquote, sexist. She said that anyone who read any type of sexual innuendo into that has a mind in the gutter. So, again, a very forceful pushback against that. I also pressed Sarah Huckabee sanders on another one of the president s tweets earlier today, chris, which i read at the top of the hour, which is that he said that he didnt know any of those who have accused him of Sexual Misconduct and that he has never met them. Heres how she responded. The accusations are false fabricated stories of women who i dont know and or have never met. Fake news. And yet the reality is hes pictured with a number of women who have accused him of the misconduct. Do you concede that that part of his statement is not true. The president was referencing the three individuals that were part of a press conference yesterday. And simply stating that you dont know someone means that you dont have a relationship with them. The president has answered these questions. He has spoken to these accusations. And denied and pushed that they are all false and fabricated accusations. Frankly, i think if Congress Wants to spend time investigating things they should probably focus on some of the things that the American People would really like them to investigate. So you heard Sarah Sanders there also talking about the calls on capitol hill for a congressional investigate into some of these accusations of Sexual Misconduct. I asked her if she would support and if the president would support such a probe. You heard her say congress should be focus on other things. Bottom line, though, this is clearly something that is enraging this president. He wants to turn the page. He wants to be talking about his agenda. But we are in a National Conversation right now. The me too movement, and it has come right here to the white house. Of course these are accusations that were brought up during the campaign. And the white houses point, and they are very defiant in this chris is to say look the American People already litigated this and they voted President Trump into office its time to move on. But obviously those accusers are not going away. In fact, more coming forward with each new day, chris. Kristen welker thank you for that. Including kiersten jill brand six Democratic Senators are calling for trump to resign and members of the Democratic Womens Working Group are calling for an investigation into the Sexual Misconduct allegation against the president. Members now tell us the caucus has the support of 113 lawmakers. I want to bring in one of those lawmakers calling for an investigation, democratic congresswoman from wisconsin, gwynn more. Always good the see you. I want to get your reaction to everything that you have been hearing. Because you know, what the president wrote brought a very swift, for many, a very pointed reaction. Kiersten jill brand said she thought it was sexist. Elizabeth warren said she thought it was slut shaming. To the point, to be fair of the press secretary i did a quick google on the president s comments on what he has said in the past about Campaign Contributions. And he said, and this was in july, 2015 to the wall street journal, as a businessman and very substantial donor to very important people, when you give, they do whenever the hell you want them to do. So did some of his critics jump the begun on this one . Well, hi, chris, how are you doing . Im good. Thank you. Just let me say that the president s favorite targets seem to be women. I just think back to the widow, mrs. Johnson, who lost her husband and how he mercilessly tinned to go after her and to imply that she was just a big liar. Fredrica wilson. I think about poor mrs. Khan, and him talking about oh, whats wrong with her, that mr. Khan had to speaking . Does she not have any voice . If you look at it contextually, the president seems to really enjoy battering women. And not just mrs. Clinton. But other women as well. Well, he certainly didnt respond to the people who were calling for him to respond except for kiersten you have th group, and youve already got 113 people who have signed on to this to say, look, there should at least be a congressional investigation into these allegations from these fairly large group of women. But given that youre all democrats and given the makeup on the hill, what do you think mrs. Congresswoman . We see members on a daily basis being held accountable for their behavior, and yet, we arent prepared to say that the emperor has no clothes. This is the leader of the free world. This is the only man that most people in the world get an opportunity to see. And indeed in this country. And if we cant hold him to account, it doesnt seem reasonable that were holding other people to account. And, you know, i heard Sarah Huckabee sanders talking about the issue, when mama aint doing all right, nobodys doing all right. Its an economic issue, its an issue that pervades every segment of our existence and so the fact that it certainly is a workplace issue and if and the president has just said you can just grab them by their genitals, you can treat them any way, and to the extent that he holds those views, i think its important for us to get at the bottom of these things. This conversation is not going away and we appreciate your time. Sorry we didnt have more time because of the press briefing. And now to a place where Sexual Misconduct charges have dominated a senate race. It is election day in alabama and the stakes couldnt bhai e higher. Theres a saying in alabama, fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice, shame on you. These allegations are completely false. I did not date under aged women, i did not molest anyone. Judge moore is a good man, judge moore is a righteous man. And judge moore, they have tried to destroy judge moore, all that establishment up there every day, that doesnt have trumps back, you know they dont have his back at all. What they want him for is that Corporate Tax cut. Thats all they want him for. As soon as they get that tax cut, you watch what happens. Theres a special place in hell for republicans who should know better. His name is jones and hes their total puppet and Everybody Knows it. He will never, every vote for us. So get out and vote for roy moore. And as candidates do, Democrat Doug Jones and republican roy moore both made quite a show of casting their ballots, moore arriving on horse back, his horse back is named sassy. Both spoke to the press after voting, this is the closest race in alabama in a generation. Robo calls have been made by joe biden for mr. Moore. But mixed messages on republicans on what they will do if moore wins, well, no endorsement today for him when asked who he voted for. I voted absentee, yes, and i value the sanctity of the the ballot. And i would say the people of alabama are good and decent and wonderful people, i have been proud to serve for 20 years in the senate. And theyll make the right decision, im sure. For more, i want to bring in nbcs von hillier, whos been covering every step of this race from montgomery, alabama to today. What are you hearing about the campaigns, about the polling stations, tell us about these final hours before the polls close. Reporter were five hours from the closing of polls. Were hearing about high voter turnout in the areas where they need high voter turnout. How does that ultimately play . Or does that come down to a race that ultimately finishes neck and neck . Were hearing from the moore campaign, who said from the rural counties, they had Republican Voters baked in there, and if they could just turn out the rural voters, that that was enough to get a victory. The democrat, doug jones, theyre encouraged to hear from the black belt, through these democratic areas, but also jefferson county, some of these area where is they could potentially get high republican crossover voters. Much of this is anecdotal. We dont have any hard data besides the request for absentee ballots at this point. So its very difficult to go out except for talking to poll workers. These are two campaigns that have stood by where theyre at and well see where this goes five hours from now. Von hilliard, it has not been a boring month for you in alabama. I want to bring in michael shearer, a National Political reporter for the washington post. What are you watching for, whats going to tell you where this race is going . Well, northern madison county, around huntsville area, its always been pivotal, its filled with a lot of defense contractors, reporter types, who tend to be republicans, whites, but also the ones that tend to swing towards jones, if thats the way the night is going to go. Were also looking at africanamerican votes in the center part of the state. But its probably going to be a long night. I dont expect that even the exit polls will give us a certain indication about how this is going to turn out. Dave, you have said that it would be devastating for the Republican Party if moore wins. Make your case. I think its a Pretty Simple and easy case to make, the man is a walking commercial for the democrats, he is constitutionally illiterate, hes been accused of child molestation, that alone is a titanic problem. And the other thing it does is it gives his win would give an enormous boost to the effort by steve bannon to expand the Republican Party. If you dont want roy moores running as republicans, the fastest way to stop that is to not vote for roy monore. This could be a long night, but i would be surprised if doug jones wins. For roy moore to lose, he would have to have massive erosion of republican support, unprecedented in many ways, erosion of republican support. The fact that were even talking about this as close is a symbol of the incompetence of his campaign, his own ethical failings and Steve Bannons incompetence. But it would almost be an intentional effort for him to lose this thing. And thats why i would say the safest betting would be he has a relatively narrow victory. Its interesting to watch all of the outside help thats coming in, i have heard about people driving people to the polls for doug jones today, and obviously we have had the Steve Bannons who have come in, and the Charles Barkleys and more. Theres also an argument to be made, that senator richard shelby, who was extremely popular in his state, dealt a huge blow to moore when he said he wrote in another republican. And the New York Times said this about writeins. There are two ready options, lee busy, a republican and retired marine colonel for tuscaloosa has entered a write in bid. And the most important man in the state, the university of alabama football coach, nick saban, which is personally my favorite part of this crazy story. Having said that, do you agree that this could be truly one of, if not the closest race we have ever seen in alabama, number one, and if so, could something as seemingly minor as writein votes make the difference . Look, i agree that it would be a momentous upset if jones is able to pull this out. This is a state that trump won with 63 of the vote in 2016. So you need 13 , almost onesixth of Donald Trumps vote to walk away from the republican here. And the way it would happen is suburban women turning against roy moore, people who are sort of establishment business republicans in the state, who very much are the people that shelby represents. Hes done an enormous amount of brilliant Economic Development to that state. Theyre broadly concerned. And i have heard of people writing in jeff sessions, theyre just turning away to other people. We are out of time. But michael sheer , david, we appreciate you both. Ill see you back here again tomorrow. Thanks for watching. Deadline white house starts right now with nicole wallace. Its 4 00 in new york, what one democratic senator calls slut shaming tops the coverage of the election in alabama. A tweet that trump tweeted this more, light waegt senator krir ten gill brand, a total flunky for Chuck Schumer and someone who would come to my office begging for Campaign Contributions not so long ago, ca using the word crooked. Senator