Transcripts For MSNBCW The Beat With Ari Melber 20200107

Failed to pink the impeachment process. We begin with the big news. You may have already heard some of the hints. The republican leader Mitch Mcconnell is now saying he will move forward with plan to conduct a trial of donald trump, the impeachment trial, and they wont reach any initial agreement about witnesses. Democrats say the coverup is unfolding in plain sight. Let me explain exactly whats going on. Mitch mcconnell is now saying, look, he has the votes to begin this trial with the framework that he wants, meaning no effort and a unified bipartisan agreement like there was in the 90s. This would, if you believe mcconnell and he would appear to come through with votes when he has them in his caucus, it leaves him ready to come in and announce ground rules that still leave open or kick down the road some of the biggest debates that are going on right now, especially after the news from john bolton this week. So basically you would have the start of the trial, the opening arguments, and later the senate would then deal with and later have the clash over the big issues, including witnesses. Mcconnell is making the point that this is basically in its thrust the same framework that was used during president by clintons trial. Hes ignoring a big difference and we can show it to you. Some of the major players, basically all of them including the president , had dramatically testified already before even reaching the senate trial. That includes of course president clinton, who faced down ken starr by videotape and his investigators, and three of those witnesses were then brought back in the senate trial for reinterviews. And mcconnells comments come with the other news i mentioned that im sure you heard about, because it went off like a bomb or a broken drug deal to use his terminology. Im stalking about former adviser john bolton, who came forward yesterday and said hes decide to do sf if the senate asked him. Today one of the few republican senators who side that he wants to hear from bolton still basically stayed in line with mcconnell. Take a listen to mitt romney. Are you still open to voting to convict the president . Im remaining impartial, as my oath will require, assuming that impeachment articles actually reach the senate i intend to do impartial justice. Do you feel mcconnell is acting in an impartial manner right now. I believe hell do what he considers the best for the country. Thats a dodge. The word impartial here cant be parsed out of existence and it is literally the oath required before anyone, any Senate Jurors hear this case. Senator mcconnell has stated in public that hes not impartial, which made a lot of waves. Its part of the reason that Speaker Pelosi is looking at this range of options. What they decide, where they go in the house and the pressure they want to put the senate could be critical. I will tell you that earlier today Speaker Pelosi was staying mum. Mum. Also today, were seeing some new reporting about how Donald Trumps team will approach this looming trial. Lawyers and their strategy, they are looking also at clintons game plan. White House Counsel Pat Cipollone will take a lead role. And reports are that jay seculo could participate in some way. Weve discussed some of this when we had him on the beat. I dont see where its a high crime or misdemeanor, tell me what rule has been violated by the president under article the 2 of the United States constitution violated any rule. You may not like the politics of it, but where does it violate a law . Joining me now to kick off our coverage, former dc bureau chief, and former mayor of new york city and a former prosecutor in the Southern District of new york. Good to see both of you. Mya, let me start with where Mitch Mcconnell has a point. He does have a point that in the clinton trial they started with opening arguments and kicked the can down the road to debate the witnesses later, where a lot of people say he doesnt have a point is hes not pretending or even claiming to be impartial about bringing in witnesses later. This looks like a prelude to trying to block them. The real question is do we fear daylight or darkness. Because really what Mitch Mcconnell is saying is i fear the daylight. The difference with clinton as you said earlier, is they had all the documents. They had heard from all the witnesses. They knew all the facts. You could decide after we had a second round, and after weve heard questions from the senators, well decide whether or not theres anything more we need to hear. That makes sense at least in a context in which you know all of the facts. In this case, theyre literally saying we dont know all the facts. In fact, every time new information comes out because someone else outside of congress was able to get some documents and make them available to the public, we learned something we didnt know before. Thats why its so important to have these witnesses, thats why its important to have the documents. If its going to be a trial in daylight versus a nonexistent trial. Both of you stay with me because were getting some developments from the hill. I want to bring in kasie hunt who was questioning them today. Good to see you, kasie, what are you hearing on the hill tonight . Great to see you, too. We are all in wait and see mode waiting for the House Speaker nancy pelosi to tell us what hes going to do and right now its the battle, frankly, of wills between her and the majority leader in the senate, Mitch Mcconnell. And depending on your perspective, either Mitch Mcconnell has rolled Senate Democrats and forced them to agree or really shown that they dont have any leverage to force him to give them the witnesses that they have demanded, or as Chuck Schumer would argue, that democrats have extended this process long enough to at least allow some new developments, those documents that came out over the christmas break, and of course the news from john bolton yesterday that he would be willing to testify. Democrats use that as evidence that her strategy so far has worked on extending this period where were all talking about when this trial is going to begin. We know that Mitch Mcconnell has seemed to be in something of a hurry to get this done and over with. Theres been some reporting that hes of course been at odds with the white house occasionally or at least with the president about that, although everybody does seem to in republican corners be getting on the same page. Let me get you on the Speaker Pelosi front. I know youve been keeping an eye on that. It would seem that whatever effort shes making, it does have some kind of end date. Is there any indication from democrats in the house that having made her point and Mitch Mcconnell moving forward, theres a time now to hand it off . We know that this is a regular meeting of Democratic Leaders now. We dont think that she would have made this decision in any kind of a vacuum, so we can anticipate at the very least this is the first conversation theyre having since everyone was away on break. We dont have any timeline or guidance. Everybody here in the capitol is asking the same set of questions. But if you listened to Chuck Schumer today, he essentially gave her permission to send the articles over and we know that the two of them are talking closely and coordinating. And a lot of this is pelosi looking at schumer and saying im willing to do what you want me to do in order to get the best result in your chamber. So i took schumers words today to mean, okay, were going to try to get the ball rolling here. And thats the other thing. With everything going on, if at a distance people thought wow, iran and other developments, does this change the timing, far from it. What youre reporting and were seeing on the house side and what obviously is coming out of the senate is barreling towards the preparations to begin the trial of the president of the United States. Kasie, thank you for keeping us posted. I want to turn to shawna and get your thoughts on all of the above. I do think theres a little bit of a timeline in that you have five senators who are still running for president of the United States for the democratic nomination. I think there was some reporting today that senator Bernie Sanders was talking about the plane that would take him back and forth. But at a certain point their campaigns look at nancy pelosi and say, hey, we have the Iowa Caucuses which are followed the next week by New Hampshire which are followed by nevada and south carolina. Theres only so much we can do. And they know they have to be in that Senate Chamber when this is going on. They cannot run for president and not be part of this process with the president of the United States. So you have some very practical political concerns that she needs to take advantage of. I also think kasie made the point about Nancy Pelosis leverage, and that she kept this conversation in the news over the christmas holidays, kind of until we got this iran situation. She got people to question the process that Mitch Mcconnell was going through. We did learn new information. But heres the deal. She is running out of leverage. What else can she do, and if she doesnt send them over, then will they claim that she is not doing a fair process in the senate . She is not giving the president of the United States the chance to argue his case. So at a certain point youve kind of got to get on with it. I think substance tivly and theres more than substance in washington, but substantively if there is urgent, which theyve said on the record and if this is going to be a trial, which it is, then at a certain point all deliberate speed, a speedy trial, all the other terms you can use, even if you dont think the president affords them to everyone else, is still is standard. I dont think holding them for a couple of weeks to talk about format violates that. But you have the Senate Republicans saying maybe well dismiss the whole thing if we dont ever get it. I do want to play for you from the throwback machine. Theres always something in the throwback machine. Lindsay graham back when he said what Speaker Pelosi is saying today, that if its a trial you need witnesses. Take a look. In every trial that there has ever been in the senate regarding impeachment, witnesses were called. The big problem i have if we dont get to call meaningful witnesses, direct witnesses to the point, is that youre basically changing impeachment. Impeachment in the house is not the trial. When you have a witness who was there, who was engaged in it, who was in the middle of it, telling you about what they were doing and why, its a totally different case. So there you have it. Theres a lot of hypocrisy right now. What i would say is theres bun gamechanger that we didnt talk about which i know you covered last night, ari, which is john bolton saying he will now testify. Should be some leverage. Now it may not be leverage in the sense of the timeline. But let me tell you what i think is the principle that should connect all these pieces. The American Public deserves to know. The American Public needs to hear from those people who were in the room when the conversations were happening and understanding what decisions were made. That means that what the house should absolutely do is subpoena john bolton. Because what that will do is ensure that the American People are still hopefully getting facts and not fiction. It goes back to what you were saying, that if you really think that this is that what President Trump did is a matter of National Security, is a matter of an impeachable offense, then the house of representatives, whatever the senate decides to do, should then try to get as many facts out and hear from john bolton if hes willing to actually talk to the house. Fox news was discussing the same point, the value of someone like this who is such a key witness, echoing you but saying it to an audience that may hear that less often. Take a look. He can say i was there when the president said, fill in the blank, im not giving the guy money until he goes after joe biden. If Something Like that comes out of his mouth that would be harmful to the president and it might force the president to take the stand in his own defense. Shawna, is that judge fan fiction coming to a theatre near you . The president of the United States taking the stand in his own defense in this particular situation, i think thats a little bit of legal fan fiction. The thing is, we know john bolton knows something. He has said hes willing to talk so i think the thing to take away is thatl lets hear from jon bolton. I have to think that all of the lawyers that President Trump has around him would tell him do not take the stand, because that lends credibility to this process, that they want to argue in a political context that it has no credibility. And he didnt take the stand with mueller. Look, no lawyer wants him to take the stand because the man does not make consistent statements. He did answer questions from mueller. Interrogatories. And saying he didnt remember things. Its a little hard to believe he didnt remember. Maybe he didnt. But if you actually had him as a witness, you could actually go harder on you say let me give you a document that refreshes your recollection. Let me remind you of something you said publicly because now it sounds like youre saying something different. Thats why you dont want him on the stand. Or giuliani says you did send him to ukraine, so if you say you didnt, who is lying . One of you. And that kind of pressure. I want to talk to you a little bit about the senate side. Speaker pelosi has played this past the point where she would seem on paper to have a role, which is interesting and shows you again some of the way that she has proven to be a strategic communicator in this era. Chuck schumer sometimes, and youre a student of washington of these stories, im curious what you think not on the law but on the communication and the politics. Take a look at him responding today to mcconnell coming out with this partisan plan on the rules. Whoever heard of a trial without witnesses and documents . Its unprecedented. We say witnesses and documents, fair trial. No witnesses and no documents, coverup. That simple sentence describes it all. Ive got to say this is sort of typical washington, d. C. In some ways, even though theyre talking about an atypical thing because it is impeachment. But on the house side, nancy pelosi has the power because shes the speaker of of the house. On the senate side, even though you have 60 votes, though the impeachment rules are a little different, Mitch Mcconnell is in control. What you are seeing there is Chuck Schumer trying to spin the story for the democrats in that particular case and saying, hey, if Mitch Mcconnell doesnt work with me to maybe call witnesses, to be willing to have more documents, essaying that the process in the senate was illegitimate. We had a bunch of republican senators saying the process in the house was illegitimate and house members saying its illegitimate. This to me sounds like very typical washington, d. C. And in lightning round, given mcconnells statement today, how soon does this trial start . I dont know. I mean, i think it starts soon. Shawna, weve worked together before. We have. If you dont know, i need you to just make it up. Thats what television is for. I think its very clear based on what kasie was saying and nancy pelosi hud ling with people that theres only so much longer they can hold this. So it starts sooni. A couple of weeks because she said i had to make something up, so i just did. Youre following the rules. Well, i always follow the rules when ari sets them. But i will say one thing. This is not spin to call this a coverup. Theres an article of impeachment on obstruction and we have never seen a sitting president deny congress what this president has denied him. I think coverup is not actually a spin word, although i agree that there is a tradition within washington. Its something thats actually happening right now. Really interesting to get both of your wisdom, given your knowledge of these issues. Thank you so much. Im going to bring you back as well. We are watching Speaker Pelosi in this closeddoor huddle. Were going to bring you any news that breaks on what shes going to do with the articles of impeachment that she is still holding. Also coming up, did you know the other president who faced these problems, richard nixon, also was invoking a National Security crisis during the process, many seeing ecos and another twist, where a former trump aide could potentially go to prison for longer than expected. All of that plus another important story that cuts into life and death and policing in america that were going to bring you only on tonights show. Im ari melber and youre watching the beat on msnbc. Coe damage. Thats how you do it right. Usaa insurance is made just the way martins family needs it with hasslefree claims, he got paid before his neighbor even got started. Because doing right by our members, thats whats right. Usaa. What youre made of, were made for. Usaa before discovering nexium 24hr to treat her frequent heartburn, marie could only imagine enjoying freshly squeezed orange juice. Now no fruit is forbidden. Nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for allday, allnight protection. Can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn . Doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacistrecommendeding . For allday, allnight protection. Memory support brand. You can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. Prevagen. Healthier brain. Better life. At philof cream cheese. W what makes the perfect schmear you need only the freshest milk and cream. That one and the worlds best, and possibly only, schmelier. Philadelphia. Schmear perfection. Remember, you have out the hilton app. Can the hilton app help us win . Hey, heywere all winners with the hilton price match guarantee, alright . Man, you guys are adorable alright, lets go find your coach, come on book with the hilton app. Expect better. Expect hilton. Fidelity now has zero commissions for online u. S. Equity trades and etfs. And fidelity also offers zero account fees for brokerage accounts, plus zero minimums to open an account. And only fidelity offers four zero Expense Ratio index funds directly to investors. With all of those zeros, there are zero reasons to invest anywhere else. Fidelity. So maybe ill win saved by zero so maybe ill win when youyou spend lessfair, and get way more. So you can bring your vision to life and save in more ways than one. For small prices, you can build big dreams, spend less, get way more. Shop everything home at wayfair. Com this escalating iran crisis may not have anything to do with impeachment, but the number one republican in the house is already invoking it to attack congressman adam schiff. Maybe had he spent the last year working on that trying to to protect us from what was happening in iran from the bombing of the takers, saudi arabia taking down our drone, instead of taking that committee and making an impeachment. Is National Security fair game in this kind of debate . Well, history shows president nixon repeatedly tried to invoke National Security to thwart investigations that led to the impeachment probe to hide evidence and to literally plot the coverup that helped get him ousted because he put his own plotting on tape. So consider that and consider how dangerous it is to have someone with the power to bomb plotting openly about using that power and that defend, that rationalization, that authority as something that could cover up a probe. Were going to play for you some of the infamous watergate tapes. Here with nixon with dean and haldeman. That turned out to be a false coverup defense and then as the grand injujuri is he wer were convened, he tried to formalize this. Consider where the arguments can go in history. They went back to siting executive privilege in court. What you see there in the nixon history is the temptation to use things, be it executive privilege, National Security privilege, attorneyclient privilege, all things that do have real contours but arent supposed to be use to cover up crimes and did temptation inside the white house that can exist to do so. Two days before the public hearings the New York Times wrote that nixon was invoking National Security about vietnam and over watergate to silence domestic opposition. Or take some of the best reporting we have from legendary Journalist Bob Woodward about that period. In his book he wrote about how Henry Kissinger began reaching in the dark final days for a broader argument against impeachment, that impeachment, the process, the removal of the president itself was a threat to american strength on the global stage. Quote, watergate was shattering the illusion of american strength and with it American Foreign policy. The specter of the United States as a pitiful helpless giant aptly describing the impeachment of richard nixon. Were going to get into that and the limits of this type of debate when were back with our panel of experts in 30 seconds. Looks different. The unbeatable strength and speed of advil liquigels. What pain . Its red lobsters new threecourfor 14. 99. East choose soup or salad. One of seven delicious entrees like new hawaiianstyle garlic shrimp. And, get a sweet dessert. Three courses. One amazing price. So come in today. Im joined by New York Daily News contributor, host of the podcast and daily beast columnist margaret carlson. I want to be clear as i mentioned in the earlier setup, its not that everyone is doing this, and even a couple of days into the iran crisis, which is very serious, some people are doing it and invoking it as some sort of cudgel against people who think the president may have abused his powers. Your thoughts . Well, its an easy one to do. Theres a movie about it. Wag the dog. And people get accused of using distractions like trump every time theres something bad going on, he shifts the topic. Now, this is not this is a huge thing and what he did by killing the general is another huge thing. If we believed trump, if he was a truthful person, if he didnt have 14,000 lies on the ledger, we would be more inclined to believe there was an imminent threat to which he responded. And if we believe he ever invoked his National Security council the way other president s do, we would be more inclined to believe him. But trust but verify, at the very least, with trump on this issue. Mike . Well, my first reaction last week, ari, was that imminent attack is the new weapons of mass destruction. And you use a line here and say were in a whole different mode, except as you keep pointing out, its not a different mode. Everything old is new again. All of the arguments that nixon tried to use during watergate are coming up again. This guy is desperate to be a hero wartime president. If youre on social media at all, youve seen all of his old clips saying dont let obama start a war to get reelected. And now here we are, all this time later, in a mess with iran. Did we take out a bad guy . Yeah, we took out a bad guy, just like we took out saddam hussein. And after we took out the bad guy, what was the human cost . And people who think this is some sort of event for which there should be cheerleading, wait until americans start dying and then ask them how they feel about this. Margaret, mike speaks to not only some potential bars that may apply, but to the issue of the credibility, whether its of the president or the intelligence agencies, or political appointees who are dancing around something that is a very clear line. Either theres an imminent threat which can in some cases provided justification for certain actions, or there wasnt. Either there were wmds or there werent. The question being raised, at least by some, does this environment of impeachment make him likely to change his governing in his own selfinterest, margaret . I dont know that trump is able to change. If he were able to change, he might have. Even a toddler getting bad feedback tends to change, even a lion being trained, you get a good piece of meat or you get smacked. It doesnt matter to trump. And to the extent that even if he wanted to, he might not be able to. So hes not going to change even during impeachment. In impeachment, he wanted witnesses and he wanted a trial and then he didnt. He was talked out of it. Now Mitch Mcconnell said he didnt want witnesses and now democrats are fighting that. Theres no way to gauge your way through trumpland, because we dont deal with the same basically facts. And when you say about credible, remember when Lillian Helman said you cant believe anything, not even the a, the and or the they. Do you remember that, mike . Mike, youll get it. Margaret, i think the line was everything is a lie, including and and the. You do get it. He thinks he really remembers it. Look, however it goes, i think it speaks to the level of historic proportion of lying and people said in this quote, unquote, people like to claim nothing matters era, does it catch up with the president. It certainly caught up with him on the world stage. It certainly caught up if youre going to have other allies involved in anything over there. And then back home on the impeachment side, on a night where mcconnell is moving forward on a partisan plan to get this trial on the road, its a lot of pressure on the white house. I want to play with regard to the credibility piece one other interesting thing. Sometimes we show quotes of folks because theyre saying things that seem completely unreasonable and sometimes we show it for the opposite reason. And i want to give some credit here to Tucker Carlson, whatever you think of him, is being consistent in his arguments against the excessive use of projecting American Power abroad, even for a president that he has at other times cheered. And here he was speaking to that. Take a look. Just the other way, you remember, our intel agencies were considered politically tainted and suspect. It seems about 20inutes ago we were denouncing these very people as the deep state and pledging not to trust them again without verification. But now for some reason we do seem to trust them implicitly and completely. Criticizing kind of the hawkishness that comes with saying lets do whatever the military folks want if theyre controlled by a politician you like. What do you think of that, mike . Well, tucker coming to that realization, its kind of the example of the Blind Squirrel finding an acorn. But he happens to be right in this case. And it was shocking to hear him say it, and now he and shaean a fighting im sure the viewers hate it when they fight like that. But in this case Tucker Carlson was right. The broken clock once a day. So the other astonishing thing about the Trump White House and cabinet is how easily trump gets other people that you thought adhered to some code to lie for him. You know, pompeo, secretary pompeo is lying for him. Some military people are shading the truth for him. So you feel like youre in a funhouse and theres no one you can completely rely on if theyre touched by trump. Because theyre so fearful of him, they will say anything. You can gauge an amount of time in between when Lindsay Graham says something thats semi truthful, a phone call from trump berating him, and then senator Lindsay Graham coming out and saying, oh, well, listen, im going to hold hearings on joe biden and his son. Thats how fearful and whimpering the United States republican senators are. Go ahead, mike. I see you reacting. No, ari, how about nikki haley . How about nikki haley acting as if youre practically unamerican if youre not on board with this . Its astonishing to see just how much she wants to be president , because every time she makes a Statement Like that, you just imagine her shrinking to the size of a jockey. And mike, can i just say the book that nikki haley wrote isnt nearly as bad as her book tour. Shes gone much further. Maybe book sales were down. Maybe she really wants to be Vice President or president more than ever. But youve seen, like today, how far will this person go that we used to think was one of the bulls of the administration. We have some breaking news relating to the topic we were just discussing. We have a quote from a u. S. Military official saying an american air base in iraq has now taken two rounds of rockets. We cant yet state whether there are any reported casualties. There are immediate questions about how this may or may not relate. The ongoing and escalating crisis with iran coming just days after President Trump authorized the Deadly Strike on iranian general soleimani. Youve seen footage of him here. I can read as well from a reporter, and both of you are learning this breaking news as we are. But Reporter Zeke Miller quoting from an ap lead saying iran state tv consider the source, but iran state tv says tehran has launched some of these surface to air missiles in iraq, where there are still u. S. Troops stationed. Margaret, we also know that, although the United States has been disclaiming any sudden changes there, just getting some of this as we talk, although the United States has been disclaiming any sudden changes there, there was at least the initial vote by the Iraqi Parliament to try to expel the u. S. Troops. Margaret and mike, obviously stay with me. Our nbc analyst, former general Barry Mccaffrey joins us by phone. Your reaction to this breaking news story, sir . Well, the bottom line is you have to know what kind of missiles are being fired at the air base. Theyre under almost constant intermittent attack in boeth irq and afghanistan. Fortunately the u. S. Has put in some technology that we borrowed from the u. S. Navy and most of these, including mar tar rounds, are actually destroyed before they hit the ground. You mentioned surfacetoair. Im sure you meant surfacetosurface missiles. If theyre being fired out of iran, thats a gamechanger, because then there will be bigger warheads. Some of these missiles they fire, 107 millimeter are not too bad. The big ones, 122 millimeter and up are really scary. So ill listen up for technical evaluation, which will happen very quickly. Theyll know what kind of missile it was. And if its fired out of iran, then weve got a gamechanger in progress. And appreciate your point there. That is indeed surfacetosurface missiles. So let me repeat that and thank the general for that point. Surfacetosurface. Stay with me, general. Our viewers have come to rely on joining me by phone on the breaking story, which again is limited information at this point. But the report of the rocket attack there in iraq, in a place that houses u. S. Troops. Aman, your view . So ari, this was something that its safe to say the entire region was bracing for on a few different levels. One, theres no doubt that over the past several days the gulf countries, the persian gulf countries were anticipating a response by iran into their neighborhood, so to speak. There were a few scenarios that were mapped out. The saudi Deputy Defense minister, the crown princes younger brother was in washington, d. C. Yesterday precisely for this type of scenario. He was meeting with members of the nsa, had a brief meeting with President Trump one on one, and all of it resolved around what would happen in the event that iran responded. They gamd out a few scenarios, including the possibility that iran would attack directly, as opposed to through proxies. In the last 72 hours or so, the rhetoric coming from iran made clear that iran would take ownership, would take some kind of ownership of whatever that response was going to be. And that certainly is what were seeing tonight, because were getting confirmation not only from the official iranian news agency, which is the state news agency, very closely aligned with the government there. Pretty much the mouthpiece of the government, but essentially that it was the iranian government that launched the missiles into the northern air base there in iraq. An air base that i believe President Trump visited last year on his surprise visit to the battle zone. So this is a pretty Significant Development on two front. One, as we assess the damage, as we assess whether or not there were any casualties, and certainly well find out more about that in the coming hours, what you are seeing is that the iranians delivered what they said they were going to do, which is a direct response on an American Military target in the region. They did not shy away from making that the goal of what they said. Interestingly, some of the analysts ive been speaking to over the last few minutes have said the timing of this is also significant. It seems to have been coordinated or have happened around the same time that general soleimani was killed. And theres some speculation that the name of the operation may be actually named after him. So well wai and see when more information comes out. But in the initial read of what has happened over the past couple of days and certainly tonight, it is iran delivering what it said it was going to do, which is an initial response. As general mccaffrey was saying, it is a bit of a gamechanger, iran has not been known to act directly against military assets, certainly not American Military assets. Theyve used drone attacks and used proxies to attack other facilities and other western interests, but this would be the first time in recent memory that the Iranian Military has directly engaged the American Military with the surfacetosurface missiles. The region had been bracing for Something Like this. We know a lot of the gulf countries that house American Military basis, the United Arab Emirates and the fleet, the Central Command at the air base, all of those had been put on heightened state of alert, as well as the diplomatic facilities as well. They had all been bracing for spg like this. And the speculation is that it could have been any one of these targets. Its interesting to see that iran has gone after a u. S. Air base or u. S. Facility inside iraq. That is obviously where general soleimani was killed, but it puts the Iraqi Government directly in this fight between iran and the United States. So we are entering definitely unchartered territory here with this direct military response from iran on an American Military facility in the middle east. Aman reporting on this breaking news, these new reports of this rocket attack on the iraqi base there. Basically that houses u. S. Troops. Aman was walking us through how unusual that is. General mccaffrey, i wonder if you could speak to the context that aman is adding. This is a new reporting and aman is saying this kind of direct attack from iran onto a place where u. S. Troops are is rare. No, it was an excellent report by him. Im looking at ap wires from five minutes ago and its saying that iran state tv says that iran has launched tens of surfacetosurface missiles at the american air base. I think this is truly alarming. My instinct is its going to turn out that these were very large rockets to go the range, to target an air base. We do have incredibly effective protective measures, not just bunkers and concrete reinforced command centers all over these basis. Afghanistan routinely, theyre rocketed every two, three days. So weve learned to live with this. With very few casualties. But the large missiles are quite a different thing. Theyre horrifying. You hear them coming in for miles. And when they hit, it shakes the ground for a half mile around it. So this could be a serious blow. Well have to wait and see what the casualty count is. General, and i should stress no casualty reports of any kind, so we are obviously in the early period of this reporting. But general, from your extensive experience, how rare is it to have iran you mentioned that this kind of rocket exchange can happen. How rare is it for iran to be directly doing it . I dont believe ive ever seen them do anything like this. Now, the quds forces actively in both western afghanistan and inside iraq and the quds force agents took part in direct attacks on u. S. Servicemen. They abducted i think six at one point, u. S. Servicemen. So theyre on the ground, theyre in the fight. And theyve supplied technology thats been incredibly difficult for us to deal with. Both the directed energy ieds, as well as rockets to the shia malitias that have been attacking us over the years. And they also cooperated with the sunni insurgents, isis and al qaeda agents, they provided them with technology. But if this is an iranstate act with tens of surfacetosurface missiles, again, we should assume that now theyre saying this is the initial stages of high intensity war against u. S. Forces, at least in the region. My assumption, by the way, was their targets would be senior u. S. Military and diplomats in the region and put pressure on Oil Deliveries out of the gulf. So the fact theyve gone with a direct fire attack on a u. S. Military base from iran is truly a gamechanger. So gamechanger, thats general Barry Mccaffrey speaking on our breaking coverage. This is one of those times with breaking news where we get little pieces as we go and we try to emphasize what we know, dont know and havent confirmed. Im reading first from the u. S. Government, which has a fairly standard reaction here, aman, from the press secretarys office of the president saying, quote, we are aware of the reports of attacks on u. S. Facilities in iraq. The president has been briefed and is monitoring the situation closely, consulting with his National Security team. Obviously no great details there. But aman, a fellow Foreign Policy colleague of yours, abc newss Julia Mcfarlane is reporting and we have not confirmed this, but, quote, a u. S. Official confirms to abc Ballistic Missiles have been fired from inside iran at multiple u. S. Military facilities inside iraq. The facilities include in Northern Iraq and alasad air base in western iraq. This single official said according to abc news, not confirmed here. But i know you know the colleague, aman, your view of that report . Look, in the beginning i will say im going to take everything that is coming out of iran and i know that the u. S. Is going to be slow to respond on this and perhaps well get an initial readout from the department of defense which is monitoring this very closely. Heres what we can rely on. And when i say rely on, this is what we know the iranians are actually saying they did. And its important to emphasize that, because they know that even if the base is not hit, even if the missiles land somewhere else, even if the base is hit but no american casualties are reported, irans state news agency which is a verified account, is taking responsibility for these attacks or the iranian government is taking responsibility for these attacks, and saying that they launched tens of missiles at an American Military base. That in and of itself is significant because what iran is doing here is they are saying to the world that they have responded in kind, and what i mean by in kind is with a direct military operation against u. S. Military personnel in the region. That has been the rhetoric coming out for the past couple of days. They did not say they were going to use proxies. Some people speculated it could happen over the course of several days, some people said it could happen within the year. The Iranian Foreign minister said it would be up to irans timing and choosing and location of where and when they take these attacks. But when iran comes out and essentially again, based on their verified twitter account, fa fa farse news agency, saying they confirm hitting with tens of missiles, they want to be responsible for that. And as we were saying with general mccaffrey, it is a gamechanger. The extent of the damage is going to be significant, i think, because theres two components. One, theres going to be a deterrent component, whether or not the United States says it can absorb this type of attack and not necessarily respond. Or you will definitely see the American Military respond by targeting where those Ballistic Missiles were fired from. The scenarios are endless. But this goes against what the diplomatic efforts have been over the past 72 hours. I was trying to say earlier the region had been trying to back door some kind of messaging both to iran and to the United States not to escalate. Obviously thats not the direction where things were going. The Arab Companies that have relationships with iran want to tehran i believe the day before yesterday to communicate with him. To say that it wasnt qatar air case that was used for the drone to try to deescalate the situation. We also understand that the saudis have been trying to back door communication with iran through pakistan to say nobody in the region wants this type of escalation. So we have now entered into the escalation with these missiles launched that the iranians, the irgc is taking responsible for. And aman has been joining us by phone, as well as general mccaffrey speaking to the breaking news report of the missiles fired into iraq where u. S. Troops are stationed. Iran is claiming publicly through official channels responsibility and directly hinking it as retribution for the killing of the general in iran. My experts stay with me. I want to bring in a new voice, Courtney Kube with nbc news. What can you tell us . Well, not much so far. We know that alasad air base did come under attack. There were at least three separate barrages that came in. But there have been sarous accounts of what exactly it was. Initially u. S. Military officials were saying they were rockets. There has been media reporting of potential Ballistic Missiles, but no one is confirming that from the u. S. Side yet. If but no one is saying, we have to point out. General mccaffrey knows this. Ive been on the phone. Im not sure if this has been covered. The difference between the rockets and missiles people on the ground would know. We dont know what was hit or where it was coming from or whos behind it. Given the te tensions right now there has been a lot of activity here in the pentagon and the u. S. Military officials. There were reports that they came under attack earlier by rockets. That was not true. It led to the military bunkering down waiting for an attack. We do know that there was incoming at al assad. Iranian state media are saying this is the beginning of a larger coordinated attack. So far were not tracking that here. But, again, its very early. I will say, nerves have really been on edge today. Its clear that the u. S. Military was expecting something today, ari. Thats interesting that you say you were picking up the idea of some expectation. Walk us through what we do know about the current u. S. Presence in iraq, the discussion about any potential changes about that which has been a big part of the story and could potentially shift further in an escalating environment where iran is publicly tonight taking responsibility for these attacks. Thats right. Theres been a large military presence. Al assad, its housed u. S. Military. Theres a relatively large u. S. Military presence up in irbil. Theres more throughout the country. There are smaller installations around. Whats become clear is that the u. S. Military both since Qassem Soleimanis death and since the Iraqi Parliament voted a nonbinding vote that the u. S. Military was going to have to leave, the u. S. Is clearly repositioning in the country. The Qassem Soleimani death has led to a very real and serious concern about the force there and the protection of the u. S. Military force. Its also led to the counter isis and Training Mission there being suspended. So because of that some of the u. S. Military who are specifically assigned to those missions have been moved out of baghdad and some of the surrounding areas into safer areas. Some up towards and into kuwait and some repositioned into safer areas. They have been bringing some forces in and some 82nd airborne who were brought in for protection, embassy protection, u. S. Security, the footprint is shifting. What remains unclear is whats going to happen next between what the Iraqi Parliament and the administration is saying. Is there a time line for them to leave and are they going to do it . All we keep getting out of secretary esper, theres been no change in the u. S. Plans. We just dont know. To the context youre adding, which is so vital, theres also the question of whether the commander in chiefs view of any potential or preplanned changes will alter again if it is viewed in the middle east or the world at large that the troops are being moved or removed in response to or after this attack. I want to bring in ben rhodes. Thanks for joining me on the fly. Number one, we mentioned earlier and eamon was reporting for us that iran state tv which is an arm of the government in that country was publicly claiming responsibility. We have courtesy of the New York Times a statement of the new york revolutionary guards, they have launched a, quote, successful attack on al Assad Military base. They go on to say it is in the name of soleimani. That would seem to confirm and follow up on what we heard from iran state tv. Your view of what our experts have said and given what we know at this hour of the attack after the trump administrations killing of that general . Look, its obviously early and theres a lot that we dont know, but to me, you know, it is very striking that if it is true, that these were Ballistic Missiles and as your reporter just indicated, well have to determine if thats true, but for the iranian government to publicly acknowledge and announce that type of conventional attack is consequential. They themselves are claiming that it is directly against the u. S. Military. It strikes true that given their influence in iraqs politics, they might have had something to do with the vote that took place over the weekend in the Iraqi Parliament demanding the withdrawal of u. S. Forces followed by this attack. So what we may be seeing is iran acting on kind of a strategic objective that was a lifelong objective, at least in the lifetime during the iraq war of Qassem Soleimani to try to evict the United States from iraq. I would also add that this retaliatory act doesnt necessarily amount to the totality of the iranian response. They also of course have different proxies in different parts of the world, so there may be a mix of more of this direct attacks on u. S. Forces, diplomats and u. S. Personnel. Given your experience in serving at the highest levels of National Security, although you cant tell us what is going on literally in those rooms, you can tell us how Something Like this is traditionally viewed. Is this something where in your experience the United States where after it starts gathering information starts determining its potential retaliation or how does the u. S. View what may be a part of a larger set of consequences . Well, i think there are a number of things that you would be doing in a normal process in the white house situation room. Number one, you would be trying to figure out how to best protect your personnel across iraq and in different parts of the region and places like lebanon. Are we hardening the security, drawing down personnel, securing military facilities . Number one priority should be the security of our personnel. Secondly, im sure that somewhere on the shelf there is a plan of different ways to target the Iranian National guard so you have Response Options as well. This is the dangerous escalatory cycle that many of us have been concerned about, that we do something, iran does something, we do something, this continues to spiral. Lastly, you would be consulting with your allies and partners and come to a common view, both those in the region and in europe. Priority one has to be the safety of our people and taking every measure that you possibly can to protect u. S. Military personnel. Thats complicated when youre dealing with iran because they have the capacity to strike in several countries. General mccaffrey, with the moment we have left, what should people keep in mind . Well, i think well wait until the facts come in. It sounds as if the iranians have made a strategic decision to directly employ military power against u. S. Forces in the region. I dont think as ben mentioned weve seen the end of this. Theyre announcing this is a phase of a more comprehensive attack, and i would think that the days ahead are going to be perilous because our only good response at this point is an overwhelming dominance of u. S. Air and naval power that can be employed against the iranian homeland. Their fast boats, rockets, units. When that goes, were really into high intensity warfare with the iranians. General mccaffrey, thanks to you. Msnbc will have much more on this breaking story right now with Chris Matthews on ha hardball. Major breaking news at this hour. Iran says it has launched a decisive response to the killing of its top general by the united ates last week. Launching missiles at multiple locations today including an american airbase in western iraq. This comes just hours after the funeral for that military leader, general soleimani. In a moment were going to go to Nbcs Richard Engel whos in irbil over in iraq. In a moment i want to bring in jeremy bashaw. Hes at the defense department. The Ayatollah Khamenei right after the attack and the killing t