country could use a good shutdown. >> this is one of those deals where the president doesn't want to shut down, republicans don't want to shut down. the house passed a bill to prevent a shutdown, and it's solely up to senate democrats led by senator schumer who used to call this governmental chaos. >> i think if i had to say what the main hold up in all of this is the lack of willingness on the part of republicans in congress to support a domestic agenda increase as they support a military increase. >> and the president himself piling on this morning with an attack on democrats, tweeting, quote, government funding bill passed last night in the house of representatives now democrats are needed if it is to pass in the senate. but they want illegal immigration and weak borders. shutdown coming? we need more republicans in 2018. joining us for the latest on where things stand, jeff bennett is with us from the white house, and eric is with us from capitol hill. at the table "the new york times" political reporter nbc contributor, nick. he ran obama's reelection campaign and former white house deputy chief of staff is also here. jeremy peters, msnbc contributor, and reverend al sharp ton, msnbc and the president of the national action network joins us. let me start with you, garrett. what is the effort on capitol hill? what are they trying to get people to do? is there something that they're trying to get them to sign on to before, or are they still trying to explain what that something is? >> that's the million dollars question, nicole. i've heard frustration from republicans today that they don't know exactly what it is democrats want, that they really think they can get at this point. it's unclear if democrats are still looking for a big picture deal that would include a solution for daca recipients, for dreamers, a budget deal, kind of a big heavy lift they could get across potentially with presidential leadership and say-so. or if they're looking for an off ramp, a promise for something in the future, an opportunity to vote for what is on the table before them now and avert a shutdown tonight and fight these battles later. there are ongoing meetings on the hill as we speak. there was a meeting of democratic leadership from both houses a little while ago. told there is going to be another meeting later tonight. organized by some of the more moderate democrats to try to figure out what their strategy is going forward. we keep hearing about progress, we keep hearing about talks going on. but you asked the million dollar question. it's not clear what is going to be good enough for democrats to say, yes, we can either support this bill, or, we've got something else we're ready to drop in here we think can get votes in both chambers. both are still technically possible, but the clock is still ticking. >> let me ask you a process question. is the what being communicated to different members on a piece of paper? is there a piece of paper that exists that's being passed around from office to office? or is it a game of telephone, where one person tells another person what the president's latest position is on immigration or daca or immigration funding? >> it seems to be the latter. look, this is part of the problem. the graham/durbin agreement to get an immigration deal passed has been talked quite a lot about on the hill. it's not a bill. it's a single-page document, it is an agreement in terms of principle. democrats, if they have it, it hasn't been circulated widely, don't have something that they can drop in that they think can pass. the interesting wrinkle to me in all of this is the house is still here. paul ryan could have said, we've done our job, go home. and really jammed up the senate on this. but the fact that house members have been told to stay in d.c., at least for the short term, suggests to me that maybe there is some other possible solution that's being discussed beyond this one specific c.r. that's already passed the house. but if it is, it's being very closely held. and that would be highly unusual given how close we are to running out of time. >> jeff bennett, do you think anyone has told the president that at this point he's part of the problem, not part of the solution for a couple of different reasons? one, for saying last week to dianne feinstein that he was absolutely positively open to doing a clean daca fix and dealing with other things down the road between his own hard liners, pull them back in? and do you think that lindsey graham is saying the same kinds of frank things to the president if he gets him on the phone as he said to garrett earlier? let me play this and we'll talk about it on the other side. this is lindsey graham talking about tom cotton. >> we're not going to end family immigration for daca. the tom cotton approach has no viability here. you know, he's become sort of the state king of the senate. i like tom. on immigration, he's putting something on the table that there's just no market for in phase one. >> my favorite part of that interview has been edited out. it's when lindsey graham has a really funky ring tone and it's dick durbin on the line. he says, dick, i've got to call you back, i'm talking to garrett. i want to ask you, i want to get right to substance because this is not a divide between democrats and republicans. this is a divide between republicans and republicans. and this is a divide that on the far-right of the republican party they're going, i don't know what to call it. i mean, full-on anti-immigrant racist route. and lindsey graham is trying to sort of hold the center, but it seems in the time of trump that the center rarely holds. where is donald trump on the immigration question this hour? >> well, it appears based on the briefing we had with two of his top aides at the white house, and even conversations we've been having with white house officials, that the president really is putting the blame on democrats, trying to shovel the blame on them preemptively for this shutdown. look, nothing on a practical level has changed between this morning and this very moment, at least from the white house, apart from that meeting that the president had with senator schumer. and what's interesting about it is this. apart from the politics, the two men have a couple of things in common, of course. chuck schumer is a new york democrat, president trump used to be a new york democrat. but the issue is that president trump, democrats say and even some republicans say, is mercurial negotiator. remember, a couple of months ago when the president sat down with chuck and nancy as he called them, nancy pelosi and chuck schumer, he agreed to do a deal to do the debt limit. they left that meeting thinking they had a deal to bring daca protections into law, come to find out they didn't have the deal they thought they had. that aside, this meeting they had at the white house, senator schumer and the president, is at least raising hopes for a breakthrough, and i would add this note. white house press secretary sarah sanders tweeted not too long ago that the president looks forward to attending davos later next week. that meeting of the world's rich est people, meeting of the world's elite. he's going to meet with theresa may, sarah sanders said. if there is a shutdown, this tweet would suggest the white house thinks it's not going to last that long, nicole. >> if there is a shutdown, the president will be in davos. i'm sure that will go great. let me ask you, jeremy peters, about this leaked document axios is reporting on. it is the best window to where lindsey graham and dick durbin's plan was derailed. they had a bipartisan agreement on immigration issues. this is a document -- this is trump world scathing assessment of the immigration proposal as pitched to the president by lindsey graham and dick durbin. this is what homeland security and justice officials drafted for the president. they said that their compromise failed to secure the border and increases illegal immigration and guarantees a.m.ness advertise, increases chain migration and fails to end the visa lottery. i think at least four of those things which on their face false. how is the president so easily manipulated by the hard liners on his own policy staff? how does he not know this issue at least by now? >> the president knows that the only people he has left at this point are his hard core supporters, his base. it's anywhere from 30 to 38% of the electorate at this point and it's not getting any bigger. so, when he goes out there and agrees with dianne feinstein and agrees with steny hoyer and says, maybe we'd be open to some kind of compromise, he's doing what he does usually, which is telling people what they want to hear, but not really caring if he follows through or even really thinking about whether or not he can follow through. so, in that sense he was never really agreeing with these democrats in the room. his impulses are always to go right. i think that he can say one thing and in the end end up in a completely different place because he knows where his political bread is buttered. >> let me show you where his political bread is buttered by showing you something. i don't think i've ever said on this show. let's watch tucker carlson. [ laughter ] >> the less we have in common, the stronger we are? is a marriage stronger when spouses have radically different beliefs? are you closer to your kids when you share no common points of reference? do you speak the same language as your best friend? could you be best friends if you didn't? these are important questions given that our leaders are radically and permanently changing our country, wholly on the basis of their faith that diversity is, in fact, our strength. maybe we should have talked this through ahead of time. somehow we didn't. >> oh, my god, i don't think i heard anything past who do you marry. we don't marry our brothers and sisters for a reason. what is that? >> well, not only do we -- are we shocked at that statement coming from tucker carlson, but to really say that who said diversity is our strength, the reverse of that is our strength is not to be diverse? how racist can you get? >> the opposite is white supremacy. >> exactly. >> is that what he's for? >> he is exactly saying that white supremacy, because the only way you can go against diversity is saying, let's be all white all night, and i think that that's what tucker is saying. and he's saying that's where the president is. remind you now, nicole, this is the president that did a best-seller on art of the deal. and he will deal, it doesn't matter either way, as long as he thinks he's the deal maker. this is a guy who used to get on phones and act like he was his own p.r. guy to get in the newspaper. so, moral compass, we're not talking about here. we're talking about a guy that will do anything to make himself look right to the crowd he wants and that's the crowd he wants, tucker carlson. >> so, do you believe that these hard core immigration policies are, as jeremy said, those are his instincts, his impulses or do you believe he could be talked into doing something he seemed amenable to last week in that meeting with dianne feinstein, which was to go along on some of these immigration compromises? >> i think that in the moment he will agree to almost anything as long as it's flattering to him. >> to get something. >> to get something, in the moment. i think he said everything in that moment in the room with ms. pelosi and senator schumer, and he meant it until they walked out the room and somebody said, your base won't buy it. you can't deliver the deal. and stephen miller is in his ear and he has to be all right with them. the thing they should not have done is leave the room. you've got to stay there with him. don't even let him go to the residence until he does it. the minute he leaves, it's over. you have no deal. >> how do democrats negotiate with donald trump? >> we're still trying to figure that out. i mean, this is a guy, to rev's point, the art of the deal, he wrote a book called the art of the deal. the only person that gooets gets a deal is his porn star ex-girlfriend. >> that's true. >> it is unbelievable. as we look at trying to make a deal, yesterday mitch mcconnell said the most damning thing i've ever heard which is i do not know where the president is. where is leadership? he summons chuck schumer to the white house nine hours before the deal. you and i were on the other side of each other on tax negotiations. we spent all of our time together. >> this is me waiving a white flag. i promised to never fight with you again. >> we had paper, we discussed compromise. >> that's why i ask, garrett. so, what would normal -- we should just talk this through former white house staffers. what would happen is there would be a piece of paper floating around office to office trying to get people to sign onto that. word would spread by mouth. you got come inches? i got collins. let me work on graham. i'm going to take durbin with me. that doesn't sound like that's even happening. how does this not end in a shutdown? >> i agree completely because the problem is they're not operating out of the same hymnal, right? they don't have a piece of paper that says this is what we can offer. >> i don't think they've agreed to sing. >> no, and you hear the republicans saying now, it's up to trump, it's up to the democrats. we had a compromise with you. we could get 60 votes in the senate. that was durbin and lindsey graham. i don't know what else you want us to give you. you have the house, you have the senate, you have the presidency. how about some leadership? instead, you have a president who is more worried about missing his mar-a-lago tee time tomorrow than he is putting everyone in a room. and you and i would have said this, we would have gotten fired. >> for sure. let me ask you to weigh in on two political questions. one, the politics of the president's echo chamber, that isn't just you marry people you know. you can't be friends with people who speak different language. 0 honestly, i don't know him personally at all. but if that is the president's echo chamber, we know the president does a lot of tweeting while watching fox. that certainly explains where he is finding a safe space to say racist things. i want to ask you about the politics of that in light of the gop 2012 autopsy, and then just the politics of trying to blame democrats who are in charge of nothing. >> look, fox last night had a guy on who was talking about how hispanics in arizona are not really americans. and they're taking over the state. that right there is an insight into the thinking. for hundreds of years, america has been a country of ideas, and now we are seeing a faction in this one party that believes in blood and soil. and that is the view that is ascend ant n. white house. >> i can't even -- blood, blood -- our military is more diverse than the general population. so, if you want to talk about blood, you want to talk about people -- i mean, the military is more diverse than the general population. what is -- what is the point that they're trying to make? >> because they are there to serve people that they believe in some way that their country is being taken away from them by people who are -- >> by brown people? >> yes. and that is the operating assumption that they have, that is their politics. and if you watch fox news, who is the 6th partner negotiating this bill, by the way, they're in that room with the president along with leaders of the house and the senate. that's their view. now, look, i think that democrats will eventually come out ahead on who is to blame, but you have to point out every lawmaker has a sporesponsibilito deal with this problem. i can't think of a more basic function of somebody in office than to pass a bill to fund the government. >> i think that lindsey graham is trying to crawl toward honor. but i wonder if you see anybody acting honorably on the republican side. that you would put your trust in if you were advising the democrats. >> i think lindsey graham is certainly moving there. i do not see who else is moving there. and who you can really look at that would stand up. i mean, i think you need someone to really break the ceiling hereof this kind of extreme behavior, because even the immigration fight that they are waging is race based. they're taking our country. don't let any more of them in. and some of them know better. i have met -- i know tucker carlson. when i was running for president, he went to africa with me. >> so he knows better. he knows better. >> tonight he's going to get me for the white supremacy -- >> you're saying he knows better? >> he's been around better. i hope that he knows -- i hope he doesn't bring children in here, preaching you don't think they are going to say something their kids need to hear. they are playing, though, to the fears of people that rather than deliver for you, it's them. we've got to keep them out. we've got to play on them because we are in a real pickle here on how we're going to explain that we're not being able to deliver to you all of the things we promised in the campaign. what happens when this tax bill expires and they find out they really didn't get a break and that the corporations did? it's them. so, they're setting the premise to try and shift the blame to the blacks, the browns, the gays and everybody else. it's them. no, it's them, them being the ones talking. >> yeah, it's bob bronson, to be afraid of and who is to blame. jeff bennett, garrett haake, sorry you had to listen to my aaron soar kin reference. you guys are too business iz for that. when we come back, donald trump's past statements on shutdown is coming back to haunt him. how he's straining credibility by trying to blame democrats. also ahead, a president, a porn star and a very large check. what we're learning about donald trump that we won't soon forget. and does it offer any clues into what the russians might have thought about candidate trump? and the politics of a smear, how republicans risk branding themselves as being on the wrong side of the key national security issue with their latest antics. stay with us. the president in all fairness, he's the leader. he's the one that has to get everybody in a room and get it done. they're not going to be talking about boehner, they're not going to be talking about reid, they're not going to be talking about any of these people, they're going to be talking about obama. well, if you say who gets fired, it always has to be the top. i mean, problems start from the top and they have to get solved from the top. and the president is the leader and he's got to get everybody in a room and he's got to lead. >> i don't say this very often, but, mr. president, i agree. that was donald trump in 2013, unequivocal. but when it comes to a government shutdown, the buck stops with the president. yet now that there is a real possibility of a shutdown on his watch, he's blaming the democrats. panel is still here. so, the polling suggests that this isn't a good political strategy, which i already put you on the spot for. but i want to put up another number. the new nbc/"wall street journal" poll shows donald trump's approval rating at 39%. i only chuckle not because it's the lowest anyone has ever been, but that's the lowest anyone has ever been at the one year mark of their presidency. again, i'm always trying to understand what happens inside this white house. does anyone walk into the president today and say, you are at 39%. and while congress as a whole, yes, they are unpopular, you at 39% don't have the political capital to get democrats and republicans to bend to your will. or do they just let him wing it with fox in the background? >> from what i understand, they believe these poll numbers are wrong, inaccurate. scaramucci said the poll numbers are wrong. they're irrelevant to them. i think it's a mistake. i think people in the house and senate are looking at the poll numbers and are very, very, very worried. but, look, they believe that they are like beyond history, yontd facts, beyond limits and they can do whatever they want. like i said before, i think the democrats will come out ahead in the blame game because the whole country just watched the republicans pass an incredibly unpopular tax bill, with no democratic votes, but they can't keep the government open. yeah, it's a fact that the senate needs democrats to pass a bill. the blame will go to the republicans and the president. >> i agree. i don't even think it's close. joe scarborough had a funny tweet about the polls. he said blame the party in control, no one ever said nothing with the brain ever. but i do think the only potential exposure for democrats is it does make all of washington look bad. and i wonder if there are any private conversations going on among democrats, particularly red state democrats, who want to at least appear to be part of the solution. >> sure, garrett reported earlier that senate moderates or democrats are meeting tonight to discuss ways to reach out. that's why durbin and graham have been spending a bunch of time together. i think democrats is a party that wants to govern and republicans are the party that wants to win. you have democrats figuring out what to do here. the problem is if you look at trump's numbers, i remember after the first year in the obama white house, ram rahm iman yell said it's going to get hard. it's going to get way worse. these numbers you were talking about, nick, they are going to away quicker than you can say boo. they have protect themselves. you have these retirements already. someone at some point has to be the adult and tell the president he's wrong. the problem is he's surrounded by a bunch of yes guys who don't seem to be able to do that or stop him from getting his nightly big mac. >> one of the men that has that job -- and it appears that he tries more than others to speak truth to this president, but he's in his cross hairs. your colleague -- your colleagues maggie haber man and davis have a piece describing the atmosphere between donald trump. thursday morning after digesting accounts and comments on cable news, the president was riled up. both mr. trump and mr. kelly are used to being in charge and both are prone to dramatic outbursts and a temper. both have a tendency to say different things to different audiences, mr. kelly is more stride entitle about the need to restrict immigration than some realized. there seems to be this layered problem that kelly was projecting more hop than was really rational, that he would pull him in. he actually shares a lot of the president's hard line views on immigration. but also between kelly and trump and between kelly and a lot of that white house staff, there is not as much good will as some people hoped there would be. >> yeah, right. there is a reason trump put him in place as homeland security secretary first before he was named chief of staff, because they saw eye to eye on a lot of these issues, nicole. i do think we're looking at where the voters are going to assign blame in november. we should be a little bit careful for two reasons. number one, because the voters are like, donald trump. they forget who they're mad at. his relationship with kelly is going to be fine for now. the president is all over the place, but for now it seems like it's okay. voters are the same way. think about how many new cycles there will be. we were talking about oprah being president and that seems like a year ago. second, if you look at the political damage that republicans suffered after the '95, '96 shutdown and the 2006 shutdown, it's hard to argue that they were that damaged because they went on in '96 elections to of course lose the white house, but they gained seats in the senate. and in 2014 they -- it was a republican route. so, i know that these conversations are happening on capitol hill right now. they're saying, we're not going to get blamed. democrats are saying the same thing. we're not going to get blamed. voters are going to forget. >> it does paint a picture of, more than anything else -- i don't disagree with you. i think voters throw their hands up and say the whole thing is a mess. but the dysfunction certainly starts at the top. and a lot of great reporting in nick and jeremy's papers and other places, politico reporting that the tweet that sent the republican lawmakers into a frenzy and white house aids into frantic damage control came after the president was watching a segment on fox and friends. and i think they were talking about paul ryan's idea to somehow sweeten what ended up passing in the house. you're the only one at the table i think that i know of who knows donald trump personally. can you talk about how sort of negotiating as a new york real estate guy is just on another planet from what he's engaged in now? >> you know, i think that when you are dealing with a guy who just believed in salesmanship, say whatever you need to sell the condo or the building, you know, that does not understand now you're talking about multi-layered factors that include human beings' lives and livelihoods and security. he just doesn't get it. i think that he lives -- the problem is he lives in an alternative universe, but he has too much power in our universe. that's the problem. [ laughter ] >> i think that we are coming to terms with that. what i think happened -- and i read the times piece that nick talked about. what you really saw, as i read it knowing trump and having dealt with him good and bad, is that when he first heard what kelly said, they said he was all right and it grew over time. and it sounded like some of the sync offense he had in the white house warmed him up because they all know if you play to his ego, if you flatter him, you get in his graces. so, do you know, boss, what kelly said about you? what did he say? no, you, almighty, boss, he shouldn't be questioning you. it took a little warming him up to get him red hot and i think that came from the palace guard who really wanted to try to appeal to him and get in his good graces. >> i was surprise today hear a lot of that yesterday. the white house staff, just to generalize the kinds of conversations i had, they were more mad at kelly for calling the president uninformed than they were with the president for being uninformed. all right, the beat goes on. jim, thank you so much. i hope you'll come back early and often. when we come back, the sex scandal that wasn't. why a brand-new sex scandal involving an alleged $130,000 pay out and a porn star is already being dismissed as no big deal by political observers, and why they just might be wrong about that. [ click, keyboard clacking ] [ click, keyboard clacking ] [ keyboard clacking ] [ click, keyboard clacking ] ♪ good questions lead to good answers. our advisors can help you find both. talk to one today and see why we're bullish on the future. yours. talk to one today and see why we're bullish on the future. i no wondering, "what if?" uncertainties of hep c. i let go of all those feelings. because i am cured with harvoni. harvoni is a revolutionary treatment for the most common type of chronic hepatitis c. it's been prescribed to more than a quarter million people. and is proven to cure up to 99% of patients who've have had no prior treatment with 12 weeks. certain patients can be cured with just 8 weeks of harvoni. before starting harvoni, your doctor will test to see if you've ever had hepatitis b, which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after harvoni treatment. tell your doctor if you've ever had hepatitis b, a liver transplant, other liver or kidney problems, hiv or any other medical conditions and about all the medicines you take including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with harvoni can cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects of harvoni include tiredness, headache and weakness. ready to let go of hep c? ask your hep c specialist about harvoni. having her tell me the next day when i asked, how did it go, and she says, well, picture this. donald trump chasing me around the bedroom in his tighty whiteys. [ laughter ] >> isn't something that you ever forget. >> no, it's not. that was adult film actress a lana evans recounting the story when her friend and fellow actress stormy daniels told her about heron counter with donald trump in a hotel room in 2006, which led to an alleged affair between the two that lasted nearly a year. today the magazine "in touch weekly" released a 2011 interview with daniels about the alleged relationship. she talks about the fun banter she had with trump, his promises to get her onto the apprentice and how she was, quote, beautiful and smart just like his daughter, end quote. meanwhile, "the wall street journal" was first to report last week that daniels was paid $130,000 by trump's lawyer michael cohen to keep quiet, right before the 2016 election. and now the paper is reporting that cohen used a private delaware company to funnel that money to her, according to corporate records, and people familiar with the matter. cohen has not denied the payment, but has denied the alleged affair and produced a document he says is signed by daniels in which she says there was no encounter. we are now joined by joyce vance, former u.s. attorney and evan mcmullen who pulled the short string and ended up in the segment. joyce, let me start with you, because i -- this story has been out there a few days. i hadn't covered it. it seemed a little icky. i'm not trying to be a prude here. someone said the reason this is so interesting -- two reasons, and i think i have "the wall street journal" speaking to one of them. the climate in which the $130,000 alleged payment was made was the post access hollywood climate where donald trump's accusers were -- their voices were being heard. there were debates going on in newsrooms. and certainly someone who had an affair with donald trump, albeit from what we know consensual affair, would have been incredibly damaging. the second was that you don't pay $130,000 if everything has ended perfectly and everyone has agreed to keep their mouth shut. you might, though, spend $130,000 if somebody feels like maybe some day they'll want to talk about it. and the observation was made to me that if it's that easy for an adult film actress to blackmail donald trump, can you imagine what the russians are doing with him? your thoughts on either of those prongs. >> i think the last point that you make, nicole, is the real problem here. you're right, it's icky, it's awkward, it's uncomfortable coming on the wake of the access hollywood tape. it's not the kind of behavior that we want to see in our president. it up holds the integrity of that office to ridicule. the real world problem, though, is the blackmail issue. and it's maybe easier to understand in a different context. just imagine if the head of the fbi, for instance, had had an affair, was trying to keep it out of the public eye, was subject to blackmail, we would all think that that's a problem. it's the same problem when you've got either a presidential candidate or the president of the united states. and then the risk that this is not the only incident that he's blackmailable on. there's more, really has to call into question the entire integrity of the administration. it's deeply troubling. don't know why that aspect isn't getting more attention. >> well, it is now, and evan, same question to you. you can pickup on this thread. i remember when i was being interviewed for my background check to be a white house staffer, there is a question about whether there is anything in your life, is there anything in your past -- it's a written question on the background form -- it's a question the fbi asks you face to face. is there anything in your past that you could be blackmailed with that could jeopardize your role as a public servant to the u.s. government? clearly in donald trump's case there was. >> absolutely. so, this is across the board for anyone who has a security clearance in the u.s. government. investigators investigating you to determine if you're worthy of whatever clearance that is will ask you exactly questions like that. for donald trump, as i think you point out, this is something that isn't a surprise, and it's -- >> the conduct. >> yeah, that he has some marital infidelities, it's not a surprise. but the fact that he would -- he would seek to hide them makes them, therefore, leverage that could be used in blackmail. but what's even bigger to me is what that says about other things he may have done that are -- that put him in criminal vulnerability. so, if he was involved in laundering money with the russians, for example, something that deserves a lot more attention. that is something that would be put in even more jeopardy for blackmail. >> nick, let me ask you a question that maybe to sort of self-examining for you. why isn't the media making a bigger deal out this? an affair with an adult porn star, i have other things to cover. >> i have an answer, not a very satisfying one, but news coverage is driven by news and the "wall street journal" had a great scoop today showing the money trail. but aside from that, what's left to feast on is the taudry part, the things sheetz saying in the interviews. there is a lot going on now. it does seem crazy, i get it, the president having covered up an affair with a porn star on the eve of the election is not the dominant story of the day. it seems crazy and yet here we are. there was a lot hang. our governme -- a lot happening. the government is about to shut down, and here we are. >> i looked at the story friday, and decided ton do it. i decided to do it today because someone made the point about someone who could be blackmailed potentially. again, we don't know that he was, but somebody who pays $130,000 for whom an appearance fee would be, at most, we did a little bit of research, we had our investigative unit look into this, 5 to $10,000 at most for an adult film actress at the peak of her career. i don't know enough as to whether or not she was at the time. but i want to know if you think that this is the kind of thing -- just stick at the taudry level. if this is the salacious information in the dossier, this is the kind of detail that made the president lose his bleep when it was published. does knowing about his personal life, sex life, make the sensitivities about the dossier more or less intriguing to you? >> remember when the scandals used to be quaint? can we go back to that? >> enron was the big bush scandal, you know. but it wouldn't give. >> gees, here's what i think. i think that you used the right word, numb. people are numb to this kind of stuff. it's just another story untoward about donald trump's past and it's resurfaced in the same way the access hollywood stuff and the other stories about the women, the affairs that he's allegedly had. and i think to a certain extent it gets washed over in the public consciousness by everything else that is happening. i mean, this is an administration that is just impossible to keep up with on an hour to hour basis. so, yeah, i don't know that it bothers him for that reason. i think he understands that people voted for him in spite of all that stuff. >> all right. when we come back, republicans say it's worse than watergate. democrats say it's a smear campaign. so, where is the truth when it comes to the document they're calling "the memo?" why make something this intelligent... (engine starting up) ...when it can get by on looks alone? why create something that stands out, when everyone expects you to fit in? it's simple. you can build a car, or you can build a cadillac. come in now for this exceptional offer on the cadillac cts. get this low-mileage lease on this 2018 cadillac cts from around $469 per month. visit your local cadillac dealer. from around $469 per month. it takes a lot of work but i really love it. i'm on the move all day long... and sometimes, i don't eat the way i should. so, i drink boost to get the nutrition i'm missing. boost high protein nutritional drink has 15 grams of protein to help maintain muscle and 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d. all with a great taste. boost gives me everything i need... to be up for doing what i love. boost high protein be up for it conservative republicans in congress and many in the right wing media are shouting today about classified memo written by house gop staffers that purports to describe abuses in surveillance practices in the russia investigation, some of what they're saying about the memo, congressman steve king tweeting, quote, i have read the memo, the sickening reality has set in. i no longer hold out hope there is no explanation for the information the public has seen. i have long said it is worse than watergate. it was never trump and always hillary #release the memo. democrats say this is yet another attempt to discredit the investigation and the people running it, but the memo might not be classified for long. the house intel committee passed a motion along party lines to make it available to all members in the house. let's get right to nbc intelligence and national security reporter ken delaney to fill us in. you and i talked before the show. fill in some of the facts. what's going on? >> well, so, this is a memo based on a classified fisa application. apparently in the trump-russia investigation. the fbi had to go to the fisa court to get a warrant. and what looks to be going on here is that this memo shows that parts of the steele dossier may have been cited by the fbi as part of the justification to get this warrant and that drives republicans crazy because the christopher steele dossier was, in part, paid for as a democratic opposition research project. but the bottom line here, nicole, is that when you're applying for a warrant in front of a judge, the standard is probable cause. >> right. >> so, the fbi talks about what they believed to be true, not necessarily what they've proven to be true. they cite information from all kinds of sources. i spoke to a former government official who has reviewed thousands of fisa warrants who said it would be perfectly normal and not improper at all to cite the steele memo, and other information they are getting from trump-russia collusion to apply for the fisa warrant. >> joyce, help me understand what the value is to the law enforcement community of what is obviously a purge. they want to purge the dossier and any leads it provided from the law enforcement system. and i understand that the dossier, as delivered, is a campaign document contained unsubstantiated claims. but why would a party -- why would a party with members sitting on an intelligence committee seek to purge leads in an investigation into russian meddling in the 2016 election? >> you know, it's a little bit of a mystery. there's no rational reason grounded in law enforcement processes that would suggest that it's a good idea. so, i think that forces us to turn to a more political answer and the rationale for what we're seeing here and the #release the memo is purely political. the reality is the fisa process is inherently a bipartisan one. the judges who sit on the fisa court are judges who are appointed from both administrations. and fisa applications are reviewed both by the fbi and inside of the justice department, by career committed people. prosecutors don't have any interest in pulling a fast one on the court. the probable cause standard clearly makes it appropriate to incorporate information from something like the steele dossier along with other sources. this is a lot of hull a ba loo about nothing at the end of the day. although congress does have a legitimate oversight function to perform here, it shouldn't be a politicized one. >> and, evan, it very clearly is and has been, i want to ask you a serious question. so, during the bush years, a lot of the foiled plots, the shoe bomber and others were done so with surveillance. by politicizing and turning fisa into political -- a political football, do you weaken the tool, and do you taint those who use it? >> you do, but this is consistent with everything that the president and his republican loyalists are doing. they're attacking those who protect the country because they're trying to defend our country from foreign interference right now that is still ongoing. so, this is the problem. but this is absolutely a political stunt, and this is -- >> let me stop you, though, because it's the same tool that protects us. that's the same tool that finds out about political meddling. 2s' the same tool that finds out about attacks on 9/11. if you weaken the tool are you putting the country in danger? >> absolutely, absolutely you are. let's look at what's happening here. mueller is conducting this investigation. he's developing all of this information that's mostly private. we don't know much of it. the dossier is something that was developed, it wasn't intended to be in the public space, but it is. it's easy to attack. it us doesn't have the mueller stamp on it. so it's easy to attack. that's what trump loyalists are doing. it's easy for them to do that while mueller does this -- he has much more information than is in the steele dossier. but that is mostly private, and so republican loyalists for trump are doing everything they can to attack the steele dossier because it's available and it's vulnerable because vulnerable bs out there defending it. but much of it has been validated, has been shown to be consistent with other facts that we know. >> it is -- >> nicolle. >> i wanted to point out that this release the memo hashtag that joyce mentioned is the top hashtag among russian bots and trolls, according to the german marshall fund so you have house republicans and donald trump jr. on the same page as the rushon bots and trolls and they are calling donald trump to delay signing the fisa bill which refused this crucial intelligence tool for the intelligence community. if he does that and vetoes that bill or delays signing it, that is a victory for putin's russia. >> and for anyone having a phone conversation about doing harm to the homeland. it is shocking that some of the same figures in the far right media are attacking this tool, the ability to surveil bad guys, to protect donald trump who is trying to protect russia. can you make any sense of it? >> do you recognize your party any more. you probably have been able to. >> no. >> i have had many conversations with republicans over the last few weeks about how cringe worthy it is. republicans are supposed to be the party of law enforcement. this is what trumps wraps himself in and they are trying to tear down the fbi and the justice department. >> it is worse than that, nick. they are trying to tear down the fbi and the justice department and trying to take away tools that we put in the hands of law enforcement after 9/11 so people wouldn't get murdered at 8:00 in the morning on the way to work. if they hobble the fbi -- and i'm already worried that too many people in the fbi spend too much time up on the hill meeting with jerks that are maligning them and smearing them and want to be briefed on the hillary clinton investigation from two years ago. what would they about doing if they weren't doing that. >> you have a reasonable conversation about surveillance. but think -- >> you've been debating it for 20 years. that is not what this is. >> they say how can you use this dossier full of allegations for an investigation. if the fbi was only going to investigate things that were already proven, it would not investigate anything. second of all, as a source, michael steele is like a real guy. he's respected. think of all of the people who are on the fbi list, payroll as confidential sources or drug dealers or criminals of one kind or another, law enforcement gets information from various sources and pursues it. that is what is happening here. >> all right. ken delanie and joyce vance. thank you. a senator breaks ranks with chuck schumer. that is up next. so that's the idea. what do you think? i don't like it. oh. nuh uh. yeah. ahhhhh. mm-mm. oh. yeah. ah. agh. d-d-d... no. hmmm. uh... huh. yeah. uh... huh. in business, there are a lot of ways to say no. thank you so much. thank you. so we're doing it. yes. start saying yes to your company's best ideas. we help all types of businesses with money, tools and know-how to get business done. american express open. i'm mark and i quit smoking with chantix. i tried, um, cold turkey. i tried the patches. i was tired and i was fed up. i wanted to try something different. along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help people quit smoking. chantix reduced my urge to smoke. compared to the nicotine patch, chantix helped significantly more people quit smoking. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. some people had changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, agitation, depressed mood, or suicidal thoughts or actions with chantix. serious side effects may include seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking or allergic and skin reactions which can be life-threatening. stop chantix and get help right away if you have any of these. tell your healthcare provider if you've had depression or other mental health problems. decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. use caution when driving or operating machinery. the most common side effect is nausea. i'm finally free of smoking. ask your doctor if chantix is right for you. all right. an update to the ongoing shutdown threat on capitol hill. democratic senator joe donnelly of indiana now said he will vote yes on the short-term measure to keep the government open. that is now two democrats voting yes. he'll need about a dozen more to prevent a shutdown. what do you think -- we talked about this at the beginning of the state, red straight democrats feeling pressure to avert a shutdown. what -- who do you think it making the case and what do you think that case sounds like? >> i think they are feeling a lot of pressure from some of the voters in their state. i think that they are unfortunately in this beltway mentality and starting to hear the volume raised by the republicans and get nervous. and i don't think there has been enough pressure from progressive forces saying they'll be a backlash against you no matter how marginal they may think in their states, there is an active backlash and there must be a price and schumer is caught between that. i think the volume has to be louder among progressives if you get out of line, you will have a lot of consequences in terms of the election in your state. because we're talking about very fundamental basic things that democrats believe in. in terms of daca and other things. >> health care -- >> this is not a gray area. >> what do you think -- do you think chuck schumer came back with a concession and was able to get the one senator to flip. >> that is a good question. i'm sure that there was -- again as we were talking about at the top of the show, trump loves to tell his audience what he thinks they want to hear. so who knows what he told schumer and whey took back to the senate and who knows how long that will be on the table, if it ever was in the first place. >> what is your theory? >> schumer could give a couple of votes to mitch mcconnell without giving him number votes to pass. if he is smart, he gives a pass to the swing state democrats but doesn't give him all of the votes unless he gets something he wants. >> what is your advice to republicans and i said i thought lindsey graham was crawling toward honor in this debate. he was working with dick durbin and taking calls while doing an interview with our capitol hill correspondent. what do you think the honorable spot for republicans is in this debate. >> the honorable spot is to abandon this approach altogether. they are defending a fantasy nonpopular and using the lives of d.r.e.a.m.ers as leverage. describe to me in what political setting -- in one's party does that make sense. it doesn't speak very positively about the state of the party, the republican party, and how certain elements within it are leading it, are painting it into corners like this. >> and it is remarkable the damage that donald trump has done in one year. this is the exact one year mark. we've on the verge of a government shutdown and he's at a record low approval rating of 39% and his party is begging him to clarify his own position. >> 39%. it is unreal. unfathomable. >> and it is almost like what is right is not in the discussion. he has succeeded in having evangelical support a man that will pay off a porn star, he succeeded in having intelligence people compromised in africa. it is like there is no right or wrong any more. it is whatever you could get away with and whatever is speedy and that is a sad commentary. >> the last word. >> democrats can give them a victory if they want. the border has a wall. so throw a few more bucks at it and let trump claim a wall and get the daca protections. >> for people who are here by no act of their own. most innocent among us. thanks. that does it for our, i'm nicole wal wallace. "mtp daily" starts right now. >> are you pulling an all nighter. >> what is that. >> are you pulling an all nighter. >> i guess. we'll see. i have a feeling i'm not. >> no? >> no. i think someone is blinking. there is a flashing light. i'll have it in a second. >> i'll go run to my tv. >> there is still no deal to avert a shutdown, but are we seeing chuck schumer about to blink?

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Arizona , Hollywood , California , Whitehouse , District Of Columbia , Indiana , Capitol Hill , Russia , Turkey , Russian , Americans , Russians , American , Joyce Vance , Chuck Schumer , Jeremy Peters , Dick Durbin , Joe Scarborough , Nancy Pelosi , Ken Delaney , Dianne Feinstein , Sarah Sanders , Stephen Miller , Lindsey Graham , Ram Rahm , Tucker Carlson , Michael Steele , Alana Evans , Bob Bronson , Paul Ryan , Steny Hoyer , Graham Durbin , Jeff Bennett ,