ex-wives accused him of abuse. one of them going as far as to file an emergency protective order in 2010. although that order did not allege abuse, porter denied the allegations in a statement. quote, these outrageous allegations are simply false. but the episode raises a fresh round of questions about who is vetting the most senior government officials and what did the president and his team know about porter's past? politico reporting this hour, quote, a senior administration official said chief of staff john kelly was previously aware of the 2010 protective order which prevented porter from getting a full security clearance. that reporting which nbc news has not yet confirmed is striking because john kelly last night released a statement of support for porter. saying, quote, rob porter is a man of true integrity and honor and i can't say enough good things about him. he's a friend, a confidant, and a trusted professional. i am proud to serve alongside him. let's get right to this with nbc's hallie jackson at the white house and from the washington post white house bureau chief phil rucker. hallie, i'm seeing a lot of stories start to bubble up just as we came on the air about a lot of second guessing about chief of staff john kelly, both the decision to have him in this position in the first place and the decision to put that statement of strong support out yesterday. >> on the record out yesterday, nicolle. i think that's critical because we don't often see that. we don't always see that at this white house when somebody's job appears to be on the line as questions were coming up late yesterday. i think there are a couple significant things. one is the overarching look at security clearances and how the white house can say, if it does it, it didn't know about some of these allegations prior to porter joining the white house and becoming staff secretary. i am reminded what happened almost a year ago, nicolle, when you and i were talking about some of these very same questions about vetting relating to different people inside the administration, relating to, for example, mike flynn, what the white house knew, had they vetted him properly, what about his security clearance, security clearances for other members of the staff as well. the white house not responding to those questions during the briefing, although there is a new statement from sarah huckabee sanders in which she again does not elaborate on rob porter's security clearance, but just a couple minutes ago, i'm pulling up my e-mail here because it popped into our inboxes from sarah sanders in which she said the white house takes security clearances seriously, but not commenting on the specifics of porter's clearance. the other piece is pulling back on rob porter's involvement and interactions with the president on a daily basis. you better than anyone know this, you worked in the west wing. you are snow the title staff is a misleading title. we were reporting on hand because he was working on the state of the union speech. having worked with orrin hatch and rob portman was back channeling on policies like tax reform, before that health care. he's with the president on trips. he sits right there by the oval office. looks at everything coming in and out of the oval office. harvard guy, road scholar, son of a road scholar. somebody very involved in the policy making piece of the white house. when we talk about inner circle rob porter is in it. it is significant that he's leaving. it is significant we don't know about his security clearance. it is significant we don't know when he's leaving. the white house talks about a smooth transition. he could be in the west wing a little while longer. >> phil rucker, does the white house have a vetting problem? i held up one night, the form i had to fill in before i could go to work in the white house, before i could have access to a fraction of the kinds of things that rob porter would have seen as staff secretary. and the better name for people to understand this job is the person who has eyes on the access to the things that the only other person gets to see is the president of the united states. >> yeah. >> the staff secretary is essentially -- we've seen more depictions in fiction of the body man, the person that sort of carries the president's stuff. reggie low was president obama's body man. >> mcentee is now. >> this staff secretary is a much more serious job, a much more substantive job and really the person who sees everything that goes in front of the president. how was that person, if the allegations are true, if the chief of staff knew about the order, how was that person not vetted or not required to have security clearances, phil? >> it's a great question. you know, donald trump during his campaign was not known for having a serious vetting operation. and in his transition to the white house did not have a serious vetting operation. basically, if people -- if he liked people, they got the job. and they got hired and they got to sort of figure it out in the west wing. it did not begin as a particularly professional operation in terms of the vetting procedures we're used to seeing at a white house. now, that has improved slightly under chief of staff kelly, but still there was a problem there. but, nicolle, back to your point about the role rob porter played, we can't underscore enough how important he was to the operation of this white house. in particular, to john kelly's mission to bring order and some discipline to what had been a very chaotic west wing. rob porter is one of the few people there who has any past government experience, who is a professional in terms of working in the government, working in politics, and working with policy. and i think it's one of the reasons why last night and again this morning john kelly was trying so hard to help save his job and keep him there. >> hallie jackson, what explanation do you have for the fact that -- i'm sure you're hearing the same sorts of rumblings i am. >> yeah. >> there is a lot of tension between john kelly and other members of the white house staff. i put together a quick list before we came on the air. people were critical about him calling the president uninformed on the topic of immigration. people thought he drew a little too much attention for his comment yesterday where he suggested dreamers were too lazy to get off their assess. and now it's his name and obviously he's the man we believe to have had knowledge of rob porter's past who yesterday said he was a man of impeccable integrity and credibility. just how fraught is john kelly's leadership of this very, very chaotic west wing? >> so, i do think that, nicolle, rumblings are different from pulling the trigger on any personnel moves. anybody is subject to rumblings at one point or another as we've seen the last year. in particular some of the things you mentioned that have happened in recent days and recent weeks have put john kelly under a microscope that he tried to stay out of and tried to stay away from in large part in the beginning of his tenure. but think about when that started to change. it's when he started to take on i think more of a role in the policy piece of this on capitol hill. he was always involved sort of behind the scenes, but he took a more public facing role when it came to the immigration debate and the debate happening now. he was out in the public more, on the hill more, he stopped and talked to reporters, mentioned the daca recipients, dreamers too lazy to get off their haases, doubled down late into the evening. keep in mind, this is -- i'm racking my brain here. phil or nicolle, jump in. this is a crises of management for john kelly. much was made when he came in, both privately to us to reporters and publicly. according to my sources as well, he was going to put some processes in place for personnel. that was the thing. he wasn't going to stop donald trump's tweeting and he said that from the very beginning. i think people had an unrealistic expectation he was going to be jumping on the phone and covering the button. there was talk about him being the chief of staff. rob porter's staff. this is obviously a problem, and this is the first time i think that john kelly has had to grapple with something like this in an area that is strictly his, all his. >> always great when we get to snag you. we're going to let you go to other responsibilities. msnbc contributor, journalist alicia menendez, contributing editor for the website bustle. jason, an msnbc contributor. and conservative commentator and msnbc commentator charlie sykes. i can see your shot and moderating the way i do when i start the news. i'm going to start with you, jonathan sykes. your thoughts, your observations about what it looks like when a white house obviously doesn't have sort of command and control of the basic functions of government. i mean, this person, if he works on the white house staff in a normal white house, would have been investigated by the fbi. these sorts of things would have been brought to the attention of the white house counsel and the white house chief of staff. those systems either broke down or they knew about it and did nothing. your thoughts? >> yeah, either way it's not a pretty picture. it's almost malfeasance without doing basic vetting. they either had no idea this was out there which is bad enough, or they knew and somebody decided to ignore it which in some ways is worse. but you think about this administration and how many of the problems have been created by bringing in this kind of, you know, just the cast of characters that donald trump has surrounded himself with. >> you mean a russian spy, a guy with russian sanctions from the dais of the inauguration? the list goes on and on. >> from steve bannon to carter page. you think about, you know, how much this has contributed to the dysfunction. but also there is a real blind spot here. if, in fact, these allegations are true, how could they possibly have overlooked it? and why would general kelly, when the questions are raised, not immediately recognize what the end game was going to be here. >> alicia, i want to ask you about this episode in the context of sort of this moment in culture. you exist and report on that intersection. since the me too movement really picked up steam, donald trump's more than a dozen accusers have sort of had a second round of telling their stories. donald trump backed an accused pedophile in a special election. now someone probably among the top three, four closest advisors to the president announced his departure today after news accounts surfaced that he had been abusive to his two former wives. what does the picture start to look like in the context of this moment where women are finding their voices, in a tipping point they're speaking out? do you see this as unrelated or do you think that's the backdrop? >> it absolutely is the backdrop. i think parts of the conversation is when we talk about me too, a lot of the attention is focused on the perpetrators of the misconduct and that is an important part of the conversation. but the bigger conversation is about institutions that allow this type of behavior to exist. so, the fact that you have a white house where possibly people knew about this, didn't take action, came to his defense, didn't want him to resign is almost as problematic as the behavior itself. >> yeah, let me read this to you, nick, from last night. washington post reporting, and i still have phil rucker so i want your thoughts, too, phil. nick, the washington post reporting, senior white house official to resign after allegations of abuse. senior west wing aide spent part of wednesday morning preparing for the fallout of his departure. many senior officials including kelly urged him to stay. in light of what alicia said, anyone that urged him to stay that has reason to believe these are true is now kind of enabling someone who is accused of abuse to keep one of the most powerful positions in the world. >> i'm reminded of a few months ago when john kelly came out to the press room and lectured the press about the good old days. >> right. >> one of those things was when women were treated sacredly. this reminds me if women are untouchable and sacred and virtuous goes hand in hand to a failure to protect them from harm. it seemtz the white house was aware of the allegations in principle for many months. it seems a knowledge of the photographs which were published by daily mail only came out in recent days and that is only the point at which they decided they had to act. what did they do with those photos? they said stay, we'll defend you and protect you. >> it's really stunning and so many -- just to pull your thread through, so many of these stories have hit a tipping point when photographic indisputable evidence emerges. >> yes, that's the problem. you remember a couple years ago the ray rice situation, you had this athlete there had been reports of domestic abuse, lee doesn't do anything about it until it's visual. why do we have to have a picture? allegations aren't the only reason you should lose your job. there should be an investigation. if there is an investigation, can't we just believe women? can't we just believe the words women express? does there have to be some graphic embarrassing photo before people are compelled to do the right thing? what really concerns me, whether it's podsener or accusations by bannon and his old wife, the accusations against the president business his wives, you can't tell me you can't find other qualified people. >> the vast majority of women have not abused women. >> exactly. i'm pretty sure you can find people who don't have this in their background. it leads me to believe they don't care or that they don't believe women, and that they're willing to keep these people anyway because there are other people that are not going to have that problem. >> equally alarming is sarah huckabee sanders saying of the president's accusers, he won the election and that answers those questions. >> it's been litigated. phil rucker, while we have you, where do things stand? this is the third day this week where we have written five different leads for this show. we are here also in a moment, another thing on john kelly's plate is how and whether to release the democratic rebuttal memo which i understand the justice department and the fbi to be very eager to come out, to paint a fuller, more accurate picture of that fisa process. where do you understand things to stand at this hour? >> well, we are told it is under review. 9 president and the chief of staff at the white house have it. they have a few days here to decide whether to object to the release. we could expect a decision perhaps tomorrow, perhaps friday. and the kind of working theory based on our reporting is that he is likely to approve the release of the memo with some redactions. now, it's important to remember that the president approved the release of the republican memo without any redactions, even though the fbi requested some redactions. we're not sure yet whether the fbi has requested redactions on the democratic memo, what those redactions might be or what sorts of redactions the president might want to recommend. but the word is that memo is likely to be approved with whatever redactions the white house asks for. >> nick, what do you think the stakes are for the white house in this fuller picture being painted? two schools of thought emerging. one, the damage has been done to the fbi, some polls showing republicans now distrust the fbi more than they did before this whole episode. another school of thought being that this was such a that the president's moved on to smearing the fbi agents who were one of his favorite targets. where do you come down? >> look, i don't think he has much to lose by allowing it to come out. i think the damage is done. he does most of the damage to the fbi on twitter and by transmitting his thoughts to fox outlets that have amplified his message. the debate over the memo is mostly taking place like in the intelligence. the real battle is over the public perception of law enforcement and its legitimacy. i think he is winning the battle against illegitimacy. >> john sykes, can you sort this out, the ongoing war with the justice department? >> it's going to do long-term institutional damage. i also agree he has been winning the messaging war. they have set that -- they have set a narrative, you know, for the last week or so. the memo itself that was released last friday was a , but the release the memo campaign was a success. and it continues, and it continues to be a success. every single day they -- by the way, i've sort of spent some time in conservative media. and to say that he has succeeded in turning around the conservative media to get them to buy into his attempt to discredit and dee legitimatize the fbi is putting it mildly. now, what long-term effects it will have on the mueller investigation, i don't know. but there's no question about it, when you're seeing numbers like republicans, 70 some percent of republicans losing confidence in the nation's law enforcement institutions, you know, that's an extraordinary moment in our politics and it's going to have long-term damage. >> i'm going to predict one he's going to grow to regret. phil rucker, thank you so far starting us off. when we come back remarkable reporting from the white house that reads like from the late great vince flynn, a spy in the biggest political story in america. and donald trump orders up a parade as the nation's commander in chief, the pentagon is now working to make his wish their command. but is that how any of this is supposed to work? ♪ if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable after just 4 months, ... with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ♪ otezla. show more of you. but through goodt times and bad at t. rowe price we've helped our investors stay confident for over 80 years. call us or your advisor. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. you know what's not awesome? gig-speed internet. when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids, and these guys, him, ah. oh hello. that lady, these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh, sure. still yes! xfinity delivers gig speed to more homes than anyone. now you can get it, too. welcome to the party. christopher steele, the british spy at the center of the political and legal scandal of the century, was treated, quote, as a peer by the fbi. this is from the washington post titled how a british ex-spy became a flash point in the russia probe. the post reports the fbi investigators treated steel as a peer, a russia expert so well trusted that he assist the the justice department on past case ands provided briefing material for british prime ministers and at least one u.s. president. and this, in one of his first cases as a private consultant, steele worked closely with the fbi in its investigation of corruption at fifa the powerful worldwide soccer governing body. the post goes on to detail a dramatic meeting between steele and his fbi contacts in rome as well as others from other locations where steele laid out his concerns about donald trump's ties to russia telling them, quote, the russians had damaging information about trump's personal behavior and finances that could be used to pressure the gop nominee. what's more, the kremlin was now carrying out an operation with the trump campaign's help to tilt the u.s. election. a plot steele had been told was ordered by vladimir putin. senator john mccain figures into the story that the post lays out as well. the post detailing efforts by steele to share his concerns with republicans who shared his we wariness about russia. i call those the good old days. the meeting was arranged with john mccain who was, quote, visibly shocked by the allegations. let's get to all of this with the panel, nbc's ken dilanian, assistant director for counterterrorism now an msnbc national security analyst, nick, jason and charlie are also still here. let me start with you, frank. and this idea of christopher steele sort of going about his life now in the private sector. he's been described to me by u.s. government sources, by british government sources as someone whose credibility on the question of russia has never come into question during his entire career in and out of government. how did he end up in the middle of the trump land war on the fbi? >> well, the washington post piece tells us even the director at mi 6 considered steele to be his go-to guy for russia. this is a guy who lived and breathed the life in moscow when he was posted there as an intelligence officer. so, he's a true subject matter expert. what the story tells us is that he felt so compelled as someone who understood how the russian services worked about what he was hearing and learning about a presidential candidate for the united states that he had to tell the fbi. so, he went to his colleague in the fbi, former colleague that he had worked the fifa soccer case on, and he told him what he knew out of a sense of expertise and a sense of loyalty to his ally, the united states. >> and there is some reporting in there, ken, that should be disturbing to all americans regardless -- there is not much we agree on, but everyone should be concerned about irreparable harm potentially being done to our intelligence sharing relationships with everybody, especially the u.k. >> what i found fascinating about this reporting it emphasizes while steele is now being portrayed as a political gun for hire, he was opposite of that. he was a trusted intelligence partner. that's how the fbi saw him. he had helped them in their investigation of corruption in international soccer. he was coming to them of his own volition. glenn simpson who hired him testified he didn't thinks he should be going to the fbi with the stuff. steele said i have an 0 bely gags -- an obligation to warn the americans. some of the sources in russia weren't aware he was giving information going to a political campaign or fbi. there were sources he developed over many years as being a russia expert. >> nick, a former top intelligence official said to me, you take the document in question, the document being used to smear the fbi in the russia probe, the mueller probe because i think for trump this always comes back to his own personal exposure, right? this is never about the fbi. this is never about our relationship with the u.k. this is about him. the idea that mueller has already spent two days with christopher steele, mueller already knows everything that steele knows. so, smearing him now is almost after the fact. >> that's right. and, look, if steele has it and mueller has it, and if there are bread crumbs about the trump family's finances in connection to russia that aren't in the public domain, the special counsel has them. what the pro trump faction wants you to think about this, steele is a guy who hated trump and went out to find bad stuff about him. instead of a guy who went out to look into him and found this bad stuff and reported it. there is no indication that he was a big partisan in this story, he was somebody who was out to get trump. the entire story is he went out there and what he found shocked and horrified him so much that he went back to our country and tried to meet with senators and the fbi. >> and the irony of him going to a republican, because it was an american in america. it used to be republicans worried about russia. i laughed out loud. it was a laugh-cry when i got to that section. he had to get this into the hands of a republican because they used to care about russia. >> i have to say i love reading this piece. and when the liam neeson movie comes out, escaping cybers, i can't wait to see it. exactly, from jared and ivanka on a ski slope. i look at this as a larger problem. it's not just the u.k. it's also andrea merkel in germany. >> israel. >> israel. we have had relationships with you for years and not only are you saying we're incompetent and not good leaders, you're not trusting the long-term intelligence agencies we have used to keep peace on this planet the last 50 years. that's where this becomes a problem. everybody, every single one of our allies in nato looks at what the apartments of president is doing with steele. i don't know if i want to work this guy. i don't know if we can. >> i have to bring charlie in on this new reality of republicans. i meant republicans aiding abetting a pro-russian president. i want to hear you break down for me where this goes now that law enforcement, that the d.o.j. and the fbi are interested in, it would appear to me, preserving the credibility of a source, and preserving the credibility of current and future sources. their equity in quitting this democratic memo out frankly seems to be to try to restore some of the integrity and capabilities of american intelligence gathering in law enforcement and i want you to detail for me what the stakes are if they don't succeed. we heard from nick and charlie the president has largely been successful in destroying trust and credibility in the fbi. >> i think there is a real interest in getting the truth out. i still want to believe because it was an agency i was part of 25 years, this isn't about partisan politics. it's about getting the truth out. to the extent the democratic memo reflects a more reasonable version of the truth then it needs to come out because if it doesn't, it puts the fbi director and quite frankly department of justice in a trap. do they come out publicly and start rebutting the republican memo line by line and therefore appear to be politicized, which is the worst thing you can do if you're the director of the fbi. or do they hopefully allow this to come out and let it speak for itself. >> let's speculate. i've been led to believe one of the things that's inaccurate in that memo is the idea that the fisa court wasn't aware of christopher steele's feelings about the president. or as you have said, other people have said, i think you said, who do people think informants -- is it a bunch of nunns and kindergarten teachers? informants one way or another -- mike flynn is a source, an informant now for bob mueller who may have questionable credibility because he perjured himself. talk about the informant pool in general. >> so, look, we don't recruit sunday school teachers as informants. the question is whether or not that source does anything that undermines his credibility and veracity of what he's already told you. the biggest allegation of christopher steele is he went to the media with his story. that doesn't go toward his veracity or trustworthiness. it simply confirms he was working with the bureau on this. so, i think you'll hear the bureau come out and reiterate that they trust their sources, they vet their sources. that is what's likely to come out. >> they don't pay their sources. real quick -- >> why did he go to the media? he didn't understand the extent to which the fbi was investigating. he thought they abandoned him. the story didn't get in front of voters. if there was a deep state conspiracy against donald trump, why didn't the fbi leak the story. that didn't happen. >> to put a few more facts on the table, that is an excellent point. there was a debate going on in the obama administration whether or not to make the counter intelligence investigation public. they ultimately decided not to, a decision that will be reevaluated forever. john sykes, i have to read you something. in the aftermath of the 2016 election, by mid november the former diplomat approached steele to discuss whether they needed to take more steps to ensure theuous government was aware of his information. john mccain expressed interest in reading the full report. john mccain said, thank you for seeing me. you did the right thing and i'm grateful. my first thought has to be for my country. in a private meeting on december 9 mccain gave comey the dossier, passing on the information steele provided the fbi earlier in the year. ironic to me it is lindsey graham who referred christopher steele, who his best friend in the senate john mccain valued so much that he took that dossier and put it in the hands of jim comey. his one-time best buddy in the senate has referred christopher steele to -- for criminal charges. >> yeah, how extraordinary is that? the story of john mccain is what you would expect him to do. what you would expect a republican to do under these circumstances. among all the soul crushingly dissolutioning things we've seen the republicans do the last year, the decision to become complicit in discrediting law enforcement is among the most extraordinary things. i think republicans are going to regret this. i do want to go back to one point on the story of christopher steele. when we think about the final leaks of this campaign, we know that james comey announced the fbi was investigating hillary clinton's e-mails in late october, and yet we had that big new york times article saying there was no -- the fbi found no evidence of russian collusion. we never got that story we now know the fbi was very involved in this investigation, and yet we never heard that story. it never got out. i do think it would be interesting to find out why, why that never happened. >> it was a deep state plot. it wassant a very good one. when we come back, the secretary of state warns that it's very difficult to preempt russian meddling in our elections, suggestions from the gallery. maybe you should start by enforcing the sanctions, sir. we'll take a look at the state of u.s. defenses against russian interference. (daniel jacob) for every hour that you're idling in your car, you're sending about half a gallon of gasoline up in the air. that amounts to about 10 pounds of carbon dioxide every week. (malo hutson) growth is good, but when it starts impacting our quality of air and quality of life, that's a problem. so forward-thinking cities like sacramento are investing in streets that are smarter and greener. the solution was right under our feet. asphalt. or to be more precise, intelligent asphalt. by embedding sensors into the pavement, as well as installing cameras on traffic lights, we will be able to analyze the flow of traffic. then that data runs across our network, and we use it to optimize the timing of lights, so that travel times are shorter. who knew asphalt could help save the environment? ♪ when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night, so he got home safe. yeah, my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. what?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. i think it's important we just continue to say to russia, look, if you think we don't see what you're doing, we do see it and you need to stop. if you don't, you're going to just continue to invite consequence for your self. >> is the u.s. better prepared this time around than 2016? >> i don't know i would say we're better prepared because the russians will adapt as well. the point is if it's their intention to interfere, they're going to find ways to do that, and we can take steps we can take, but this is something that once they decide they're going to do it, it's very difficult to preempt it. >> that is shocking. i mean, i don't know what i'm supposed to read next. we now can't protect ourselves from russia, frank? >> so, the theory that we're hearing here, since they're going to keep doing it anyway, why should we booth tore tther stop t. we've had previous administrations that indicted chinese liberation army hackers. we know who these hackers are by name and they need to be -- >> okay, so, let me put some more information out there for our viewers. new hashtags trending, these are all russia accounts. fisa gate. there is now the capability and politico has a piece on this today, to track sort of the viral success of what russian bots are doing. you had a huge piece about this. we should just all learn russian now. our kids are young. tillerson is like waving a white flag they're going to do t. >> step one is sanctions. how come we aren't imposing sanctions. >> why aren't we? >> the administration decided it wasn't what we were doing, we're doing fine with sanctions. on the one hand steve mnuchin is saying it hasn't worked. they're coming for us and there isn't anything we can do to stop it. there are things we can do. >> what can we do to stop the bots? >> we know, for example, who is funding these bot nets and which people in russia are organizing them. >> we can trace the money? >> in some cases. it's been done before. you can warn russia privately. if you guys do this, we will come for you. >> but if russia, i'm guessing, saw tillerson say yes, they're coming again, it's not something dissimilar from what cia director pompeo said. every expectation they will try to do that. he said we'll push back in a way that's sufficient. not a lot of tough talk for russia. i'm shocked. >> fbi director christopher wray announced in january they set up something called the foreign influence task force. they are trying to combat this. they're supposed to warn people when they're compromised by foreign influenced social media. as we saw with release the memo, this propaganda network is working. that release the memo was propelled by a russia influenced campaign that was later seized on by house republicans and alt-right people. this is working and the federal gofrmt is doing very little to stop it. >> i'm thinking about what happened yesterday. so, american ingenuity was used to send a tesla into space. my 6-year-old wants to drive the next tesla that goes to space. a president has the ability to direct the attention of every asset, every asset of the government, every relationship with an american ally, and every asset of american technology to combat the russian interference. there is no evidence that he has done that or that he will do that. why? >> because donald trump actually believes, deep, deep down, that vladimir putin is his friend, that they're best buddies, that vladimir would never do anything one way or the other. he feels it's about him. he feels any validation that russia had an influence on the election somehow says his election wasn't legitimate, somehow he's not the president he's supposed to be. the problem is, of course, this could be turned on the republicans just as easily. >> yeah. >> we talked about this, they got hacked, too. we have no idea what the russians may have gotten from the republicans. so, if you let this continue to me taft size and be a problem, i don't have to worry about this now, there's been some break ins, i don't want to put a cara los angeles rams in my car, this could affect every party in this country very soon. >> what is the scenario that scares people in your former position in the fbi the most? >> well, if we're talking about actual cyber hacking and talking about infrastructure, shutting down the grid, we know other nations including russia have that capability. what i want to watch vo closely, there is reporting the mueller team knows by name who meddled cyber wise with the hacking at the dnc. let's see what happens if he comes out with indictment requests. those indictment requests against russian government hackers are going to have to be approved by who? the u.s. state department, tillerson, and the attorney general, because they're foreign government officials. let's watch what happens when that happens. >> would that be sessions since he's recused from the russia investigation or rosenstein? >> it will probably go to rosenstein. >> his job is very much in peril. >> absolutely. and the state department would have to sign off as well. >> let me, float out another theory that's out there about republicans. marco rubio is the only one i remember saying during the campaign, next time it will be us. don't use the hack documents as a political weapon. i remember asking kellyanne conway, remember warning marco rubio, it could be you. what gave them the confidence over objections from a very senior republican and foreign policy circles? >> you're left to draw conclusions that aren't looking very good. you're left to think there is a familial relationship very too familiar. there is an understanding that's taken place and i think that's what's at the heart of the mueller inquiry, is determining what that is. >> it's not -- collusion is not illegal. would some sort of coordination be a theory? >> quid pro quo, that's a corruption case. >> it's also possible that because there are russians who are marching into trump tower to offer things on the clinton campaign, they maybe had some kind of a sense that they were all on the same page. that's just a crazy theory. >> we're all kracrazy here. thank you both. when we come back we've become accustomed to seeing missiles rolled out on full display for the pleasure of the leader of north korea. it's been a long time since the american military has been paraded in front of a president for reasons other than the conclusion of a military action. whoooo. looking for a hotel that fits... ...your budget? tripadvisor now searches over... ...200 sites to find you the... ...hotel you want at the lowest price. grazi, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor. let's take a look at some numbers: 4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom... is a stroke. 80 percent of all strokes and heart disease? preventable. and 149 dollars is all it takes to get screened and help take control of your health. we're life line screening... and if you're over 50... call this number, to schedule an appointment... for five painless screenings that go beyond regular check-ups. we use ultrasound technology to literally look inside your arteries... for plaque which builds up as you age- and increases your risk for stroke and cardiovascular disease. and by getting them through this package, you're saving over 50%. so call today and consider these numbers: for just $149 you'll receive five screenings that could reveal what your body isn't telling you. i'm gonna tell you that was the best $150 i ever spent in my life. life line screening. the power of prevention. call now to learn more. ♪ who's the fun one now? made with real cream. reddi-wip. instant greatification. i was your guest at bastille day and it was one of the greatest parades i've ever seen. we may do something like that on july 4 in washington down pennsylvania avenue. i don't know, we're going to have to try and top it. >> they laughed, it sounded so farfetched people in the room laughed when he said it. but here we are five months later talking about president trump's desire for an official military parade. the white house is insisting it's all still in the early preliminary stages, but if this does happen, here's the club the united states would join. north korea, china, and russia regularly hold these types of marches. according to the washington post, quote, trump has long mused privately and publicly about wanting a parade. but a january 18 meeting between trump and top generals in the pentagon d pentagon. joining us at the table, retired army colonel jack jacobs. alicia is back with us. go. here's what i want to say. so, i think that it's dangerous for people to be derisive of honoring the military. i want it know if being asked to march in the military parade is how the military would like to be honored. >> of course not. it's labor intensive, capital intensive. troops hate doing it. in order to do a good parade, you have to practice months in advance, do it over and over and over again. they hate it. if you really want to honor veterans like the president says, the best way to do that would be for civilians to parade and then the veterans would stand on the sidewalks eating popcorn and drinking beer. being in a parade stinks. it's an awful -- not to say nothing of the fact that it's an awful waste of time and of money. we're short of people. general mattis was on the hill, what, yesterday, day before yesterday, talking about how there are about 19,000 soldiers and air men he'd like to get in the ranks but he can't because of the budget. and now we're going to spend money on this? and you've got an army, air force, navy, marine corps overdeployed, under trained in many respects. we're going to spend our time training. it's got to be doing something other than marching. at the end of that -- i've done plenty of marches, i can tell you. at the end of this, the only thing you can do really well is march. and that doesn't do you very well in this environment. >> what i was struck by in the washington post report was that george w. bush used to go to the tank to watch ops, watch operations. some of the most serious conversations where lives are at stake. the idea that he used a briefing in the tank to ask for a parade. what do you think secretary mattis thought at that moment? >> he may have had -- when he left the room, may have had exactly the same response that tillerson did at one point when he was commenting on the intellectual intellectual acuity. >> what was that? >> not repeatable on television. >> a moron. do you think this is a moronic waste -- >> mattis is a marine. he's done plenty of marches and probably swore he wouldn't do them again if he doesn't have to. he's trying to defend a country with 320 million people with lots of threats against it. doing it with scarce resources and scarce time and scarce money and scarce troops. got people down range 15 times in a row, so on. next thing we're going to do is march? probably not scratching his head, but very, very disappointed. >> charlie, i want to read you something that my old colleague general michael hayden tweeted. parades, i used to watch them in bulgaria. this is maybe -- i want to give the president the benefit of the doubt that his desire was to honor the troops, but it's hard to do that when you watch that tape of him with macron where he seems to be motivated by having a bigger an better parade than macron did. >> oh, nicolle, this is the trumpiest thing ever. he wants to show people that he's got a bigger missile than anybody else or a bigger button than anybody else. i hope he gets a uniform for it. but i think aaron blake was right when he said this is the ultimate trump troll because you know what will happen is that he wants this parade, it is going to be about the military, right, and when democrats and critics and people in the media mock it or criticize it, he will wrap himself in the flag and in support for the troops and say, well, again, you people don't support the troops. you don't support the military. it really is kind of -- when you think about it, it is about as -- as trumpian as you could get and it is the ultimate troll. and i just don't think he'll find a way to -- to not go through with it. from his point of view, appealing to his base, i'm the biggest, baddest guy around, it is kind the perfect messaging if you are donald trump and you are marketing to your base. >> alicia, i keep sort of falling in love with the potential of the guard rail. the idea that a secretary mattis will save face instead of back in his office that this is moronic idea, the idea that secretary tillerson will say what nbc news reporting and rex tillerson never denied i fantasize that a michael j. fox will walk in and say work for me, mr. president. i'm a voter. the fantasy is dead. there is nobody around that will get him a bigger bomb or button or twitter feed. they are all lackeys and stooges to a president with -- even in this instance, again, i want to -- i want to believe that maybe he wants to do something nice but it is hard to do so when you see all of the one-upsmanship. >> you have your next edition of 18 acres. and you're right. there is no one who is telling him no and saying we could do things with our veterans like dealing with the suicide -- or housing, there are so many -- issues but this is where trump wants us to exist. we are talking about symbolism. we've spent five minutes talking about it instead of russia sanctions or the budget deal and that is where he's comfortable. so it is hard not to watch it and think we've fallen into his trump because we're now having the conversation that he wants us to have. >> so give us some advice. you are all right. and charlie is right. this is turned -- we'll become his foil. how does -- how do we amplify voices like yours and sort of underscore what you just said, if you want to honor veterans, shorten the waiting list at the v.a. >> do anything other than this. >> what should we do? what is the case against the parade? >> if -- well the case against the parade is that it is capital and personnel and time intensive and we don't have the capability of doing that. and defending the republican at the same time. the people who are closest to him, who have his ear and who are military people, we're talking about kelly. >> why didn't he stop it. >> well it is a fair -- and not a rhetorical question. those are -- that is what i was getting to. those are the people who have to saddle up to him and say we couldn't do it. we're not doing it. >> but how did -- i would imagine they were in the car with him on the way to the pentagon and way didn't they tell him, you're not going to bring you are your crazy parade idea, are you, sir. >> but there is an argument that the president says the last thing he was told and if you weren't the last guy to say don't say that, then the guy after you said do say that, he's going to say it. seriously, the adults have to get control of the play room. >> you still have faith that there are some. we've got some lake breaking news. we have to sneak in one more break but we'll bring it to you and it is about russia and it is next. thank you so much. thank you! so we're a go? yes! we got a yes! what does that mean for purchasing? purchase. let's do this. got it. book the flights! hai! si! si! ya! ya! ya! what does that mean for us? we can get stuff. what's it mean for shipping? ship the goods. you're a go! you got the green light. that means go! oh, yeah. start saying yes to your company's best ideas. we're gonna hit our launch date! (scream) thank you! goodbye! we help all types of businesses with money, tools and know-how to get business done. american express open. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient to get business done. originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember. breaking news just this hour. the top cyber security official, the department of homeland security telling nbc news exclusively that russians successfully penetrated the voter rolls of several u.s. states prior to the 2016 election. ken is back with us. what else with did he learn. >> what is new here by cynthia mcfadden that the department of homeland security is acknowledging that in a small number of circumstances that the russians actually got in to these voting or election systems. they had previously said 21 states were hacked but not -- they wouldn't say how often it was successful. now they are saying it was successful in a small number of occasions. to be sure, there is no evidence that any votes were changed or voter registration rolls were changed. but the story describes how really some people including jeh johnson, the former secretary believed that not very much has been done to harden the voting systems in preparation for the next attack. there is a lot of discord between the states and federal government. states believe it is a state issue and they don't want the feds meddling in their business and there is a question about whether we've learned very much from the 2016 experience and whether these states have gotten their act together and shored up their systems. >> so nick, what we know now, if you want to do a low-tech version of the story, the burglars burglars -- were inside of the house and it is not if they -- not clear if they took anything but they know how to jimmy the lock. >> it is to see what they could do and what access they could get and if they could get to the voter daisa base and the scenario is they go in later and change things. small things you wouldn't notice. small things hard to notice. but when a person goes into vote they are in the wrong precinct or address and multiply that and you are changing the result and chaos that sheds the result into some turmoil. >> we will have much more on this story again -- the great reporting from our colleague cynthia mcfadden and it broke during our hour. thanks to the panel. that does it for the hour. i'm nicolle wallace, "mtp daily" starts right now with a breaking news news story. >> don't we love the 4:00 and 5:00 hour. >> you used to get them all. i rage tweet but now we get a few crumbs. >> the sweet spot is 4:30. because we want you to have half of it. >> thank you. >> if it is wednesday, nancy pelosi is making history. >> tonight the pelosi factor. >> the speaker, i thank you for your courtesy, i'm not finished yet. >> will nancy pelosi filibuster strengthen her hand with democrats and improve republican plans to make her their mid term foil. plus -- rex tillerson dire warning about russian meddling. >> it is difficult to preempt t it. >> and finally, marching