Some point. On capitol hill, there is talk of some republicans about maybe, maybe doing something on gun violence and specifically on the socalled bump stocks which let semiautomatics fire faers, but it is not clear if this talk is going to turn into action with new are reaction just this morning from the House Speaker paul ryan who wraps up the interview with hugh hewitt a few moments ago, and the highlights are first on this show. And President Trump this morning real mad about fake news and spoiler, it is not fake, but the fallout today is with Rex Tillerson. We will have the latest from las vegas and here in d. C. This morning, but lets start out west in nevada with Stephanie Gosk, and good morning to you, and lets start with the new details of police about how this unfolded and the timing of it. And sorry, hallie, i am having a little bit of difficulty with communications here, but the time line, and astonishing astonishingly, we are talking about the rounds and the volleys that went around, but 10 minutes had to feel like an eternity, and this is the time line as we know it now. At 10 09 Stephen Paddock first fired shots and 10 12 the first an offic an officers arrive on the 31st floor of the mandalay bay and then at 10 15, the final shots are fired by paddock, and then at 10 17, first officers arrive on 32nd floor of mandalay bay. And 10 18, paddock fires 200 plus rounds at Hotel Security guard in hallway, and striking him in the leg, and the guard gives Police Location of the shooter. Thank you, Stephanie Gosk for breaking down the time line in las vegas. There are still so many questions on this, and first and foremost, why did the shooter open up firing on the Country Music festival in the first place . We spoke to acting fbi director andrew mccabe. We look for actual ind icatos of affiliation, motive and intent, and so far, we are not there and we dont have those kind of ind icators. I am joined by justice correspondent pete williams, and start with a question from Clark County Sheriff joe lombardo that paddock had to have some help, and we dont have any evidence yet that bax it up, but what do you hear . I think that the sheriffs statement is supposition, because he said that it is troublesome that he moved the amount of gear that he did into the hotel, and the weapons and the cameras, and everything and he said it is troublesome for the amount of the stuff as he put it, meaning the additional weapon, the electronic device, and the phones that he had in the other house, and he is just saying that it does not seem like he was able to do it all by himself, but they have not found any indication that anybody was helping him. What they want to know is was somebody helping him . It is a question they have, and another one of these many questions that they have about how this happened, why . Was anybody else involved that they have to run down . As far as i know, there is no direct thaefd somebody else did help him. It seems that he bought all of the guns himself, and i am told that they have traced all but one of them, and the indication is that he bought them all legally. Pete, i want to ask you about the weapons stockpiled by Stephen Paddock and maybe we are getting new details on those, and you have said that they have traced all but one at this point, and what more do we know . Well, it is a point that the sheriff made last night, and something noted here for past 24 hours or so, and he started to buy weapons 35 years ago and he has bought guns many places where he lived and lived for a time in texas and california and nevada and then he went across t the border several time, and went to the gun stores in utah. So he has bought the guns in four states over 35 years, but most of the guns that he had, and most of the rifles that he had in the room, 3 4 of the guns that he owned, and well, coming back to the bump fire thing in a moment, but most of the ones that he had, he bought in just the last year. So the question is, what was going nonhis life that a year ago caused him to suddenly buy at lot more guns. Now, you can think of a lot of explanations for it, and maybe he started to have a lot more cash around the house, and he wanted to have more guns to protect that, and i think that is an open question, but thats a real focus of the investigation now. Can the girlfriend marilu danley, and can she answer that question as to what happened a year ago or what other things that the investigators are finding out . We know the one in los angeles meeting and undoubtedly they will want to ask her more questions. She is cooperative, but she has not shed a lot of light on him, and she has been living with him for four years as his girlfriend, but she has not provided any direct evidence about this shooting. She claims that she didnt know that he was planning anything like this, and she said that she was looking forward to many happy years ahead with him. Pete williams in the washington bureau. Thank you, pete. Im joined by political analyst hugh hewitt host of the political show on sunday mornings, and also, our White House Reporter jill colvin and hugh, i have to start with you and the interview with paul ryan and you asked him about the conversation of gun rights an gun control on capitol hill, and i want to play a look at your first look at the interview with the speaker. John cornyn said that he wanted to have hearings on bump stocks. Yeah, look, i didnt know what they were until this week and im an avid sportsman and so we are quick ly coming up to speed with this. So to turn a semi au automatic fully automatic is something we have to look into. And no hemming or hawing, but b bump stocks are going to be illegal in the United States within the month or the end of the year depending on the procedure votes, but the speaker was close to join two in the senate and others who said that he didnt know they existed and they rare terrible. And i spoke with one democrat who seemed more skeptical than you and it seems that the democrats who are wanting this and saying, hey, maybe there is a crack in the armor here. And nobody knew what a bump stock was. And not even the speaker. And he is a hunter, and i spoke to him, and later on the interview i said, why not give a vote on the australian option of the buyback and he said, no, a show both, and so maybe a specific piece of legislation, but not much. We asked the nra about bump stock, and it has been radio silence so far, and how do you believe it plays into this, because it is a big lobby when it comes to this . They should not get behind Public Opinion on this, because it is an automatic weapon enhancer or creator, and he said that automatic weapons have been illegal for decades and no way they should be on the side of bump stocks. Do you agree with hugh, this is something that you think could happen by the end of the n next month or the end of the year . Not that i disagree with hugh, but it is very rare that they they could come out with something narrowly tailored they could act on is something that we have not seen in the immediate aftermath of a shooting, and so it signals a debate on this, and i dont know if i would be as aggressive with this time line, because this congress has so many things to work on and i dont see them expediting this on the agenda. But given that this nfs shooting happened in a week, and in a month, is this conversation going to be at the forefront in a month . Well, we dont want to make it political or talk about it, and this is the time, and this is different talk that we are hearing, and this is a president despite the fact that he had significant support from the nra and talked about how much he loves them and supported them, and this is a president who in 2000 said he supported a ban on semi semiautomatics, so this is a chance for opportunity. And what you think that in four hours, we will be in the briefing room, and Sarah Huckabee is going to be asked about this new bill that might be reintroduced and what might we hear . This is what we have been hearing from sarah is that this is a conversation that he does not want to have right now. And the discussion will happen in a while, and not right now, but we will see if she changes the tune, but i would not expect it. Hugh . I think that she will respond emotively, and it is the most traumatic event since sandy hook and certainly 9 11 and people are going ton cyst on the conversation happening, and given that the republicans agree on the bump stock, and so you have john cornyn who is a hunter like paul ryan, and thi ti thint the the speaker and the president will take note of it. And the president has had four major crises in a month, and three hurricanes and the mass killing. And so i dont think that you will be hear Sarah Huckabee talking about it today. I think the fact that the whip has come out, and the speaker, they wont come out, and they are looking to get the cue not only from the leadership, but the rank and file. We have seen the rank and file in both chambers come out. And the congress mman said tt he would support a full ban. That is right, the former chairman of the committee, and if the white house needs that cover, they have it, but the question is whether Sarah Huckabee sanders feels comfortable getting ahead of this thing now. And hugh, final thoughts of you from the interview that you just finished with paul ryan in the office there. B bump stock, and the president s empathy, what else stands out here . Well, the speaker is open to the interview, because of the tax bill they have out, and we have not been talking a lot about aaron rodgers, and the schapter corporation, and i am a schapter corporation, and so it is funny. And so, now the tax bill moves forward on a railroad that the speaker and leader mcconnell are not going to be diverted from. I do believe that is on the president s desk by the end of the year unless bob corker and rand paul say no. And thank you for racing over here from the capitol to give us that exclusive first look and we will watch for that on your show this saturday morning. I want to have tim and jill hang out for a little while because we want to talk about the fallout on the nbc news report of the relationship between President Trump and secretary of state Rex Tillerson and how this is impacting the world, iran, north korea, and we will talk about that after the break. Encs when you have the right Financial Advisor, life can be brilliant. Ameriprise this morning inthere is pley of new damage control after the fallout from the state department but in the middle of it maybe you missed a small but important piece of news from the secretary of state. This is context. Next week the president has to make a critical decision on the iran deal the 2015 deal that curbed irans development of nuclear weapon, and this is when all signs are pointing that iran is not complying with the deal. There are some with the administration who agree with the president who believe the iran deal is a bad deal, but others who believe that the u. S. Should stick wit. So that is going to bring us back to Rex Tillerson who has been critical of the deal. And this is how he described his future at the state department after that impromptu press conference. Do you believe that secretary mattis should stay the head of the we will give the president a couple of options of how to advance the important policy to iran. And joining us now is christopher hill, former u. S. Ambassador the iraq and former secretary of state for east asia and Pacific Affairs and msnbc diplomacy ambassador, and thank you for joining the program again. And you heard Rex Tillerson say they will present a couple of options, and based on your experience, where are the options . Well, you present two option, and one is a kind of a good option, and the other is a dumb option so that the first wone hs a choice. So you have a watchdog organization, the ieae has been satisfied with how iran has behaved. You have to understand that this is a deal that is narrowly construct and only dealing with the nuclear issue, and so a number of the complaints about iran are appropriate, but nothing to do with the nuclear issue. So i am hoping that he is wanting to engage iran on syria and others, but at a minimum, i cannot believe they are thinking that we dont have enough to do and lets create a huge crisis with other countries over this deal, because at the end of the day, and americans need to understand this a big deal, because it is not u. S. iran deal, but it is with u. S. , france, britain and germany, et cetera. But am bbassador, you may no like it, but it is our reporting that the president has been at the time of the United NationsGeneral Assembly leaning towards desertfying the deal, and if that happens, there is a window to where the presumably international lies could put the pressure on the president not to do that and the folks that you are talking about give n that i is an International Deal and if that happens, how does it play out from the lawmakers perspectives . Well, the decertification would open up a whole new crises as if we dont have enough of those, and so what we would see is certification with some mechanism or approach dealing with irans misbehavior in the arab middle east. And if he goes with the desertification, he will make a lot of people happen in the congress, but a lot of people wondering what in the world he is doing that for. And general mattis testimony that we should certify or the implication that we should certify is important, and people should listen carefully to mattis on that. And we have some sound from secretary mattis here. Lets play it. The agreement right now, what i testified to last week is that iran is not in materiel breach of the agreement, and the agreement the date has delayed the development of a Nuclear Capability by iran. It is in our National Security interest at the time to remain in the jcpoa . That is a yes or no question. Yes, senator, i do. Secretary mattis there referencing what you are talking about, and in the a. P. , talking about this certification as well, and joe colvin is reporting that several officials familiar with the internal discussions say that the periodic 90day deadlines to recertify are such a source of embarrassment for President Trump that the aides are trying to find a way for him to stop signing off on the accord, and so can both of these things happen simultaneously . Sorry, is that directed to me . Sorry, ambassador. Can you get rid of the deadlines and keep the integrity of the deal . Yes, clearly, that stroi find a mechanism to not have the president to do it, but at the end of the day, i am not sure that the intent of the congress is to see certification or decertification, but really, mattis and he clearly thought about it, and clearly thinks that there should be certification. I dont believe that there is anybody who is looking at what is going on in the world who would seriously say to the president , hey, we have to open up a crisis. So the issue is how to get him out of the 90day embarrassms, and there is a method or the me means to do it, but it is not the prime issue. The prime issue is what can we do in terms of working with iran in some of the behavior they are engaged in that is serious concern for us. Jill . The idea here is to come up with some middle ground, and the president does not want to have to continue to sign these recertifications, because he does not believe that iran is in compliance and looking for a second way out of this, and what is under discussion right now, and what we are expecting them to announce as soon as next week is that the president is going to decide not the secertify ando to congress and ask them to not reimpose any of the sanctions that the iran deal took off, and so, basically kind of have it both ways, you are not going to say they are in noncompliance, but we wont tear up the whole iran deal. And this is important, am s ambassador, because we talk about the relationship of Rex Tillerson and the president , and we talked about the impromptu News Conference sparked by reporting of tensions with Rex Tillerson, but the policy stuff is critical here. Because you have senator corker, the head of the Foreign Relations committee, and the guy that oversees and has the jurisdiction with the state department here, and he said to reporters that secretary mattis and secretary tillerson and chief of staff are keeping this Ed Administration out of chaos. He is crediting the leadership from keeping the country from the chaos around the world. They support the president , and they serve the president. Tim . I dont know if we can overstate how extraordinary that statement is for corker and he is feeling liberated to make that now that he is not running for office. And he said it twice. And he is a deliberate guy, and cork ser a pragmatic guy and he would not just say that. And going back to jills point a minute ago for a guy that likes to have it both ways and for a guy who says he is not a politician, he is being very political here. And when head to certify the last time, there was an outcry from the base. And if you are concerned about breaking a promise to the base, you dont want to have to break the promise every 90 days. Ambassador, final thoughts he here. What does secretary tillerson do here . I think that he has a serious problem, and this is not what he called the president a couple of months ago, but he has a serious problem, and he has to go out there to the world and people have to be convinced that he is representing the president , and he can get back to washington and get stuff done. He has completely failed to develop enough ally, and i think that he needs to do a much better job of shoring up his own base such as it is, and be a in stronger position, because i frankly think that he is going to be having trouble continui