busy hour to a close for me. allie velshi will be back in the chair at 3:00 eastern. "deadline white house" with nicolle wallace starts right now. >> hi, everyone. it's 4:00 in new york. it's a now familiar pattern, a flurry of indictments in the mueller probe, a weekend of unhinged tweets from the president that the staff ignores. thrown in the water at fox news to rile up the base. then come monday morning with don sewpursuit and plays presid again. telling the nation what he would have done if he had been in parkland, florida on the day of the tragic shooting. >> i got to watch some deputy sheriffs performing this weekend. they weren't exactly medal of honor winners, all right. the way they performed was frankly disgusting. they were listening to what was going on. the one in particular, he was early. then you had three others that

probably a similar deal, little bit later, but a similar kind of thing. you know, i really believe -- you don't know until you're tested, but i really believe i'd run in even if i didn't have a weapon, and i think most of the people in this room would have done that, too. because i know most of you. but the way they performed was, was really a disgrace. >> they're called medal of honor recipients. a close campaign advisor, rick gates, a man who was in the president's inner circle until october 2017 when he and paul manafort were indicted, is rearing its head in many ways, including more frequent swipes at attorney general jeff sessions. >> a lot of bad things happened on the other side, not on this side, but on the other side. and somebody should look into it, because what they did is really fraudulent and somebody should be looking into that and by somebody, i'm talking about

you know who. >> i have a feeling i know who it is, mr. president. >> even trump's aides acknowledge there is a sensz of unease hanging over the west wing. peter baker writing in "the new york times" this weekend, quote, with each passing day robert mueller seems to add another brick to the cases building, one more indictment, one more interview, one more guilty plea. so far 19 individuals have been charged with crimes, including the president's former campaign manager and 13 russians. five have pleaded guilty, including the president's former national security advisor. the momentum of the mueller probe on top of unanswered questions about who has access to the most sensitive information, including the presidential daily briefs, the single most sensitive piece of intelligence shared inside the west wing has this white house on its heels for its third straight week. ivanka trump in an interview with nbc's peter alexander, promised she and her husband will be treated just like

everybody else when it comes to clearances. >> given the fact it's been reported in november that both you and your husband still had interim security clearance, i guess the simple question, is it appropriate for family members to have exceptions granted to them when they serve in that regard? >> we will be treated like everyone else will be treated. we've been fully cooperative and transparent. chief of staff john kelly has made his thoughts and intentions very clear on the fact that he wants to streamline and modernize this process. and i think that's a good thing. i think that's a very positive thing for the people in the white house and beyond. >> let's get to all this with our reporters and guests. with us from "the new york times" chief white house correspondent peter baker. from the washington post white house reporter ashley parker. and joyce advance, law professor at the university of alabama. peter baker, your piece landed like a thud this weekend in the west wing, i'm told.

talk about how they are processing what is to many of them i'm sure the grim reality that the mueller probe is contrary to the pledges made by ty cobb and john dowd, far from over? >> yeah, no, it doesn't look like it's over any time soon. and i think in the white house they take some solace from the fact that so far none of these indictments and none of these guilty pleas have specifically pointed a finger at the president or the campaign in and of itself. but they have to wonder where it's leading to. what is bob mueller building a case toward? and it looks like he's moving up the chain. well, the chain only goes so far, where it ultimately ends up nobody knows. in the process of course many who have been around the president now are facing enormous trouble. legal trouble, lawyer bills and so on. that doesn't sit well obviously with the president or his people as well. so, while they would tell you they're feeling calm because there is no implication of any wrongdoing so far, at least by the president, this has to worry

them about where it might end up. >> and it's amazing to see that the president's measure is his own personal criminal legal liability. no actual knowledgement that the person who chaired his campaign took him to the republican convention has been indicted, i can't even keep track. i think on close to two dozen counts. his deputy who was in and around donald trump's inner circle until he was indicted last october, rick gates, he was part of the presidential transition. he was on the campaign. he was in and around this white house staff until he was indicted. but the president -- i mean, i read your piece over the weekend. i read it again today. everything that his friend -- his friend chris ruddy, the good news for the white house 18 months since the fbi began there is no evidence of russian collusion. bad news is the special counsel has the scorched earth prosecution aimed at crushing the president's associates. that's not true. it's aimed at prosecuting the president's associates who

commit crimes. they crushed themselves. i don't think the president is worried about the investigation himself but it clearly bothers him people are prosecuted because they will -- they're being prosecuted for lying to the prosecutors. they're being prosecuted for running money laundering schemes. rick gates lied three weeks ago. what is the degree of delusion? >> it is interesting. you're right that the president's frame of reference is whether or not anybody made an allegation against him, particularly or his campaign specifically that he's running. but you're right, look, other presidents have had people around them convicted or indicted on pretty serious charges that weren't directly implicating the president yet it was a problem. burt lance for jimmy carter. ed middle east feese. those in senior positions were charged with things that didn't have anything directly to do with their duty. it was still considered to be a big scandal. so, you're right, it is an

extraordinary thing when we say the president's security advisor, campaign chairman, deputy campaign chairman are charged with big crimes and it's okay because they weren't directly implicating the president of the united states. >> must be a great accomplice to work. ashley parker, let's watch something that happened in a briefing a few moments ago with sarah huckabee sanders and our own hallie jackson. >> given a guilty plea from rick gates on friday, i'm wondering what it says in your view about the president's judgment three people linked to his campaign now turned out to be criminal. >> look, those are issues that took place long before they were involved with the president and anything beyond that, because those are active investigations, i'm not going to go any further than that. >> are you concerned about his campaign? >> but those actions that are under review and under investigation took place prior to him being part of the president's campaign. >> so, jim is here. we're going to bring him in in a second. if he was a criminal long before he joined the campaign, why the hell was he on the campaign in

the first place? did they have not have access to google? rick gates pleaded guilty to a crime he committed three weeks ago. i don't even know what -- does she have notes in front of her? why does she say the things she says? this blows my mind. >> right. well, her statement had, as you point out, a number of problems. one of those is that rick gates, for instance, he was not just a part of the campaign. he was a quintessential survivor. so he was part of the campaign. he was a part of the transition. he was a liaison to the rnc. and then through relationship he had with tom bank, a close friend of the president, he was still in the mix in dealing with the white house up until right until he was indicted. so, it's not just someone who was, you know, a small part of the campaign who did some miss deeds, alleged misdeed. the second thing which is

interesting, they basically sort of -- one argument is at the very least hallie's question got out, the president is guilty if nothing else, horrible egregious judgment. the campaign and his team is oftentimes very willing to admit they proudly call themselves the island of miss fit toys. their argument against collusion is we were too stupid to collude. so are we guilty of bad judgment? yeah, sure. >> they'll take that at this point. ashley, i want to ask you one more question about this pattern. i heard last week that some of the most senior advisors in that west wing were very unnerved by the tone and tenor of the president's tweets last weekend when he went over the -- after the fbi saying that russian collusion is the reason they missed the tip in the parkland shooting. i didn't hear anyone confronted him, but i wonder if you heard any similar discomfort with what is clearly become something your paper has written about, the releasing of pressure for this

president when he rages at twitter in his jambies or whatever he's wearing. he called in to judge -- what's her name? jeannine parine on fox. what does the white house say about weekend trump where he's unleashed on twitter and his favorite fox shows and that he comes back on monday morning and tries to put on the suit and act like the leader of the free world? >> his aides are clearly uncomfortable with his undisciplined use of twitter. they simply are. they don't know when the tweets are coming, they don't know what it's going to say, they know it's going to fall on them to clean it up. they're going to have to go to the podium, they're going to have to talk to the media or almost sometimes make policy or explain away things that is not in any way official white house policy. that being said, i will note the aides i talked to, they said early on in the administration when they would see a tweet their heart would start racing and they would be utterly

panicked. now they just sort of know, this is part of being a member of this administration, not dissimilar from badging in every day. so, they don't love it, they're uncomfortable with it but it's a daily reality they're learning to deal with. >> joyce, one of the things i understand could be a new reality for this white house is they have lulled themselves into a sense of complacency that mueller was clearly looking at obstruction and had let collusion go. i understand that the 13 indictments and rumors about what might be next has the white house staff that participated in the campaign, only a few of them left, on edge. and i want to read you something else from peter's great, great piece because it's back on the obstruction point. peter reports that, to the extent mueller is exploring whether trump obstructed justice by firing comey, the president's defenders contend that under the constitution he has the power to dismiss executive branch officials and dictate their work. they also point to testimony by comey and others who said the investigation was not impeded. therefore they argue the original order a pointing

mueller was itself invalid and should be revoked. the comey defense has gone from a president can't obstruct justice so he didn't to comey did a stinky job with hillary clinton to, i was going to fire him anyway, lester holt, because of the way the russia investigation was going, too. the constitution says we can do it. i mean, does offering four explanations for a single act raise any suspicions among prosecutors? >> this administration has had a remarkable tough one coding that seems to permit them to evolve their arguments over time. and when one argument is disproven by the facts, they seem to just very fastly shift on to the next one. this is sort of the defendant who -- and i'll just say the analogy of the defendant who in talking to prosecutors starts out by saying, i wasn't there, and then says, well, i was there but i wasn't involved in the crime, and then says, well, i was involved in the crime, but i didn't mean it. and we all know what prosecutors do with that. that's a defendant who has to plead guilty because he's at a

point where the evidence against him is so overwhelming that if he goes to trial he's going to get hammered. this administration is really starting to look like that on a lot of fronts. this investigation didn't end at thanksgiving, it didn't end in december. we still have a president who, despite john dowd's protestation that he's fully cooperative, hasn't agreed for a sit-down with the prosecution team. and how they've been able to maintain this veneer of cooperation and lack of culpability is really a mystery. >> joyce, let me ask you the question of security clearances. obviously the country has been jolted by another horrific tragedy in a school, parkland, florida. but the white house still has not answered for how an accused domestic abuser had access to the most sensitive information float floating around the white house. today i put out queries to individuals who could not answer whether kushner read the pdb for

the president. we know from reporting he doesn't read. but we also know jared does. what sort of oversight function is available to congress to try to understand the handling of sensitive classified information inside donald trump's west wing? >> you know, congress absolutely has an oversight function here. there's been a little bit of a pulse lately, but we've not seen any full-on effort to take this into consideration. but you, like i know, i had a security clearance for 25-plus years, and it's not a check the box kind of thing. it's important. it has real significance for the work that people in government do. we can't have people who are compromised and vulnerable to blackmail. we can't have people who have poor judgment making these difficult, sensitive positions. and if the white house shows a continued tolerance for people who can't pass a background clearance using this interim clearance device for a longer term length than it's meant to be used for, then congress

really does need to step up and look into this. >> and, ashley parker, it makes a mockery of all of the ordinary staffers who have to reveal everything they've ever done and be held to the standard of not presenting a blackmail list. i want to read something your paper reported. top justice department official alerted white house two weeks ago to ongoing issues in kushner's security clearance. two people said the deputy attorney general told don mcgahn, white house counsel, the justice department had obtained important new information suggesting it could be an obstacle to kushner's clearance process. one other said rosenstein did not discuss the nature of the ongoing investigation. are questions about jared kushner's role that may be of interest to bob mueller holding up in making his security clearance a no go? >> so, the truth is we simply don't know the answer to that question. i can tell you as much as journalists would love to know

the specifics is also a parlor game within the west wing. there's a number of people there who are curious about just what the hold up is. and there is a sense that there may be some sort of, as you remember, the deadline for everyone, if you didn't get this clearance was friday. well, that has come and gone and jared is still in the white house. so, there is some sense there may be some sort of carve out for him maybe giving him just a little more of a grace period. but again, we don't know what, if anything, his security clearance has to do with the mueller probe or separate issues that have raised flags in the mueller probe and might have also raised flags in that process. we just have no idea. >> peter baker, politico reporting that kelly and kushner took a pass on punt clearance. he is unlikely to resign if trump ultimately decides to do so according to a person familiar with his thinking. i've heard he may have a brother in arms, another senior staffer, that feels the same way.

but how decapitated is their authority inside the west wing, i didn't grant a waiver, but i didn't leave over it? what is this fight about? and if nobody stands their ground, how does anything change? how does the white house system apply to everyone but the president's daughter and son-in-law? >> well, this underscores why many presidents try to avoid having members of the family on their staff. once you do that, you create a very different circumstance than any other staffer. any other staffer would probably be shown the door just a couple weeks ago the white house put out -- forced out a relatively middle rung aide because he smoked some pot a few years back. well, that's, you know, a pretty minor thing compared to a lot of issues being raised these days. so, you know -- >> compared to money laundering and lying to federal investigators? >> well, to the things that have been alleged or suspected of being investigated. >> i'm saying the things people

have been charged with in the mueller probe include lying to federal investigators and money laundering, right? >> absolutely, absolutely. those are obviously big things. they don't get to that level to trip up security clearance. it's a pretty low bar. you know this. i mean, a lot of -- >> i barely made it. >> well, a lot of relatively minor things. and we've got a situation here where jared kushner is an international businessman, contacts with people around the world, lots of business dealings over the last 10, 12, 15 years. a lot of entanglements. these are complicated things. you're the chief of staff and you're the one to tell the president's son-in-law, sorry, no clearance for you, you can't do your job. that is a very difficult position john kelly has been put in. you heard ivanka. you interviewed ivanka. she said we're being treated like everyone else. people in the white house want to know if that is in fact the case. they're not so sure. >> peter baker, let me put the last question to you and ashley parker. have you had any indication in your reporting as to whether or not the pdb is still available

as of this hour, monday at 4:18 p.m., to jared kushner? peter first. >> that is an excellent question. excellent question. i don't know the answer. you would want to know that answer because that's something that most sensitive anybody gets in the white house. you have a son-in-law here who is senior advisor in charge of middle east peace. people say well, you can do the job without security clearance. i don't see how you negotiate middle east peace without having the fullest intelligence on what the arabs and israelis and palestinians are thinking, what they're doing. this is a very critical thing for somebody in that position. >> ashley parker, same question to you, last word. >> sure. the short answer is i don't know about today or 4:15 p.m. specifically. i can tell you before it was certainly something he was getting and was very interested in getting. and my understanding was that he was consuming it in a way that sometimes even his father-in-law was not. but i can't speak to today. >> all right. we'll keep asking. we'll keep bugging you guys. joyce, let me give you the last

word. should kushner receive a pdb? >> no one who doesn't have high level security clearance should have access to that information gs investment. what we don't know is whether his failure to get this clearance triggered this downstream of people who also couldn't get clearances. that is an unknown, but it's dangerous in any government office, particularly in the white house. >> peter baker, ashley parker and joyce vance, thank you so much for starting us off. we're grateful. whether we come back, the memo donald trump and devin nunes never wanted you to see. we'll explain it to you and how it directly contradicts the gop smears of the fbi. also ahead, the republican party is officially dead. the convention meant to celebrate c celebrate conservatism attacked his own, he once was a party only because he was black. he'll join us with reaction. if you're 65 or older, you may be at increased risk for pneumococcal pneumonia that can take you out of the game for weeks, even if you're healthy.

pneumococcal pneumonia is a potentially serious bacterial lung disease that in severe cases can lead to hospitalization. it may hit quickly, without warning, causing you to miss out on the things you enjoy most. prevnar 13® is not a treatment for pneumococcal pneumonia... it's a vaccine you can get to help protect against it. prevnar 13® is approved for adults to help prevent infections from 13 strains of the bacteria that cause pneumococcal pneumonia. you should not receive prevnar 13® if you have had a severe allergic reaction to the vaccine or its ingredients. if you have a weakened immune system, you may have a lower response to the vaccine. the most common side effects were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site, limited arm movement, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, joint pain, less appetite, vomiting, fever, chills, and rash. help protect yourself against pneumococcal pneumonia. ask your doctor or pharmacist about prevnar 13®.

at planters, we put fresh roawhich has its drawbacks.an, guys, know anything about this missing inventory? wasn't me! the cheeks don't lie, chet... irresistibly planters.

it's the memo that donald trump and the republicans on the house intel committee didn't want you to see. but the justice department and fbi did want the record clarified and that clarification and vindication came in the form of the release this weekend of the democratic memo. among the revelations, it knocks down the gop's smear against the fbi for using the dossier without telling a judge who funded it. it also reveals that four republican judges authorized surveillance of one-time trump campaign advisor carter page. let's bring in our panel with us at the table. jim mussina, former white house chief of staff for president obama, a man who filled out and reviewed a whole lot of background checks in his career.

also campaign manager for president obama in 2012. charlie sykes, conservative commentator and msnbc contributor. donnie deutsche and sirius xm radio karen hunter. let me start with you. i love this topic. >> first, does anyone believe donald trump would actually run into a building with children being shot? you know, that was the most stunning thing that came out of this today. five deferments and you actually would go in? without a weapon, he said. every day is becoming increasingly more difficult to keep my sanity as each ridiculous thing happens and it's sort of making us numb, which is the fear that i have, that the temperature gets turned up so high that what's our normal, you know? this is now our new normal where we accept these things, we laugh it off and move on to the next ridiculous statement as our country country erodes.

>> no one in the special prosecutor's office is laughing. bob mueller is working away, grinding away, proving anyone on television who said the obstruction case was more fruitful at this point than the collusion case, proving them to not know what they were talking about. what do you think about the president clearly being triggered by a quick read of his twitter feed this weekend? the democrat memo response on government surveillance abuse is a total political and legal bust. no, that was the nunes memo. it just confirms all the terrible things that were done, so illegal. basically calling his own fbi illegal. >> i went on captain courageous for the foot bunions. he's afraid of his own food. >> he's afraid of sharks. >> he's afraid of stairs. really brave fellow, that gentleman. the memos don't matter. what matters is bob mueller. what matters is you and i have talked about this a lot, 20 some odd years ago trump ran out of

money and he went to the russians. there's 34 examples of entanglements. the top three, certainly top two guys, nsa advisor and manafort have already been indicted and two or three of them have pled guilty already. there are two other fellows waiting. don trump, jr. and jared kushner. and whatever we know so far is so little of what's coming. and it's going up the ladder and it's going to stop with trump. and he knows it and mueller knows it. and if you have any instincts about the world, about business, about prosecutors, you know. it doesn't matter what he says at this point. it doesn't matter the dueling memos. it's where it's ending up. >> i can't wait to see supreme court justice janine pir owe. >> jeannine parine. >> judge judy.

>> and the great news is apparently the president's bone spurs aren't hurting him any more so he's going to -- i agree with all of this. i think it's the sense we were just trolled by devin nunes' memo. it had nothing to do with anything. as you watch robert mueller walk through this investigation, we don't know what he's got except that it is systematic. there are no leaks on this. it is going higher and higher. so, devin nunes comes out with his jubilant little memo that says let's look at why they were having surveillance on carter page. carter page is going to turnout to be a small footnote in this whole investigation, you know. so, a lot of this is, in fact, a distraction to the big show which is unfolding day by day, week by week. >> let me push back a little bit on the idea that the memo doesn't matter because it matters a lot to the director of the fbi. and it matters a lot to the justice department. the trump appointees and the

career officials, it mattered so much that they got in a car and they went up to see paul ryan. and he begged him not to release the nunes memo. and they begged the chairman of the committee to let the trump appointed fbi director and the trump appointed deputy attorney general just brief the republicans and the democrats about what a false picture the republican memo painted. i guess the importance of not letting that slip, of not being numb to the democratic memo, it sets the whole record straight. i think we have a graphic from "the new york times," shirley savage did a great piece over the weekend that said, unlike the smear in the nunes memo, the fbi only used a very small part of the steele dossier and they made perfectly clear to the four republican judges that had been funded by a democratic campaign, by lawyers associated with hillary clinton. so, the democratic memo shouldn't be ignored because it's going to be superseded at some point by bob mueller. trump is still doing irreparable

harm to his own appointees at the nation's top law enforcement agency. >> and to himself, right? for the first 240 years of this republic there's been a real cardinal rule. do not get in a fight with law enforcement agencies that have subpoena power. and instead, trump seems to think it's his weekend hobby. every sunday he tweets out some mean thing about the fbi. he's going down a road he is not going to be able to walk back. >> will it end in a conviction? >> we'll see here. let me make one other point about the pdb. the president's daily brief is the most important thing in the white house. a staff would run in, i need to be in the pdb, few people got it. when i was white house deputy chief of staff, two people crashed an indian state dinner. why is there not an investigation right now about who is on that list, do they have security clearance, who is looking at these documents every day? if this were barack obama, they would be burning down the front

gates. >> anybody else. i mean, when there were questions -- dick carr was the person who first started speaking out about how he'd warned condi rice and george bush about the attack. it was his insistence the public needed to know, the intelligence community had indeed warned. so, these documents are held very tightly. they have the graveest consequences. if someone seeing them could be potentially blackmailed, where is paul ryan? where is trey gowdy? this is not a right/left thing. this is not a trump stooge, pick out the pink star bursts because he likes them. this is a scandal the likes of which i don't recall in the -- >> the vulnerabilities are obvious. given the international ties of the conflict of interest, the

investigations that are ongoing, what are you mostly concerned about? the information will be misused. that the person who is getting the information might be subject to blackmail, or inappropriate pressure. all of which is probable. when i said the nunes memo was trolling, i wasn't saying -- >> i agree with you. >> because, in fact, it is this ongoing attack on the -- and the attempt to dee legitimatize all these things. again, this issue, especially given what a big issue the whole question of national security and concern for secrets was during the campaign. this is highly ironic. again, this is what happens when you have an administration based on this sort of -- the island of the misfit toy/nepotism. >> by the way, as we're talking about it this past weekend, we have been paying millions -- i don't know how many taxpayer dollars for don trump, jr., to be in india. >> selling condos.

>> the absurdity of this -- where is john kelly? this is his job. at the end of the day how does he answer these questions at this point is almost incomprehensible. >> was we aring that the conversation, the american people could care less. it is important, but not resonating with voters so it could matter at the level it needs to matter so we can have the conversations all day long. the punditry could be correct. >> i'm not sure i agree with that. the bump from the taxes is gone. >> the approval is at an all-time low. >> we'll put that up. cnn today had him at 35%, his lowest approval rating on record. >> they still support him and this is all a hoax and a scam. >> i'll go one better than you and it scares me. >> last word. >> if he is not taken out of office -- voted out of office by 2020, he will win again in a land slide because people vote with their pocketbooks and that's what's scary to me. >> all right. when we come back, it's no secret that the gop is in a

violent throes of a civil war. this weekend's attack on the highly regarded and only african-american man to ever lead the republican national committee, reached a new low. we'll speak to the former rnc chairman, my friend michael steele. ...it starts a chain reaction... ...that's heard throughout the connected business world. at&t network security helps protect business, from the largest financial markets to the smallest transactions, by sensing cyber-attacks in near real time and automatically deploying countermeasures. keeping the world of business connected and protected. that's the power of and.

we had just elected the first african-american president and that was a big deal. and a little bit of cynicism, what do we do? this is a terrible thing. we elected mike steel to be rnc because he's a black guy and that was the wrong thing to do. >> that was cpac communications director ian walters a minute after donald trump's wild address. michael steel invited cpac chairman who is a friend of ours, on his radio show the next day to try to clear the air. >> you have been rather critical of some of the more conservative aspects of the trump phenomenon

and this trump agenda. >> i think what ian was getting to the heart of that was there are people who are critics of some of the things you did as you were chairman. >> right. >> so you mean to tell me that as a black conservative put in that context, let alone as a conservative, i can't be critical of the president? >> don't take the worst out of what you said. you know him. this is where you need to have some grace. >> wait a minute, what the hell do i have to be graceful for? >> you have not been very graceful to the republicans and the conservatives in this hall in this room for a very long period of time. >> former rnc chairman and msnbc political analyst michael steel. we get glib, you and me, because we can't believe what we're seeing. matt is a dear friend of mine, a dear friend of yours. >> yep. >> i think he made a few mistakes there. let me just fact check him. you have not been critical of the conservative aspects of

trump's presidency. you have been critical of the racist aspects of his presidency. there are not good people on both sides of the kkk rally. you are at the heart of the trump administration where they have been the least conservative. >> that's correct. >> how does it feel to get shoved down alice in wonder land's rabbit hole by one of our friends? >> it was stunning. i said at that time that i saw matt stop drinking the kool-aid out of the glass and take the iv and plunge it into his arm. and i've seen a lot of folks that we both know do that over the course of the last two years. and it has been stunning to just so freely give up what i think are some fundamental principles on the role of government, the size of government, the expense of government, let alone the individual freedoms and rights that we've claimed to many

communities around the country, especially communities ever color, just have all that washed away in that moment for me was very disappointing. but i have to tell you, you know, nicolle, i got fired up. there were a couple moments there, okay, i'm about to go to a place you don't want me to go to. i brought it back. i was fired up in the moment because this fight is worth it to me. there are still things i think are of value and important that this party once stood for. and until i know definitively that this is -- that something else has been bought and paid for by republicans across this country, i think they're still worth fighting for. >> but with whom do you fight, my friend? >> yeah. well, i think you fight -- i think you fight back and push back on the kind of conversations that we heard this weekend. certainly at cpac which, to a person, even attendees there, thought that it felt different.

it sounded different and has been trending in that direction for sometime. and certainly, again, you know, i want president trump to be a successful president. i think we all want our presidents to be successful. but at the end of the day, i can't, you know, just give up my values, give up my principles and become sico-panic around a personality. what i see emerging here is a cult of conservatism, this sort of piecemeal approach towards what conservatism used to be and it's offensive to me. and the other thing that i find very bothersome, when he talks about being graceful and my criticism of the party, there have been many other people who have been critical of this president who landed jobs in this administration, who have been endorsed by this president. so, what was it about my criticism that required eight years after my chairmanship for you to stand up on a national

platform and to take down the hard work that i had done and to demean it by saying i only was able to do it because i was black? it makes no sense. it's stupid. and i think it hurts the party to its core. i don't know how we go into an afterno african-american community and say we want you to run for office. are you asking us because we're black or because we align with the values and principles that supposedly all republicans adhere to? >> let me ask you one more question and then our friends at the table want to jump in, too. real quick, hazms matt apologiz to you publicly or privately? >> he did both, and on air. he flipped the script. he did it in the beginning. thank you look at the first part of or interview, he apologized for -- i didn't want to be here. i'm sorry this has happened. and then went on and flipped the script and said, well, this is really happening because it's your fault, because you've criticized the president. and that's when i kind of lost

my mind and went, okay, dude, you're on a whole other -- >> i'm going to open this up. where has grace ever been displayed -- i think that it's important to just cut the b.s. there's no joy and glory at being at war with your own party. charlie sykes is at the table. you and i have been here now for about 15 to 20 months. it's all a bit of a blur. but there is not a lot -- it's the generosity of democrats that find our critiques -- we've got nothing to lose so they're heart felt and they're authentic. but at the end of the day we're not trusted by either side and it's lonely and it's depressing and it makes you doubt what you spent your life and your career doing and building. and so let me ask you, did you ask matt for any grace? and have you seen any grace displayed by anyone on the trump team toward you? >> i'll answer the first part -- the second part first. no, i have not. in fact, we worked very hard, a number of us, to assist the

trump team in placing african americans in the administration, men and women of not just good will, but high competence and qualifications. that was rebuffed. and so, okay, fine, i get it. but with matt, i have not asked him, you know, where was his grace for me. my attitude is you're a big boy. you're speaking presumably from your heart and your mind when you're looking at me eye to eye. that's all i need to know. again, i go back to the point that some feel so beholden and it is so important to them to either be liked, to stay out of the pathway of this president's tweet storm, that they don't want to challenge him. well, that's not how i was raised by my mama. and i'm not going to sit back -- >> your mama knew my mama, mike many >> exactly. it doesn't work like that in the real world. >> donnie has a question. >> my good friend michael, i

watched this unfold and my head was spinning in circles. you handled it with nothing but grace. i think the challenge for you and as a brand guy is all of a sudden you watch cpac. conservatism as i understand it, less government, a simple way of putting it. somehow conservatism now is that a woman can't stand up and say a woman shouldn't be sexually harassed. they had to basically protect that woman out there. conservative in me saying all immigration is snakes coming in to take over. >> that's right. >> conservatism is lock up the previous candidate. this is not conservatism. this is just heinous, inhumane trumpism. somebody has to get out there, you and the rest of the people. liberals and conservatives all agree on the horribleness of what i just said. >> there is a tremendous opportunity. >> you guys have got to start to remind this is trumpism, this is tribalism. this is not conservatism. >> i'm going to take it one step further. there is a tremendous

opportunity right now for the republican party to actually have a character and a soul. this is not the party of lincoln , the party of nixon, or even the party of reagan. this is the party of dw griffith, party of kkk and party of trump. this is not partisan, not political, it's very racial. and there is an opportunity right now for somebody to high jack this party away from it going off the cliff. and i think if you care about, you know, conservative values and republican values, this is your time to stand up and stop being a ken doll and get in the race. >> i nominate charlie sykes. >> as one of the conservatives here at the table -- >> let the liberals speak up -- >> it has been said it is lonely and depressing and makes you wonder what is going on. this cpac was extraordinary two years ago. i was at cpac, i was the master of ceremony of events. this was an anti-trump gup. very diverse group of speakers. to watch the transformation, to

watch the kind of racial attack on michael steele. this came within a 24-hour period in which somebody describing naturalization process, and the value of immigrants was booed. this came within a few hours of marianne le pen from the neo-nazi family from france spoke. the transformation of the conservative movement into this complete trumpist, nationalist front is really extraordinary. and it's important that people like michael steele, the people like you, nicolle, speak out against it. mona sharon, mona sharon was in the final day. she said what a disgrace they invited marion le pen. she called out the hypocrisy of republicans who had talked about character matters, but then had endorsed roy moore. >> donald trump.

evangelicals -- i think it's reconcilable. >> she was booed. >> it's a disgrace. >> we're at a point now where many mainstream republican conservatives who talked about those principles would not be welcome, would be booed whereas some of the fringyest, most alarm -- kooks -- >> they're not kooks. i'm going to say something controversial. that gentleman wasn't wrong even though michael steele has been qualified, lieutenant governor has qualified forever. he would not be in that position had barack obama not been elected. that's the truth. you try to counter a black president with a black person in the rnc is where the problem is. you had an autopsy that told you what to do to build the party. >> michael, do you agree with that? >> if i could address some of that, that is not exactly the way it is because, remember, back in 2006 -- >> let me tell you why. republicans are not that organized enough to be reactive.

let me make the -- the republicans are not that crafty. >> two points, one to karen's point and then to both karen and charlie. the first is to your point, karen. back in 2006 there was a great effort under foot by many states around the country to have me run at the end of the 2006 presidential cycle. so, that idea was -- that was not the first time that i had been approached nor approached the opportunity to run for chairman of the national party. so, by 2008, after the loss of the presidential race, it became a bigger effort to try to get that done. so, i don't think it was -- to nicolle's point, there wasn't the machineations going on. i think you both put your finger on something. i describe it this way so it's reality tv conservatism that has taken hold here and it's really rotting the roots of the party in a way that i see to be destructive and i'm ready to

stand up and i hope others will join me in challenging that. >> we need to sneak in a break. the problem has been now for many months that there only as many -- we in a minivan be we have to sneak in one more break. we have to sneak in one last break. we'll be right back. ♪ ♪ ♪

(vo) you can pass down a subaru forester. but you get to keep the memories. love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru. (avo) get 0% apr financing on all new 2018 subaru forester models. now through february 28th. i'm trying to manage my a1c, then i learn type 2 diabetes puts me at greater risk for heart attack or stroke. can one medicine help treat both blood sugar and cardiovascular risk? i asked my doctor.

she told me about non-insulin victoza®. victoza® is not only proven to lower a1c and blood sugar, but for people with type 2 diabetes treating their cardiovascular disease, victoza® is also approved to lower the risk of major cv events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. while not for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (announcer) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing, or swallowing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. gallbladder problems have happened in some people. tell your doctor right away if you get symptoms. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar.

common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, indigestion, and constipation. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. change the course of your treatment. ask your doctor about victoza®. we're back. we've been talking with michael steele and jim, i want to get your thoughts. i can't imagine the parallel, i don't know what the cpac group is on your side but i'm sure there are elements that are fringy but never this hostile. how should the party reconcile to me -- i said it before the break, this feels irreconcilable. how do you reconcile what has embraced the dark angels or the racism of the trump movement and the blatant and misogyny and the

woman trying to draw attention to the me too movement. but i see it as too far gone. >> i think you see the triumph of power over ideology. the right decided that the only thing that matters is power and that is why paul ryan could go missing on the nunes thing or they could sign a tax bill that balloons a deficit and invite mari marine -- mary la pen -- and it is just trumpism. and in the end, it means they don't stand for anything. which is why you're seeing these amazing numbers. saw the poll out today, democrats have an 18% lead on the generic with democrat voters two times more excited. when they do crazy stuff like the michael steele thing, they aren flaming the democratic base and make them want to go vote and restore balance to this country. >> he put his finger it right

there. and the money has crept back into the system and certainly a lot of things that i did to undo some of that, which got me in a lot of trouble in this town, are part of the status quo again. and i think that combination and the rawness of that has really turned this party upside down. i still hold out hope, though, and maybe there is a little bit of naivety there, i've been doing this for so long. i can't have come this far just to see this is the end. but if it is, then, yeah, we move on to something else and we'll build something better and something different. but i think right now jim has got his finger on what is at the core of this, this trumpism, this sort of reality tv conservatism is based around not just personality but power. >> the visceral power of a note to the democrats. >> style is important. you need testosterone and that

can be feminine in your candidate. you need strength. people have to feel -- >> have decency. >> and as far as i'm concerned, that is anywhere. but if you have weak decency with noent -- won't be evil power. and joe biden projected. >> that you need a candidate that viscerally projected strength. that is so critical going forward. >> i wish i could be optimistic but when you sell your soul things go well for a while but it never ends well. >> i agree. >> and i think that is what you're experiencing now. that a republican said we have this tax cut but what have you given, what have you sold. and i think you're starting to see that at cpac. how you've transformed everything you believed in and claimed to be and going forward i think it will have catastrophic consequences. >> one more break. we'll be right back. ients? well jd power did just rank them highest in investor satisfaction with full service brokerage firms... again. and online equity trades are only $4.95...

i mean you can't have low cost and be full service. it's impossible. it's like having your cake and eating it too. ask your broker if they offer award-winning full service and low costs. how am i going to explain this? if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab. schwab, a modern approach to wealth management. i accept i don't i even accept i i used thave a higher risk of stroke due to afib, a type of irregular heartbeat not caused by a heart valve problem. but no matter where i ride, i go for my best. so if there's something better than warfarin, i'll go for that too. eliquis. eliquis reduced the risk of stroke better than warfarin, plus had less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis had both. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke.

eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. i'm still going for my best. and for eliquis. ask your doctor about eliquis. that goes beyond assuming beingredients are safe...ood to knowing they are. going beyond expectations... because our pets deserve it. beyond. natural pet food. if yorheumatoid arthritisevere and you're talking to your rheumatologist about a medication, this is humira. this is humira helping to relieve my pain and protect my joints from further irreversible damage.

this is humira helping me reach for more. humira has been clinically studied for over 20 years. humira works for many adults. it targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. talk to your doctor and visit humira.com. this is humira at work. michael steele i said once the republican party was dead it just didn't know it yet, like in

the sixth sense and do you think there is any chance that is true. >> i think it is -- i think it is sleeping on itself. i don't think it is dead. i think it is just been lulled into this space where it is desperate and we just need to get to a better space. >> okay. that will be our last word. thanks to jim and charlie and donnie and michael steele. that does it for our hour. i'm nicolle wallace and "mtp daily" started with katy tur. >> and hi there. and if it is monday, is the president serious? >> tonight gun laws and school safety and the two americas. >> this president wouldn't be looked upon as being anti-second amendment. >> will the national conversation on guns amount to more than words? plus what the supreme court dismissal on daca means for dreamers. >> it is a great victory for all of those daca recipients. >> and is the blue tide turning