>> only when you write your essay how progressive is a big myth. >> that is "all in" for this evening. the 11th hour with brian williams is next. >> the president is not firing robert mueller while calling the russia investigation a hoax. and yet, from the doj, a new diversionary tactic emerges. trotting out uranium one involving hillary clinton. and steve bannon is at it begin, casting doubts on his old boss, casting aspurgss to the president's daughter, and spelling out the odds of trump finishing his term in office. the 11th hour begins now. . and on this thursday night, good evening once again from our nbc news headquarters in new york. day 336 of the trump administration, as we watch the

mounting partisan attacks of what many see the nation's crown jewel in law enforcement. it's an effort that seems to be launched and time to discredit the russia investigation, if not the investigator, just a few hours ago, fbi deputy director andrew mccabe left capitol hill after a second day of lengthy closed door interviews. republicans on the hill have been focusing on whether there is political bias against the president within the fbi. it's a kind of loyalty test, and they've been targeting mccabe, who's been involved in several recent investigations, including the one into hillary clinton's private e-mail server. earlier tonight, adam schiff, the lead democrat on house intel talked about what he views as the republicans obsession with mccabe. >> focused on mr. mccabe because they see him as an opportunity to try to tear at the fbi. tear at the investigation, tear at bob mueller, if they can just discredit the fbi then maybe

they can get the country to ignore what bob mueller finds or worse, they can get the country to go along with the firing of bob mueller. >> elijah cummings of maryland said this on his way into today's committee interviews with andrew mccabe. >> to the press, i beg you to get it right, you are recording this history. you got to get it right, this is a fight for the soul of our democracy. nothing less. and so i'm going to work hard to make sure we save that democracy, and i will fight until i die. cia criticized, fbi criticized, over and over and over again. now the rumors and i hope that's all they are of mueller possibly

being fired. i hope that's not true those are the kinds of things that tear down a democracy. they are the very things that our democracy is based upon. and i say to all americans, and i beg you. to guard this democracy to guard it. >> kind of emotional words from a veteran member of the house that got our attention today. for their part, the white house continues to maintain that mueller and this russia investigation are safe. >> we have no intentions of firing bob mueller, we're continuing to work closely and cooperate with him. we look forward to seeing this hoax wrap up very soon. we think that it is just further evidence that the democrats have no plan. they have no agenda, they have nothing to talk to about other than attacking this president. >> amid all of this, exclusive new reporting today from our own nbc news colleagues, ken

dilanian, pete williams, on the order of jeff sessions, justice department prosecutors have begun asking fbi agents to explain the evidence they found in a now dormant criminal investigation, into a controversial uranium deal that critics have linked to bill and hillary clinton. at issue is a 2010 transaction in which the obama administration allowed the sale of u.s. uranium mining facilities to russia's state atomic energy company. hillary clinton was secretary of state at the time, and the state department was one of nine agencies that agreed to approve the deal after finding no threat to the united states national security. as we try to do every time this subject of uranium one comes up, here now, a reairing of the definitive takedown. the most complete debunking of this clinton conspiracy theory, as delivered by shepherd smith of fox news.

>> here's the accusation, nine people involved in the deal made donations to the clinton foundation, totaling more than $140 million. in exchange, secretary of state clinton approved the sale to the russians. a quid pro quo. the accusation is predicated on the charge that secretary clinton approved the sale. she did not. a committee of nine evaluated the sale, the president approved the sale. the nuclear regulatory commission and others had to offer permits, and none of the uranium was exported for use by the u.s. to russia. that is uranium one. >> shepherd smith of fox news brings us to our lead off panel for a thursday night. ken dilanian nbc news, intelligence and national security reporter. jill wine-banks, msnbc legal analyst, and ken vogel, political reporter for "the new york times." welcome to you all, ken, i'd

like to begin with you. can you explain to our audience the genesis of this intense interest in mccabe and what about it reflects in your view, the view of others, perhaps just partisanship. >> are you talking to ken dilanian? >> i'm sorry, i knew we were leading into a first segment with two kens. ken vogel of the new york times. >> sure, this is as you sort of suggested in your intro, brian, the interest in mccabe, is part of an effort to discredit the fbi as a whole. and the goal seems to be more about discrediting, undermining bob mueller and the special council's investigation. we see this, a number of prongs in this effort, including highlighting these text messages between these fbi agents that spoke critically of donald trump. we see this in questioning mccabe, we even see this in the

uranium one, the reviving of the uranium one investigation, which seems to be less about getting to the bottom of the actual substance of this uranium one deal, and more about questioning the fbi's handling of it, and, of course, we see it in the questions about mueller himself, and mueller's team, highlighting donations that members of mueller's team gave to democrats. it's all an effort to lay the groundwork for either firing mueller, which seems unlikely at this point, or more likely to lay the groundwork for undercutting any findings that he may have that are critical of donald trump, and you see this working in some ways, you see polls showing that republican voters are amenable to the idea of firing mueller. and suspicious of the investigation. interestingly, right now, donald trump has this tremendous reservoir of good will among the house and senate republicans who

would be the ones who would potentially block the firing or would react in an aggressive way to the firing of bob mueller in a way we haven't seen before, that is causing concern. this is all an effort to pave the way, in some way undermining or pushing out bob mueller. >> now, mr. ken dilanian, join us, from about a month ago, we'll talk about it on the other side. >> you want to look at hillary clinton. i'm really not involved with the justice department. i'd like to let it run itself. honestly, they should be looking at the democrats, they should be looking at a lot of things. and a lot of people are disappointed in the justice department, including me. >> ken dilanian, this dove tails into your exclusive reporting today, the clintons are back and back in a big way. >> the fbi agent who spent some

time investigating this uranium one matter. have been questioned in recent weeks, to take another look at this case. and they're explicitly doing it, because house republicans asked them to, and in a letter last month to house republicans, a senior justice department official said, yes, we're going to look at whether the concerns you are raising in this uranium one matter and the clinton case, merit a special prosecutor. the question really, brian is, is just sessions doing this as a defensive maneuver to sort of mully phi house republicans and say, yeah, we're going to take a look at this, or is this a serious try to reopen an investigation. there is really no evidence that we have found of any impropriety, any wrongdoing. if you see a reopening of criminal investigations in this

matter, that will cause a lot of concerns. >> jill wine-banks, i've been assured you're the only jill on our opening panel tonight. is there a danger here really jill, beyond wasted time, wasted money, and this continued cleft of partisanship? do you think this effort is working? is really hurting the investigation. >> i think it is, and the reason i say that one of the reasons that watergate was so successful is that the american people, democrats and republicans and members of the congress on both sides of the aisle actually accepted what we found. they trusted us, and if you have an attack that is meant to show the investigators and prosecutors are somehow not to be trusted, you can't believe

the results of it. even though sarah huckabee sanders said a hoax today. how can you say it's a hoax, when there are four defendants, two of whom have already plead guilty. that's not a hoax, that's a real investigation. so i am concerned. now, i know, just based on my twitter followers, that most americans are not believing it. but the followers of donald trump definitely believe that mueller cannot be trusted and the investigation is trustworthy. that is a serious threat to our democracy and the rule of law. >> as if you were writing the page one lead all for the new york times as attention is going to scatter off for the holidays. what would be your lead? >> the mueller investigation is continuing a pace, even as there

are these efforts to undercut it, and these efforts have top democrats, including mark westerner of virginia, the ranking democrat of the senate intelligence committee took the floor yesterday and made a proactive defense against any efforts to push out mueller. maybe he knows something that we don't know. we have heard the public assurances all the way up to president trump as well as his lawyer, even sarah luck ka bee sanders today saying there is no plan to fire robert mueller, nonetheless, we have people who know more than we do, who are concerned about the possibility, that said, the mueller investigation as i said, is proceeding at pace, we see every day new ten tickles reaching out, including an interview with some of the folks who were involved with this russian lawyer who met with donald trump jr. paul manafort and jared kushner in june of 2016, the

people who ran this nonprofit that was sort of fighting against the magnitsky act, the top priority of russia and vladimir putin to try to undermine this act. those people have been brought in. the investigation is expanding, and there is no sign that the folks inside the mueller investigation and mueller's team are sort of taking any message from these efforts to beat them back. >> ken dilanian, i had our colleague on the other night, asked her what she was looking for next, and to our surprise, she answered it fully and forthrightly, same question to you, and i'll understand any restrictions on your wording, what are you looking for. next as american attention spans drift off to the holidays and football and so forth? >> well, the big picture brian, is that this mueller investigation is an existential threat to donald trump's presidency. what is he going to try to do to stop it. as we break down the component

parts, what we're looking for is who is the next defendant to draw the scrutiny and focus, it really seems to be jared kushner. there seems to be a lot of focus and questions about mr. kushner's conduct, his meetings during the transition, and a lot of speculation right now about his fate. so that's really what we're looking for, but back to what donald trump could do about robert mueller, you know, as we know, he can actually fire him, rod rosen stein would have to follow him. we could be looking at a saturday night massacre situation, if trump tried to make that happen, and rosen stein didn't want to do it, and resigned. would he put an acting person. there are some standards in place, and there's a justice department set of rules that say mueller can only be fired for good cause, not just for any reason, brian? >> good cause is usually a high bar, a high standard, especially among legal types. jill wine-banks, we have noticed

that mr. mueller doesn't put out a lot of press releases. in fact, i can't remember the last mueller press release, but if they did, maybe they would say, hey, we had this meeting this week, with the trump legal team and everything went swimmingly. the question for you is, if you go into this meeting with the mueller team, one of these occasional meetings they do have, what's a victory for the trump legal team. what's a good outcome for the trump legal team in terms of a takeaway. >> the only thing that the trump team can hope to gain is to have a method of giving their opinion, their viewpoint and making it in a persuasive way so that mueller hears and can think about it. on the other hand, by doing that, mueller can start working on what are the answers to those things. i want to go back to your question about cause and good cause for firing. because that was the same rule for firing arch which i cox. there had to be cause.

because there wasn't, the attorney general refused to carry out the president's order, so he was fired. and the deputy attorney general said there is no cause, i will not do it, and so he was fired. and then it got down to the third person at the department of justice. the american people cared, and they protested and the president richard nixon had to appoint a second special prosecutor, three days after firing him. that is a lesson we should all keep in mind, if there isn't cause, and so far there is absolutely no cause, then the president should be warned and should learn from history. >> it was one of those moments where people started thinking, hey, maybe this president nixon fella has something to hide, something to worry about. our thanks to our leadoff panel, including two of the finest kens in washington, based journalism. ken dilanian, and ken vogel, thank you to you too. jill wine-banks as well, for joining us tonight from chicago. coming up for us, steve

bannon unplugged in vanity fair. why there's an even more intense civil war, and a firestorm coming. he does have a way with words. first, more on the russia investigation, and what it means politically for the president's agenda, come 2018, the 11th hour as we approach the holidays on a thursday night, just getting underway. sometimes a cough gets in the way of a good night's sleep. that's when he needs vicks vaporub. proven cough medicine. with 8 hours of vapors. so he can sleep. vicks vaporub. goodnight coughs.

what you did is very criminal and very serious, and it's too bad. it's too bad. and i don't know how a person

with that cloud over their head, actually can be running for the office of president. if hillary is elected. she would be under protracted criminal investigation, likely followed by the trial of a sitting president. here we go again with clinton. you remember the impeachment and the problems. she'd likely to be under investigation for many, many years. >> incredible to see some of that stuff by candidate donald trump made a lot of predictions about what would happen under a hillary clinton presidency along the way. it seems one of his favorite predictions, that she would govern under a cloud of on going and protracted investigations turning out to be the case for his own presidency. with us tonight to talk about it and more, peter baker, chief white house correspondent for the new york times. and michael steele, former chairman of the republican national committee. both gentlemen, msnbc political analysts.

how big is -- to use his own words, the cloud over his head, over his presidency. >> the cloud has grown so much, you can see the agitation that he is feeling, and his people are feeling in these attacks on robert mueller, they had been told by his lawyers, this would be over by thanksgiving, christmas, it would be over earlier in the new year. it doesn't look like it's anywhere near over. and so you're seeing, the beginning of the backlash, the frustration is being expressed through the attacks. i was reading something today, the irony is, all this talk about hillary clinton and the impeachment, he's correct, there certainly was a lot of -- back in 1988 and 1989, what reminds me is the strategy the democrats use back then, is very similar to what you're beginning to see now is robert mueller, deny the allegations, discredit the investigators and make everything about partisanship. the same program back then, you're starting to see that play out right now.

>> i'm going to put some poll numbers up on the screen that a lot of people found disturbing today. this is the nbc news wall street journal poll. we get this result doesn't add up anywhere near 1100%. this is the view of robert mueller, this is so important, among republicans. people who identify republicans and were willing to answer affirmative or negative. 33% negative view. 13% positive view. mr. chairman, what does that tell you? >> well, it tells me, if you just take and extrapolate it out, that's trump's base. that's the core of his base, his numbers are somewhere between 33 and 35%. and certainly on a national level. at a significant point, roughly 75% of that number is republican, that does not surprise me, there's been a consistent and coordinated effort between various media outlets and the white house. that has escalated.

this drum beat that we're hearing over and over again about mueller, his team, the process, the procedures and even the law itself. and now, what is so disturbing, i think, is the fact that you have members of congress who should know better, quite honestly, they really should, sort of picking up this drum beat and carrying it forward in a way that i fear for them in that it comes back to bite them on their head when -- or some other body part when mueller comes up with his findings, and there's a lot of splatter in this thing. they have to be careful about how they frame this argument. >> watergate gave us so many expressions that exist in the lexicon to this day. i think it's the derivation of bunker mentality, if i can think back correctly. do you think we've reached bunker mentality in the trump white house? or is that a moving target.

>> well, i mean, obviously, any white house under siege like this is filled with conspiracy and anger, and suspicion and sometimes paranoia. it looks like everyone's out to get you. it often informs the political decisions that are made as a result. you know, it's not necessarily healthy. some people in the white house said they worried people are wearing a wire for robert mueller when they're talking to them. imagine what that does to the ability to be a team, to have trust and to move forward. it's a corrosive situation for any white house to be in this kind of a cloud, as you put it, it doesn't seem to be going away any time soon, they're frustrated by that, they're looking at a big win this week, with tax cuts, they want to be able to move into the new year with a head of steam, this investigation continues to nip at them, day after day. >> you guys, and by that, i mean

republicans at large, you haven't burned your party card that i know of. control white house senate house, but what has russia at large done to your brand? >> i think it's soured the brand and tarnished it immensely, particularly given the party has prior to this administration, a consistent history, certainly galvanized under reagan in which we were all about calling out the evil empire, and now we are part of that empire in many respects certainly seemingly don't mind it, and are less concerned about its comings and goings in behavior. i'm waiting to read the memo where we changed our perspective on this, because the last time i checked, russia was one of those entities out there. that as republicans warned against and rallied against to

make sure the cause of freedom stood strong. that is overshadowed a lot of the principles that republicans have touted in the past. >> we tend to forget normal wasn't all that long ago. michael and peter have agreed to stay with us, just across this break, and when we return, steve bannon, what steve bannon has to say in this new interview about his old boss donald trump, and the president's daughter.

steve is very committed, he's a friend of mine. i have a very good relationship as you know with steve bannon. steve's been a friend of mine for a long time. i like steve a lot. steve is doing what steve thinks is the right thing. >> remember what he said about steve bannon who happens to be fresh off a big defeat in alabama. he's unleashed about his time at the white house. startling revelations as they say, published today, in a new interview in article by vanity fair. donald trump serving out his presidential term, and sharing details about a strained relationship with various trump family members. the article suggests that what started out as camaraderie forged through an unlikely friendship, has devolved over time. he went on to describe trump this way. he's much more moderate, he's an accommodationist.

back in october, you might recall vanity fair reported bannon believed trump had a 30% chance of finishing his full term. he went even further this time. trump has lost a step and is like an 11-year-old child. the article also shedding light on the controversy surrounding bannon and trump's family, those relationships soured before they made it to 1600 pennsylvania avenue. bannon reportedly battled with ivanka and jared about the tone trump should take for his victory speech, and things kind of got worse from there. during an attempt by trump to broker peace, bannon and ivanka got into a shouting match, using language we can't use on a family broadcast, even at 11:00 eastern time over who was the source of leaks that riddled the administration's first year. back with us peter baker and michael steele. well, peter, what do we make of

steve bannon and what might his view of himself be that differs from the way he's seen by the general population and those who work in the west wing. >> steve bannon is a disrupter, he wants to be a disrupter. he talks in the article written by gabe sherman, as a staffer in the white house, he wasn't really suited for that job, he has a freer hand on the outside, on the inside, he had influence, on the outside he has power. the power, of course, is to wage civil war against the gop establishment, particularly mitch mcconnell. but you're right, the sort of open de rigs he expressed of the president who made him famous is rather striking and startling. part of the very unrelenting drama of this particular presidency. if president obama was no drama obama, this is an all drama white house, in which people are

constantly feuding and fighting the tribes are always at war, and steve bannon's tribe right now is on the defensive, because of the alabama defeat. but it doesn't mean that they're going away. >> and michael, i -- peter just did a great job paraphrasing this quote, we should put it on the screen and share it with our viewers. it was always a job, i realize in hindsight i was just a staffer, and i'm not a good staffer, i had influence, i had a lot of influence, but just influence. and then he went on to say, i have power, i can actually drive things in a certain direction. michael, do you doubt that, and do you think overall net-net, is he good or bad for the party? will people be elected to office because of him? or be repelled because of him? >> well, i do buy part of that to the extent that i think bannon went in there seeing himself a lot closer to the president and in his head and ear a lot more than some around him wanted him to be.

probably tried to relegate him to the staffer position, to make him into -- to put him into place if you will. no, you don't have unlimited access to the president, you can't talk to him any time you want. that's just not the relationship in the environment that donald trump himself had created forebannon in that relationship between the two, so that is the backdrop going-forward into next year's elections, bannon is still a threat to the gop. and the question to the gop is, do you lie down and take it? do you just roll over and pretend it's not going to happen? or do you stand up and fight what has become an insurgency inside the republican party? now, when i was chairman, i was all about hitting up against the status quo. and got into trouble from time to time, for it, and that's fine. i'm ready to do that battle with the establishment, the outright takedown of the republican incumbents.

the outright takedown of the philosophy in the party, and to reshape it into some nationalist paradigm, is a real battle for the heart and soul of the party. the question to all my fellow republicans is, where do you stand. what kind of party do you want? and what kind of party do you think the american people are willing to accept. not one that capitulates, not one that gives in, but one thatten sads up on principles and ideals like reagan and eisenhower and bush. even abe lincoln, remember him? that was the party that did? great things, now we're just condensed, brian, to this match over -- as you put it, the drama inside the west wing. >> not happy stuff, but boy was that well put. two gentlemen that really bring it on the thursday before christmas, no less. >> friends of our broadcast both. thank you both very much. coming up, after a break, mitch mcconnell looking forward

to cooperation in 2018. he said it, is it too good to be true, though?

months that's going to have to be dealt with in january. you're going to have the immigration issue coming up, a much more difficult situation for the republicans. >> a lot of americans have seen that horrible train accident this week, we've seen atlanta-hartsfield go down due

to a power failure. they would love a good big spending infrastructure bill, are they ever going to see that? >> that's something that the trump white house does have on its priority list. something they hope to address in january/february. the other key issue that democrats would have liked to have seen done this month, it's being kicked forward whether there's some type of fix for the people covered by daca. there are a bunch of contentious issues that are going to be coming up now. if you have this level of division right now, was it yesterday. talking about how extraordinary they all were. already you're seeing the divides on what kind of strategy they're going to take in the new year. >> are you hearing legit concerns and fears of the idea of the president alone, florida, time on his hands and a cell phone in his other.

>> not just democrats, brian. i think republicans fear this too, he tends to be the loosest when he's at mar-a-lago, away from the white house, maybe at his golf course in new jersey, he tweets a lot more, there's more bluster. some of his provocations. that's certainly a fear, when they come back is the grim climate facing republicans in the year 2018. an nbc poll earlier this week found democrats are favored by an 11 point margin on the generic ballot, that's the kind of thing that's going to create a white bout in the house, the senate, once seemed unthinkable for the republicans to lose, is suddenly up for grabs. you have 10 trump state democrats who won who look a lot safer now. several open seats in tennessee,

nevada. dean heller is a strong potential pickup opportunity. republicans have a pretty rough landscape to weather in the coming year. >> two of the best covering their beats. thank you both so much for being with us tonight. coming up for us, nikki haley says the u.s. is taking names and will remember those who go against us. that and more when the 11th hour continues. some air fresheners are so overwhelming, they can...

send you and your family running. introducing febreze one for fabric and air.

no aerosols. no dyes. no heavy perfumes. it cleans away odors for a pure light freshness... so you can spray and stay. febreze one, breathe happy.

for all of these nations that take our money and then they vote against us at the security council, or they vote against us potentially at the assembly, they take hundreds of millions of dollars and even billions of dollars and then they vote against us, well, we're watching those votes. let them vote against us. we'll save a lot. we don't care. >> president trump yesterday seems to know what was likely to happen at the united nations. 128 countries voted to condemn his decision to recognize

jerusalem as israel's capital. only nine member nations, including the u.s., voted the other way. speaking before the vote, u.s. ambassador to the u.n., nikki haley, said america would not forget when countries ask the u.s. for aid. >> the united states will remember this day in which it was singled out for attack in the general assembly for the very act of exercising our right as a sovereign nation. we will remember it when we are called upon to, once again, make the world's largest contribution to the united nations. and we will remember it when so many countries come calling on us as they so often do to pay even more and to use our influence for their benefit. >> today, former cia director john brennan wrote in what was his second ever tweet, quote, trump administration threat to retaliate against nations that exercise sovereign right to

oppose u.s. position on jerusalem is beyond outrageous. shows donald trump expects blind loyalty and subservience from everyone, qualities usually found in narcicisstic, vengable auto cats. here to explain what we are witnessing, rick stingle. the former managing editor of "time" magazine. rick, i got it figured it out this way. donald trump is a new york landlord. he probably believes the u.n. are, in a way, tenants. >> maybe he covets that real estate. a beautiful view of the east river. >> nice land on the east river. what's the danger here? >> well, it's -- i'm trying to think of a polite way to say it. it's really stupid, in the sense that it's not tactical, right? next week, she's going to come to u.n. members and ask for help on north korea. he's going to come to u.n. members for help on iran.

it's a favor bank. you can't tell people you're going to take names, which also sounds like, you're also going to get detention after school. >> we're all going to meet behind the gym after school. >> it's this kind of tony soprano-ish approach to the u.n. that the money we give is the kind of extortion money and we can get people to do what we want them to do. i mean, it's just a misunderstanding of the international system. it makes me sad, and obviously, makes other people sad, is that, we're the architect of that system. we put that system in place with the u.n. here after world war ii, it prevented a world war, i mean, we're not giving money because we want them to vote with us, we're giving money because it keeps the peace. >> a lot of moderates have been looking at nikki haley as kind of a savior, someone they can identify with. were you disappointed, speaking of taking names, in her choice of language, what she did? >> yeah, just seemed petty to me. again, it -- shooting yourself in the foot, because she has to go to all these other countries for help on issues that we care about. and so, i don't know.

it just seemed a it will petulant. >> what about friends in hot places? and i'm thinking about, say, egypt. >> yeah. >> we can't go ahead and penalize them. that relationship is, has been, and should be, kind of vital to us. >> absolutely. it's -- the money that we give to, let's say egypt, jordan, afghanistan, i mean, these are places that we have a tremendous responsibility. we can't pull away. i mean, that -- that would be -- also be not in our interest in any way. and by the way, it alien nates all the sunni nations that we have relationships with that supposedly donald trump wants to make the ultimate deal with solving israel and palestine. you need the sunni nations to support that. again, in every way, it's a setback for all the things that we would want to do as a nation. >> 15 seconds or less, do you believe an inty fad day is under way? >> i think in a low level way, and i think it will build up and i think it will, i mean, you know, the palestinians have already said, they don't want

the u.s. as part of any negotiating policy with israel. they just want the u.n. >> imagine us on the sidelines of that. rick stingle, always a pleasure to have you on the broadcast. thank you very much. coming up, something in the tax bill that may bring further hurt to a place that suffered a world of hurt in 2017. that and more when we come back.

last thing before we go here tonight. during this upcoming christmas holiday weekend, there will be journalists and lawmakers and lawyers and accountants who still will be reading through the gop tax bill that's headed for the president's sig that sure, reading to see what's in it for them and what's not. and to that end, the governor of puerto rico is warning, this bill could deliver a crippling blow to that u.s. territory. and he's asking that a portion of the bill be rewritten to help

or at least not to hurt puerto rico. a change in this tax law given puerto rico's unique status will make it more expenive for some companies to operate there. the governor and a lot of the legislators fear that companies already crippled by the severe blow to infrastructure after hurricane maria will consider the bill a disincentive to staying and might even consider leaving. the good news is, puerto rico has friends and allies and members of congress who know what's good for them. the governor is pledging to organize and mobilize the millions of puerto ricans living here on the mainland, starting in the midterm elections, to make it clear that after the hell their island paradise has been forced to endure, they will remember come november. that is our broadcast on a thursday night. thank you so much for being here with us. good night from nbc news headquarters here in new york.

had sglncht expe. expected to hate the roadways or skies. congress votes to keep the government funded until january 19. a lot on agenda like daca and children's health insurance program. stern warning for nikki haley. condemns president trump's decision to condemn jerusalem as the capital.