>> good day, everyone. i'm alex witt here in new york at msnbc headquarters where it's 1:00 in the east, 10:00 a.m. out west. here's what's happening. the s-word war of words. now one of the republicans from the white house daca meeting says the president's right, senator durbin's dead wrong. >> what we have going on here right now is a gross misrepresentation. i'm telling you, he did not use that word, george, and i'm telling you it's a gross misrepresentation. how many times you want me to say that? >> whatever the president said then, he said daca is probably dead. that's ahead. >> the u.s. pacific command has detected a missile threat to hawaii. a missile may impact our land or sea within minutes. >> the false alarm and the fallout. the wave of panic and the silence from the white house. >> when the people of hawaii got this message yesterday, they're literally going through this feeling of, i've got minutes to find my loved ones, to say my last good-byes.

>> yesterday, and now today, how did this happen? and why are some blaming the president for the fear that swept over hawaii? but we begin with new reaction from congress amid the fallout over president trump's alleged use of for feign language to describe immigrants from haiti, el salvador and africa. mia love explains why the alleged comments were particularly painful. >> we had a lot of people that were supporting the president and the vice president. my mom and my dad actually spoke to vice president mike pence and told him that they were praying for him. that they were doing everything they can to support him, so this was very -- it was heartbreaking for them. >> were the comments racist, do you think? >> well, i think they were -- yes. i think that they were unfortunate. >> also new today, reaction from three people who were in the

oval office when president trump had that meeting. >> it was an impassioned conversation. i don't recall that specific phrase being used. that's all i can say about that. >> i'm telling you, he did not use that word and it's a gross misrepresentation. >> i didn't hear it and i was sitting no further away from president trump than dick durbin has. and i know what he's said about the repeated statements is incorrect. >> let's turn to geoff bennett in florida near mar-a-lago for us. with a good day to you, the president was tweeting earlier. this was the tweet. daca is probably dead because the democrats don't really want it. what do you think sparked that reaction from him today? >> good afternoon, alex. i tell you, it's hard to tell. on the one hand, you have president trump saying that democrats are deblame for the demise of daca. on the other hand, you have democrats and some republicans say what really killed the sense of optimism that both sides could reach a solution for daca were the president's comments in

the oval office. his alleged comments in the oval office. his disparaging inflammatory remarks about people from hata and africa. what's interesting is what has a lot of people really upset beyond the words is the intent. the president is alleged to say why do we have all these people coming from africa when we could have people coming from norway? today on "meet the press," you have senator rand paul trying to clean it up. >> i think people jumped a little to a conclusion. let's take the whole scenario and put different words in there and let's say we would rather have people from economically prosperous countries than economically deprived countries, or we realize that there are more problems and economically deprived country, there's a bigger impetus for them to come. then it wouldn't have been so controversial. >> so the big question now is what comes next. beyond the president's comments and the debates surrounding it, i can tell you based on my conversations with some top aides or top democrats, aides to top democrats and even some of

our reporting about where the white house stands on all of this, they believe these conversations around daca will continue apace this coming week. one person told me the distrust, the contempt for president trump on the democratic side is already pretty much built in to the process. whatever they do, alex, they don't have much time. solving the daca debate is key to unlocking an agreement over funding the government and the federal government is set to run out of money this coming friday, alex. >> right you are. we have five working days. okay, thank you so much, geoff bennett there in west palm beach. >> joining me is jeff mason, white house correspondent at reuters. i just want to say, if erin mcpike is able to join the conversation, we'll bring her in too. i want to start with more reaction to the fallout of the president's alleged s-hole comment. here's senator jeff flake this morning. >> well, all i can say is i was in a meeting directly afterwards where those who had presented to the president our proposal spoke about the meeting. and they said those words were used before those words went

public. so that's all i can tell you. >> that's interesting, the timing there. and of course, we're hearing this big disagreement about what happened in that meeting now. what senator flake says, though, is that he was told in direct contrast with senator perdue's statement, so how does all that impact the conversation surrounding this? >> it's a great question, and it's hard to say. it's hard to determine what was said when different people are giving differing accounts. it's also, you know, either way, though, it's been very damaging. it's been damaging because it's something that people sort of view as something that the president would be able to say and would think is okay to say. and because despite his partial denial, he hasn't come out very explicitly to say no, that's never something i would do or say. so the shockwaves, as they were, politically, have been big, and they have also had an impact on other countries and areas of the

world that we're allegedly impugned by those comments. >> jeff, let's remember that senator perdue in coordination with senator cotton, initially issued a joint statement saying they don't recall the president using that term. but now he says otherwise and says it just was not said. how do you interpret that? >> well, i mean, i can't interpret that. that's what's coming out of the senator's mouth and the senator's office. i don't know if that means they have come under some pressure to say that. whether his recollection has changed. but it was certainly very clear that senator durbin believed and testified to the fact that the president did use those comments, so now it's turning into kind of a he said/he said situation, and that makes it very difficult to interpret. >> and then you have senator lindsey graham following comments by the president, i said my piece directly to him

yesterday, this was stated on friday. the president and all those attending the meeting know what i said and how i feel. what would he have been talking about were it not for that word being uttered? >> well, i think that's the big question. and the white house no doubt will continue to face questions about this once there's a briefing this next week. whether or not the president perhaps decides to address it either on twitter or in person with reporters in florida, or when he gets back tomorrow night is also an open question. >> okay. jeff, i'm going to ask you to stay with me and we hope erin is able to join us in a moment. right now, we're going tohead across the water. hawaiians are accounting how they reacted to yesterday's false alarm about a missile attack. >> the part of the message that made me panic is this is not a drill. and i went into mama bear mode. >> my brother was just about to leave for his class. and he told us that he got a threat on his phone that said

there's a bomb threat, a ballistic missile threat. and so we all freaked out. >> and take a look at this family, they retreated down a hatch. they wanted to get to a safe room there. wow. let's go to jacob soboroff in honolulu, just after 8:00 a.m. as a matter of fact, it's 8:09 precisely. 24 hours and 2 minutes after this happened. scary scene yesterday. how about today, how is it shaping up, jacob? >> yeah, after the pandemonium of yesterday, today seems like business as usual here in hawaii. people are back out on the water, enjoying their walks on the beach. the one thing that you might notice is the front page of the honolulu star, the local paper here, has a pretty recognizable, on-point headline, oops. false alarm triggers mass panic. outraged citizens could take it out on the governor in the upcoming election. this was a very traumatic day for a lot of people yesterday. they have an early warning

system in place here based on the rising tensions between president trump and kim jong-un, the leader of north korea. they put the risk of an actual ballistic missile attack pretty low, frankly, below hurricanes and tsunamis, things they prepare for here, but that did not stop what state officials are calling a very critical human error from sending out a very real alert that said this is not a drill. there's an incoming ballistic missile detected and scaring a lot of people here. officials are now demanding answers, including one of the members of congress from hawaii, tulsi gabbard. take a look at this. >> the fact that these processes failed so epically that caused this trauma, that caused this terror, all across the state of hawaii, must be fixed immediately. and those responsible for this happening need to be held accountable and making sure that this cannot, it cannot happen again. >> when the congress woman talks about those who are responsible

need to be held accountable, we got an inside look because we're on assignment here. we happened to be here yesterday when this all took place. we're on assignment looking at the potential implications of a nuclear attack on korea. the footage you're looking at is our exclusive footage inside the bunker where the alert was sent from. we happened to be there with the hawaii emergency management agency just a day before this happened. there are systems operators in the room that are responsible for pushing that button. they're only supposed to push that button if they get a call from paycom, u.s. pacific command. they would be the ones to detect the incoming missile. that, of course, did not happen. where there was no missile, but that message was sent out in error. it's people in those rooms, the people who work inside that bunker here in hawaii who ultimately are going to have to answer a lot of tough questions about what went wrong in the state's early warning sign, designed to protect people and turning a lot of lives upside down yesterday.

>> about a half hour or so, i'm speaking with the administrator with hawaii's emergency management team. he's acceptabling blame, promising to take action to keep this from happening again. meanwhile, our big thanks to you. >> let's bring back in our panel, erin mcpike and jeff mas mason. erin, did the president's tweets on the threat of north korea and kim john ung, do you think that had an impact on how the people of hawaii have reacted to this false alarm? >> oh, absolutely. this is something that's been on people's minds for the past year because there are nuclear threats, obviously, in general, coming from north korea, so of course the people of hawaii were scared to death as they should have been, as i would have been, as you would have been, as anyone would have been. i do think that the executive branch of the federal government has not done enough to say much in the last day since this happened. but you just played tulsi gabbard and what she said on television. she and brian schatz, the senator from hawaii, have done a lot, i think, to say that a lot

of systems broke down here. and they did a lot yesterday. they snapped into action after this first happened to say on twitter, this is a false alarm. everyone remain calm. i think those two younger leaders from that state have done a lot, and we need to hear more from the trump administration about this. >> yeah, and to that end, i just want to say, i have been getting texted from a friend of mine, karen, who lives in hawaii. she said people are so something mad that trump has never addressed this, instead, today, talking about wolff's book and fake news. is there anything the president could do to have gotten out and be part of this conversation and calmed the concerns of the citizens in the 50th state? >> you said the operative word there, anything. he didn't do anything. he was, as we know, on the golf course yesterday. and has been doing the regular tweeting that he normally does, and didn't say anything at all. and that's the problem. he should have done something.

just something. >> how do you, jeff, suppose world dement diplomats or the president's cabinet are looking at this. is there a chance they're more concerned about what he says on twitter, particularly relating to matters of security. >> parsing what he says on social media, what he says and what he chooses to say is something we'll be analyzing for his entire presidency. that probably applies not only to you and me and those of us who talk about this on television, but also his cabinet and his advisers. no doubt, he gets advice on some things about what he should pit on twitter, but a lot of it comes down to what the president is thinking, what's going through his head, and what he wants to send out in particular to his base. so you know what. i think that's just a question that we're going to -- we may never have the answer to. >> okay, well then, i'm going to leave it there for this conversation. i know i'll see you both again. erin, jeff, thank you so much. next, steve bannon's date

with the house intel committee. one of the members of that panel will join me to discuss where bannon figures into the investigation. spending time with theou're grandkids... ♪ music >> tech: ...every minute counts. and you don't have time for a cracked windshield. that's why at safelite, we'll show you exactly when we'll be there. with a replacement you can trust. all done sir. >> grandpa: looks great! >> tech: thanks for choosing safelite. >> grandpa: thank you! >> child: bye! >> tech: bye! saving you time... so you can keep saving the world. >> kids: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪

how crucial might steve bannon be to your investigation? >> well, it all depends on what he has seen and what he has heard. he could obviously be very significant. certainly, the comments he made about the meeting as well as the comments he made over concerns

about money laundering are quite front and center for us. >> part of my interview with adam schiff in the last hour on what he would like to find out from steve bannon in the koersh of the russia investigation. the former chief strategist is set to report with the committee on tuesday. joining me, denny heck of washington. he's also a member of the house intel committee. it's always good to talk with you. i'm not going to have you confirm that your committee is meeting with steve bannon because i know you won't. >> alex, i finally trained you. >> yeah, okay. but i still alluded to it. anyway, but hearing what congressman schiff said there, is that how you see it? >> so i'm going to do my howard baker imitation with steve bannon as with everybody else. i want to know what did you know and when did you know it. and obviously, as somebody who played an integral role at the heart and in the heartbeat of the white house, he very well may have something to offer that is of value, if he in fact is being interviewed by the house

select committee on intelligence. >> given the fallout over the book "fire and fury" do you expect steve bannon would be forthcoming or combative, since he's no longer in the president's good graces, he certainly made anoverture to become so, but it appears that's not accepted, persona non grata he seems to be. >> i see mr. bannon as somebody who may or may not be forthcoming, but he's always combative. i'm not going to be a hypocrite about this and stand on the sidelines and rub my hands in partisan glee that the republican party has fallen into this great battle between mr. bannon and the forces of bannon and some of the rest of them. the fact of the matter is within a month or two of his actually being installed in the white house, i wrote the president a letter and said by virtue of temperament and character and public policy positions, this person is not fit to be in the white house, and please get rid of him. so i'm glad he's left the white house. and frankly, i'm glad he's being

marginalized within republican party politics because i think his point of view has no place in american politics. >> so after democratic and california senator feinstein released the transcript of the judiciary committee's talk with glen simpson, they said russia and the world are laughing at the stupidity they're witnessing. republicans should finally take control. what do you think he meant by that given how partisan this investigation has been from the start? >> it's becoming more partisan than it was. i'm increasingly concerned about our ability to fulfill our job and get at the truth behind this in terms of committee deliberations. i'm very bothered by the fact as adam schiff has reported and indicated, republicans are being highly resistant to subpoenas to deutsche bank. in our effort to get at some of the potential money laundering efforts that may have occurred between the trump family and that bank and others associated with russia. i'm very disturbed that they're

resisting efforts to get at a subpoena for twitter to see what some of the communications may have been between campaign operatives and wikileaks and julian assange. the fact of the matter is that they're not being terribly helpful right now. at the end of the day, however, alex, as i have said repeatedly, in bob mueller i trust. there is an entity under way with considerable resources behind him whose integrity is unquestioned who will seek the serve the national interests. on the house side, the congressional side, i hope we get to the point of dealing with one of the terms of the terms of reference of our investigation that has kind of gotten short shrift throughout the last year. that's what is it that we do to arm ourselves against this happening again. i have said to you repeatedly, alex, the russians did this. they did it on a scale unlike they had ever done before. they're doing it elsewhere. and they're going to continue to do it. well, in fact, we have now had an indication that they're playing in the mexico national

election. so we need to begin devising some of the mechanisms that will deter them and prevent them from doing this to us again, especially now that we're into the year of the midterm elections. >> yeah. i look at where you are right now, you're in seattle. there on the west coast. given what happened yesterday in hawaii, all the sheer panic over the false alarm. "the new york times" is suggesting a link between president trump's rhetoric on north korea, that the legitimate panic on the island was heightened by the president's rhetoric about north korea. is this the climate hawaiians are living in right now? >> not just the hawaiians. those of us who live on the west coast, alex. those of us of a certain age find this eerily reminiscent of when we conducted the drills at lakeshore elementary school in vancouver, washington, of diving under the desk in preparation for a nuclear attack back in the early 1960s. the fact of the matter is, when human errors occur and nations don't communicate, and nations engage in miscalculations,

that's when war could occur. i am deeply, deeply sorry for the panic that the people of hawaii felt yesterday. but i'm also just as deeply concerned about the fact that we are in a context and a climate in which error, human error, could lead to the unthinkable. >> all right, congressman denny heck, always good to speak with you. thank you. thank you. coming up next, rand paul defends president trump. why he thinks it's unfair to call the president racist.

accusations of racism following president trump's alleged derogatory remarks about immigrants from haiti and countries in africa. here's what senator rand paul said about the controversy today. >> it's unfair to sort of draw conclusions from a remark that i think wasn't constructive, as the least we can say, and i think it's unfair to sort of all of a sudden paint him, oh, well, he's a racist, when i know for a fact he cares deeply about the people in haiti because he financed a trip. >> joining me now, roland martin. roland, good to have you back to the broadcast on this sunday. your reaction from what you heard there. is it unfair?

>> senator rand paul, his comments on this issue are ridiculous and they're irrelevant. this is the problem when you have a debate when it comes to the issue of somebody racist and not racist. and so we begin to debate the frays and the words. you look at the actual policies. this is the mistake that we have been having all week as a result of this shithole comment from president trump. that's the mistake. we're focusing on, well, what about these countries? we focus on these countries and the historical reality. you have to focus on whiteness. what donald trump said is he doesn't want them here. he doesn't want haitians, el salvadorans, he doesn't want africans here, the people here. that's a question of whiteness. because what has been driving his agenda, alex, has been the fact that white americans in this country feel as if their economic anxiety is a result of those other people taking our jobs. and that's what this is driven by. his supporters are so clueless

and dum to realize that at mar-a-lago, he's hiring the very same people who he says he doesn't want in the country. so what we have to do is actually be much more deeper than mustard on a hotdog and begin and say what's behind the comments? what's behind his policies? just last week, alex, hud announced they were not going to implement obama era rules forcing cities to come up with their plans to how do they end sgrogated housing patterns. in 2018, when this is the 50th anniversary of the fair housing act. so if you want to look at trump, you don't just debate racist or not racist. you focus on his policies, and how they impact people of color. >> but i guess the question hast to be asked, for this president, is any of this going to matter? will anyone have to pay the piper, if you will, because this is not the first time the president has been accused of racism.

it came up when he launched his campaign referring to mexicans as rapists. he had the event with the native americans at the white house. is this going to pass? >> of course it will pass, but you have to look at this in the broader context. why he did those things. he knew exactly what he was doing. look, just look at the particular data in this country. in september of 2016, the university of chicago did their particular poll where they said, since 2002, whites in america across all partisan income levels believe that their standard of living is not going to improve. african-americans and hispanics, they say it is going to improve. what you have right now in 62% of blacks say they thought america's best days were ahead of them. 40% of whites thought so. so now you have to begin to say, okay, what's driving that? what's driving that, alex, is because we're becoming a majority minority country. by 2043, whites will not be the majority in america. but you also have the economic

policy institute that said by 2032, minorities will make up a majority of the working class. that is the most important thing here. white americans are fearful of what's coming. it's a question of whiteness. when you begin to hear we're losing our culture, losing our way of life, that's what they're talking about. we have to examine this thing through the prism of whiteness and not just, oh, concern about the future. they're frayed because the fear fewer whites are having babies. with the death rate and about five or seven rates in seven rates will surpass the annual white birth rate. so when trump says it we bring in the norwegians, it's bringing more whites across the world, fewer people of color. >> i want to ask this based on the mlk event at the white house the other day, and of course, we look ahead to tomorrow and celebrating the legacy of martin

luther king jr. a number of my guests are critical of those who stood by the president in that room. is there room to understand, roland, that some black americans may agree with this president's policies? >> well, first, the data is there. you saw 94% of black women voted for hillary clinton in 2016. there was a nine-point gap between black men and black women who voted. so about 85% of black men voted for hillary clinton, but it wasn't just about trump. it was the same nine-point gap in 2012 between president barack obama and mitt romney. you have that going on. so you have always had about 4% to 6% to 8% of african-americans who supported republican candidates. you have always had that. the problem is, will you be honest about in terms of what the policies are. isaac fehr is mlk's nephew, standing there. he's an irrelevant member of the mlk family. i have been in black media for the last 25 years.

i have never had a substantive conversation with him about any policy. this is his opportunity to get attention, otherwise the king children normally get it. what you have here is what i say to black republicans is be honest. be honest about why you're there. also, if you're going to be in the room, say something. michael steele and i have had that conversation. if you're going to be at the table, have the courage of senator edward brook, who fought against republicans when it came to fair housing. have the courage of jc watts and other republicans who have been willing to challenge other black republicans. i on my tv show, i will challenge black republicans, when are you going to demand your party not move forward when it comes to voter suppression. some do, but that's the fear there. for the folks there, don't be there for the photo op. have some integrity and speak to the issues that black folks care about because that's why you're in the room, because of your blackness, not because you're republican. >> roland martin, always

illuminating talking with you. thank you so much. good to see you. coming up next, i'll speak with the hawaiian emergency management official taking the blame for yesterday's false alarm. can he explain why it took 38 minutes to end the panic? ♪ ♪ keep it comin' love. ♪ keep it comin' love. ♪ don't stop it now, ♪ don't stop it no. ♪ don't stop it now, ♪ don't stop it. ♪ keep it comin' love. ♪ keep it comin' love. ♪ don't stop it now, if you keep on eating, we'll keep it comin'. all you can eat riblets and tenders at applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. jimmy's gotten used to his whole yup, he's gone noseblind. odors.

he thinks it smells fine, but his mom smells this... luckily for all your hard-to-wash fabrics... ...there's febreze fabric refresher. febreze doesn't just mask, it eliminates odors you've... ...gone noseblind to. and try febreze unstopables for fabric. with up to twice the fresh scent power, you'll want to try it... ...again and again and maybe just one more time. indulge in irresistible freshness. febreze unstopables. breathe happy. need a change of scenery? the kayak price forecast tool tells you whether to wait or book your flight now. so you can be confident you're getting the best price. giddyup! kayak. search one and done.

welcome back, everyone. i'm alex witt here at msnbc world headquarters in new york at 38 past the hour. here's what we're monitoring for you. as hawaiians wake up on this day after a false alert about a

ballistic missile strike rattled their nerves, the question remains why did it take so long for officials to send out a correction. >> it was unacceptable it was sent out in the first place, but the fact it took so long to send out the second message to calm people, to allay their fears this was a mistake, a false alarm, is something that has to be fixed, corrected, with people held accountable. >> and joining me by phone, a man who has been very busy, vern miyagi, administrator at the hawaiian emergency management agency. i'm going to ask you the question on everyone's mienltd, why did it take so long to send out a corrected alert? >> this is vern miyagi. that timeline is on me. we do these tests or these drills on change of shifts on a routine basis, and in this case, a false alarm went out. and it took some time because we did not anticipate a false alarm, and a cancellation button we had on that existing

yesterday, all it does is stop any further issuances of the false alarm. the initial messages went out there. >> so, vern -- vern, i want to ask you, i appreciate you taking sfaublt. it was you who pushed the button. can you explain just in a very clear way what exactly happened. was it one employee who just pushed one button? and that alert went out? how does it even go out? >> well, first of all, he pushed the actual button instead of the test button. >> ah. >> so what happened is that there was a mistake. and that's my team, my organization, so that's on us. what we have done thus far to stop this from ever happening again is we stopped all of these routine drills at change of shift. we have a two-person rule from now on if we do these drills so

it's not one person that pushes the button. and right now, we have already installed on the template another cancellation button that would put out a prescripted message that says this is a false alarm and canceled. and that's what took us a long time, the 38 minutes. it will be instantaneous if we ever have this again, but our goal is to never have this happen again. >> i can imagine. i will say i have friends who live in hawaii, and one friend in particular has been talking about really what people have been saying there, citizens, and she suggests there were sirens that went off in the pearl harbor area around the military base, but they didn't go out everywhere. is that true? were there some places where sirens were not working? >> no, what happened was that when we do this test, there are really two parts. and the state-wide, there was one person who handles the sirens and one person who handles the eas and wea, which

is the telephone site. what happened is that the sirens were not triggered. but what happened on the military bases is when they received the messages, they triggered their sirens. that has to be coordinated again in the future. the state sirens did not sound. military bases did. >> okay. you say you never want to have this happen again. i imagine you're taking a very good look at everything, certainly. what is the first thing that's on your agenda when you get back to work tomorrow or tuesday after the holiday? what do you first do when you get to make sure this doesn't happen again? >> first of all, i'm here in the office right now. we're conducting an investigation about from the time it started to the time it ended to make sure we understand, get the facts, get the statements. and make sure we understand what happened. and based on that, we'll come up with after-action reviews and. but like i said, two-person rule, no more tests until we fix this, and the other point is the button we put on now that will

be instantaneous cancellation. that's the fix right now, but again, we have to finish our investigation, finish the reports, and move forward from there. >> well, vern, i appreciate that you're clearly on top of this and trying to make sure this does not happen again. thank you for clarifying our questions. and best of luck to you. thank you, vern miyagi. let's bring in general barry mccaffrey, msnbc military analyst joining us from honolulu. let's talk about the event you must have experienced. first, what was it like for you? >> well, you know, it's shocking. i thought it was highly improbable from the start, no geopolitical context that would indicate a launch by north korea. but look, mr. miyagi is very forthright, taking responsibility for it. pretty impressive. this was a bone-headed system, and by the way, there are other problems. there was no announcement of this giant, gorgeous resort i'm staying in by the hotel system. so i think they got to rethink

the whole process. now, that's the smallest issue. this was just a mistake. with severe consequences on hawaii. the bigger problem is, civil defense is not the answer to north korean nuclear weapons. if they fire an icbm with a 250-ki 250-killaton nuclear warhead and it hits on honolulu, it's game over. so what we need to talk about is how are we going to convince the north koreans to stop their nuclear development program, and more importantly, how are we going to proliferate and enhance a layered ballistic missile defense. there's no thad missile system operating in the hawaiian isl d island. there needs to be. one shot down a test missile fired from hawaii. these things work. we need to enhance the strategic missile defense system. most of it is up in alaska, so

we better get serious about this. north korea will soon not threaten just guam and hawaii, south korea and japan, it will threaten the entire continental united states. that's where this conversation needs to go in congress. >> but you know, general, given the bellicose way that kim jong-un and this president talk about, you know, who's got the bigger button and, you know, fire and fury and all that sort of thing, i'm wondering, when it comes to the residents there of hawaii, a friend of mine yesterday with whom i was speaking in the initial chaos, when i asked her what wuyour going to do, that a ballistic missile is coming your way. what do you do? she said, there is no recourse. what are we going to do until we have a system in place that we can guarantee you're going to be able to hit a missile way up in the atmosphere and not have it land anywhere and affect our citizens? what do you do, build bunkers? where are we going with this? >> well, we're not going to go

anywhere until we have an attempt to isolate north korea economically that's more effective than exists. that means the chinese and to some extent the russians, but more importantly, what we can do is we can start a serious effort for missile defense which we have lacked, with new technology and by proliferating the technology that does work. the thad missile system works. the patriot missile system works. the navy sam-3 aegis cruisers and destroyers work. we have to get industrious here and put together a defense, because civil defense is not the answer for the main targets, two, three, five years from now and the north koreans have a dozen or more icbms, civil defense is not much of a tool to use against thermonuclear weapons. >> well, i'm sure there will be a lot of conversations on the

heels of what happened yesterday in hawaii. general barry mccaffrey, enjoy the rest of your time there, sir. thank you so much. still ahead, is someone lying about what the president said in the white house meeting? and next hour, new reaction to president trump's tweet that daca is probably dead. the thoughts from one of the hundreds of thousands of d.r.e.a.m.ers. anna, do you have those plans? yes! i just wanted to show you something i've been wor... ♪ james r. and associates. anna speaking... ♪ james r. and associates. anna. ♪ [phone ringing] baker architects. this is anna baker. this is what our version of financial planning looks like. tomorrow is important, but you're ready to bet on yourself today. spend your life living. find an advisor at northwesternmutual.com.

but when we brought our daughter home, that was it. now i have nicoderm cq. the nicoderm cq patch with unique extended release technology helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. it's the best thing that ever happened to me. every great why needs a great how.

this is a gross misrepresentation, and if is not productive to solving the problem. >> are you saying he didn't use the word that has been so widely reported. >> i didn't hear that word. i didn't hear what senator durbin said repeatedly. >> is he lying? >> he has misrepresented what happened in meetings before. >> and their initial statement following that meeting they say they did not recall the president specifically making the comments. let's bring in margorie clifton. how do you make sense in the

shift of responses from senators purdue and cotton, does it seem strange to you that they can't recall? >> i respect senators that are dually elected. i said at this point i would love to see us seeing policy. a lot of latinos voted for this president because it gets to fairness. a lot of them have been waiting in line for years and to have the focus on policy, immigration, debate itself rather than something that may or may not have been said or misquoted. >> it appreciate the

conversation on policy, but it is very difficult to do without getting through all of the noise, and someone has to be lying here. how do you respond to the argument? >> it is unfortunate because what seems to have happened is we moved away away from a logic debate on anything. it goes to news media, whether or not it is credible or not. and what we have seen trump do is on the record say things that offended someone and for him to later come out and say i didn't say that. what happens is people double down. they listen to what they want to hear, and whatever is discredited it was interesting to follow. people were listening to npr and fox news are hearing two different realities. people are grasping on to the

reality they want. you had multiple aides come out that broke the story. the way that people confirmed it was different, but to have different people come out differently they say no, that is not what was said. it is hard to decide who is criminal and who is not. the truth now seems to be viewed through a partisan prison . >> so many people are isolated, they're not willing to have a conversation with some that doesn't agree with them. >> but i want to just be basic here. truth, if something has happened or has not happened, something was said or not said, it seems

to be interrupted through a partisan view. >> and i think that gets to the nature of just how polarized the country has become. everyone can snack on their own version of their ideology. the way we're going to move past this and create a more perfect union is to talk to people who don't agree with you. talk to people from a different walk of life. i 10,000% agree. this is how we move past the questions that you're raising. the only way we have the same truth is to be in the same room and have it be an open and transparent conversation. it has not been transparent. that is something that trump is bringing to the table. people were doing back room deals, and this was a back room conversation. >> is the is the president bringing more?

>> it discredited his ability to be objective. when he says something derogatory to the group, it really puts everyone in a compromising position. in part of civil dialogue, it is acknowledging fault. so how we come to a middle ground on this i don't know. i hope is that our elected members would say enough. we had plenty of people come forward and say mr. president, you're incorrect, cruel, or kind. who do we trust is the problem when we have now members of congress siding with the president and calling these

things into question. >> good to see you both, thanks, guys. >> kon >> congress in the high court, how it could change the balance on capitol hill.

you might take something for your heart... or joints. but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember. right back, ok? alriyou going to be alright? (vo) i was born during the winter of '77. my dad said i cried for 3 days straight. i first met james when he moved here in the 5th grade. we fell in love and got married right after college.

and a few years later, started a family of our own. the boys grew up fast. but then one night, a truck didn't stop. but thanks to our forester, neither did our story. and that's why we'll always drive a subaru.

that is a wrap for me this hour, thank you for watching, everyone. david is going to pick it up here. happy sunday. >> hello, thank you, you too. at odds, lawmak