funded the taliban, x, y, and z. but we have funded x, y, and z. in this moment, when it comes to russia and putin, it seems that donald trump is willing -- at least it seems to me -- willing to subordinate u.s. interests to whatever he seems to perceive as his interests in relation to vladimir putin. so, you get this lack of outrage on the one hand and this subordination of u.s. interests on the other, which leads me to conclude, not only, you know, i think reasonably, it seems to me, that this is a very dangerous moment and that we should dive deeper into it. and this goes to what willie said earlier as well. i think we've noticed a lack of seriousness, a lack of urgency, a lack of empathy with regards to how donald trump has responded to covid-19, and we understand that it's all driven by his own preoccupation with his own political well-being, even if his instincts seems to be, at least to me, wildly misguided. he's always acting in the interest of donald trump, as he understands them. and that's not necessarily

the russians have been arming the taliban now for years. and i guess the part, question two, part "b" for you, yamiche, would be he accepted it with iran. he blew up soleimani. he accepted that the iranians were a threat to u.s. troops, so he can hear it if it's someone other than russia, it would see seem. >> that's right. and what's most remarkable when you watch this is that this is an interview that's happening and that was welcomed and that president trump willingly sat down for, knowing that russia bounties was going to come up. so to your first, when you think about what are people thinking in the white house, maybe there are some people left in the white house who might be concerned about this. but people who will rise to the top and continue to be successful in the white house are the people who are going to downplay this and say that they are on the president's side. i always go back to the idea that a high-ranking white house official telling me that the way to survive in this white house is to ride the trump wave and double down

this is the taliban, which until recently has been killing u.s. service members. and yes, it's true that there isn't consensus on this intelligence, but that is not itself unusual. this was taken seriously. "the new york times" did excellent reporting on it. it went to the highest levels of government, as you pointed out. it was contained in the president's written daily brief. there was a national security council meeting about it. the pentagon is looking into it. allies were briefed. so this is not like some flimsy piece of gossip. this was real intelligence. and what i found striking in the interview was that he was incurious about this. he dismissed it on its face. he wrote it off as fake news. and it did not comport with his worldview in the way that he thinks about putin and russia. so therefore it was immediately off the table. and that's what i found striking. and i thought the second part of it actually in some ways was more shocking than the first part because i said, fine, you don't believe this piece of intelligence. but your own head of forces in afgh

so russia was providing money to the taliban to carry out something that the taliban was already doing, which was trying to target american troops. >> yeah. and of course there is a kind of grim historical symmetry here because the u.s. and cia funded the antesee dants to the taliban precisely when they viewed the russian mess there as a strategic weakness. there is a logic to why russia would do it. but there is a question of why, right? what the strategic vision is here, why they have invested themselves increasingly heavily in the taliban in afghanistan. >> well, i think what is surprising in all of this is that russia is doing this at a time when you have in the white house a leader that, by all accounts, has been incredibly warm towards the russian state and the russian president in particular. the gru unit, this is the military intelligence unit that russia carries -- that russia used to carry this out is apparently the same unit that is responsible for the poisoning of the man in london in a couple of years ago with the powerful nerve agent. if you will recall, when that event o

this is the taliban, which until recently has been killing u.s. service members. and, yes, it's true that there isn't consensus on this intelligence, but that is not itself unusual. this was taken seriously. "the new york times" did excellent reporting on it. it went to the highest levels of government, as you pointed out. it was contained in the president's written daily brief. there was a national security council meeting about it. the pentagon is looking into it. allies were briefed. so this is not like some flimsy piece of gossip. this was real intelligence. and what i found striking in the interview was that he was incurious about this. he dismissed it on its face. he wrote it off as fake news. and it did not comport with his world view in the way that he thinks about putin and russia. so, therefore, it was immediately off the table. and that's what i found striking. and i thought the second part of it actually in some ways was more shocking than the first part because i said, fine, you don't believe this piece of intelligence. but your own head of forces in

money flowing to afghanistan to support the taliban has been going on since we went to afghanistan. almost two decades ago. it is not just the russians. probably not majority of the russians. money flowed from lots of places, from iran, even today. the iranians continue to undermine what we're trying to accomplish in terms of peace and reconciliation in afghanistan. it is incredibly important that you take in context how it is this reporting is developed and how it is the united states has responded to this. we do everything we can. and this president has been vicious in securing american freedom and protecting american soldiers. last point, there is some suggestion somehow that there was an appropriate response taken because this was russia. if you have 20 minutes, i will read to you what this administration has done with respect to russia. instead, i'll provide it to you for the record. it starts with a $700 billion allocation of resources to the department of defense. it continues with withdrawal from the imf, something the russians remain unhappy about. what we have done in syri

by the taliban just weeks before it was signed. he had intelligence that was, again, recapitulated by the pentagon in a report of july 1st and the united nations spoke to cooperation between the taliban and al-qaeda remaining quite an issue and an area of concern and his own central command, general mckenzie, spoke to us recently in june that the taliban still hadn't met the conditions for withdrawal as it relates to cooperation with all guy -qaeal. so whether he takes it on board is a problem for us in the community. >> thank you very much for joining our discussion tonight. we really appreciate it. >> thank you, sir. >>> and when we come back, joe biden is now leading donald trump in a state that a democrat running for president has not won in over 40 years. the biden polling momentum has democrats and republicans focussing on the democrats' strategy for winning back the united states senate. that's next. than rheumatoid arthritis. when considering another treatment, ask about xeljanz a pill for adults with moderate to severe rhe

by the taliban just weeks before it was signed. he had intelligence that was, again, recapitulated by the pentagon in a report of july 1st and the united nations spoke to cooperation between the taliban and al-qaeda remaining quite an issue and an area of concern and his own central command, general mckenzie, spoke to us recently in june that the taliban still hadn't met the conditions for withdrawal as it relates to cooperation with al-qaeda. so whether he takes it on board is a problem for us in the community. >> thank you very much for joining our discussion tonight. we really appreciate it. >> thank you, sir. >>> and when we come back, joe biden is now leading donald trump in a state that a democrat running for president has not won in over 40 years. the biden polling momentum has democrats and republicans focussing on the democrats' strategy for winning back the united states senate. that's next. needles. essential for sewing, but maybe not for people with certain inflammatory conditions. because there are options. like an "un

when you say arming, is the taliban paying or -- >> russia is supplying weapons and money to the taliban. >> i have heard that, but again, it's never reached my desk. >> he said it on the record. >> russia doesn't want anything to do with afghanistan. let me just about russia, russia used to be a thing called the soviet union. because of afghanistan, they went bankrupt. they became russia, just so you do understand, okay? the last thing russia wants to do is get to which involved with afghanistan. they tried that once, it didn't work out. >> jonathan? >> the phrase it didn't reach my desk, i actually didn't understand, it didn't compute. i'm not sure what else you need apart from your top military officer in afghanistan saying publicly this was happening. so i don't know, does that reach the desk? i was sort of flumoxed in that moment, i didn't know what to say. that was genuine surprise you see registered there. >> what do you hear? zb >> listen, there's every evidence that the president essentially lied to jonathan. cudos to jonathan for asking the hard questions. when he says this int

because the taliban is in some ways taking on isis. two, this has to do with the united states. and russia's efforts to dislodge the united states, to make life more difficult for us. fundamentally, to weaken the united states both from without and places like afghanistan, where we have been actively engaged for years, but also from within, and when you talk about from within, these are the tactics that we talked about a great deal since 2016. the information operations we saw in 2016, the warnings that we heard from senior law enforcement intelligence officials that russia continues to do this to us today. this is all a ploy, tactical and strategic by the russians to weaken us, overseas and at home. >> ned, let me switch gears for a moment and talk about another story overseas making a lot of headlines but unfortunately not enough here in the united states. that is about the situation unfolding in hong kong after china passed that new national security law that went into effect this week. secretary of state mike pompeo spoke out again

so russia was providing money to the taliban to carry out something that the taliban was already doing, which was trying to target american troops. >> yeah. and of course there is a kind of grim historical symmetry here because the u.s. and cia funded the antecedents to the taliban precisely when they viewed the russian mess there as a strategic weakness. that is a russian pay back. there is a logic to why russia would do it. but there is a question of why, right? what the strategic vision is here, why they have invested themselves increasingly heavily in the taliban in afghanistan. >> well, i think what is surprising in all of this is that russia is doing this at a time when you have in the white house a leader that, by all accounts, has been incredibly warm towards the russian state and the russian president in particular. the gru unit, this is the military intelligence unit that russia carries -- that russia used to carry this out is apparently the same unit that is responsible for the poisoning of the man in london in a couple of years ago with the powerful nerve agent. if you will

a network that worked closely with the taliban, who told interrogators it was happening. and there was a disagreement among different agencies over whether to credit and believe those interrogation. and the nsa in particular, which sees signal intelligence, data transfers and surveillance to back up things, had more doubts and questions about this human intelligence than the cia and the military did. over time, they also found, either intercepted in real time or found in the raw repository of intercepts that the nsa is doing all the time and throws into a databases and hunts through later on, data showing financial transfers from a bank account controlled by the gru, the russian military intelligence service, to this taliban-linked account. and then there was a raid about six months ago on this network where they captured a bunch of people and the ringleader, apparently, a major person as an intermediary distributing money as reward for people for attacks on u.s. troops, fled to russia. the initial intelligence doubts were reduced after this additional data came in. we th

it says the only people dismissing the russia bounties intel, the taliban, russia, trump. this administration has done a remarkable job of politicizing everything, including the wearing of masks, but i don't understand how this gets politicized. there's no administration that wouldn't be pro our troops in the field, whether or not you agree with why they're there. how does this happen that the russians, taliban and trump are denying this and yet we continue to get information that it probably happened? >> i don't know if i can answer that question. but that's what's happening. we seem to have a president who cares more about protecting his reputation than about protecting our troops in the field. and we seem to have a national security apparatus, a secretary of state, defense, national security adviser who are scared to tell the president anything that he doesn't want to hear, anything that doesn't feed his grievances and his prejudices. and that's not a government that's doing its job to protect us. and we have to make sure that that changes. our role in congress will be

and in going after known taliban agents and known criminals, they found $500,000. all of this points to the fact that the russians have been paying folks in afghanistan, taliban or other criminal organizations, to kill americans. all our president can say is, nobody told me about it. it boggles the mind. i'm putting on my most polite language, opposed to my army language, which would be something -- you couldn't put it on the air, i don't think. but it's incompetence is incredible. >> senator, feel free to use army language here, we'll do what we have to do with it. so what would you do, what should be done in this white house? i mean, just imagine a future, which is possible, in which joe biden is president and if you were there as vice president, what would you advise the president to do when this information was discovered and brought to the president? >> well, the first thing, i wouldn't even have to advise joe biden, he could have done it on the own. the minute he read that report in the daily presidential brief, which by the way we now know that this report w

and in going after known taliban agents and known criminals, they found $500,000. all of this points to the fact that the russians have been paying folks in afghanistan, taliban or other criminal organizations, to kill americans. and all our president can say is, nobody told me about it. it boggles the mind. i'm putting on my most polite language, opposed to my army language, which would be something -- you couldn't put it on the air, i don't think. but it's -- the incompetence is incredible. >> senator, feel free to use army language here, we'll do what we have to do with it. so what would you do, what should be done in this white house? i mean, just imagine a future, which is possible, in which joe biden is president and if you were there as vice president, what would you advise the president to do when this information was discovered and brought to the president? >> well, the first thing, i wouldn't even have to advise joe biden, he could have done it on the own. the minute he read that report in the daily presidential brief, which by the way we now know that th

it was revealed weeks ago that russia may have been paying bounties to the taliban for the killing of american troops in afghanistan. so, how is the trump administration responding? national political reporter jonathan swan pressed the president on that very point. >> we discussed numerous things. we did not discuss that, no. >> and you have never discussed it with him. >> no. i would. i have no problem with it, but you know, it's never -- >> because you don't believe the intelligence, that's why. >> everything -- you know, it's interesting, nobody ever brings up china. they always bring up russia, russia, russia. >> jonathan joining us next with his exclusive interview. next wh his exclusive interview. ♪ right now, there are over a million walmart associates doing their best to keep our nation going. because despite everything that's changed, one thing hasn't and that's our devotion to you and our communities. our priority will always be to keep you and our associates safe, while making sure you can still get the essentials you need. ♪ ♪ >>> welcome back, everybody. joining me

that frankly, they didn't cancel that peace process with the taliban, and say to the taliban, you want a peace process with us? you can't have one unless you cut it out with the russians. instead, nothing was done, and in fact, instead, even though this information was at the highest levels of the white house, even though people liked in national security adviser clearly read it, in the subsequent phone calls with vladimir putin, he's being invited to the united states for a g-7 summit. the president of the united states announced recently the withdrawal of u.s. forces from germany, which makes sense to absolutely no one, except vladimir putin, who very much wants to see that happen. so he's both putting our troops at risk and he seems to continue to be pursuing a foreign policy agenda that only makes sense from the perspective of moscow. that's just the plain reality of what's happening, nicole, that's staring us in the face. it is deeply, deeply profoundly abnormal. >> ashley parker, i have two questions for you. one, the white house has found a need through the president and its spo

house and this administration with what it knew regarding intelligence that russia may have paid the taliban money to kill american soldiers in avenue st afghanistan. st afghanistan. afghanistan. afghanistan. afghanistan. afghanistan. afghanistan. afghanistan. afghanistan. anistan. afghanistan. afghanistan. you can explore endless options at every price point. get your outdoor oasis delivered fast so you can get the good times going. ♪ wayfair. you've got just what i need. ♪ they're going to be paying for this for a long time. they will, but with accident forgiveness allstate won't raise your rates just because of an accident, even if it's your fault. cut! sonny. was that good? line! the desert never lies. isn't that what i said?

when you say arming is the taliban paying or -- >> russia is supplying weapons and money to the taliban. >> i have heard that, but it's never -- again, it's never reached my desk. >> i mean he said it on the record when he was -- >> russia doesn't want anything to do with afghanistan. let me just tell you about russia. the last thing russia wants to do is get too much involved with afghanistan. >> the last thing russia wants to do is get too much involved with afghanistan. except that russia is right now too much involved in afghanistan to the peril of american troops on the ground. joining me now mike mcfaul, former u.s. ambassador to russia during the obama administration. i don't really know where to start. i don't know what's sort of more troubling. the it never gets to my desk which is something we hear from donald trump a lot. his basic misunderstanding of the role russia is having with afghanistan, or this whole talking to putin and never mentioning the idea that russia might be involved -- is likely involved in paying bounties to taliban militants to kill american soldiers. i do

this is the same kremlin that is military arming the taliban. >> you know, this goes to a point that nancy pelosi raised when this story was breaking and it was quite striking to me because he was -- she was wondering about, you know, why -- because the white house story was, you know, no one told donald trump, no one told donald trump. john bolton has said he himself did tell donald trump but john bolton won't confirm that publically because he says it's classified. but nancy pelosi at that time said this: were they afraid to approach him on the subject of russia? and were they concerned that if they did tell him that he would tell putin? and that, to me, is the most important way to look at this question. it's one of the possibilities. >> i think the question has to be raised that if, in fact, they did alert trump, he would just share the intelligence information. that's what he was already instructing the cia to do as a matter of policy, despite the analysts saying that if we do this we get nothing in return, so why would we do this? but it was, in fact, the effort by the white ho

this is the same kremlin that is military arming the taliban. >> you know, this goes to a point that nancy pelosi raised when this story was breaking and it was quite striking to me because she was wondering about, you know, why -- because the white house story was, you know, no one told donald trump, no one told donald trump. john bolton has told people he himself did tell donald trump but john bolton won't confirm that publicly because he says it's classified. but nancy pelosi at that time said this: were they afraid to approach him on the subject of russia? and were they concerned that if they did tell him that he would tell putin? and that, to me, is the most important way to look at this question. it's one of the possibilities. >> i think the question has to be raised that if, in fact, they did alert trump, he would just share the intelligence information. that's what he was already instructing the cia to do as a matter of policy, despite the analysts saying that if we do this we get nothing in return, so why would we do this? but it was, in fact, the effort by the white house a

when the taliban in afghanistan -- >> it was a different era. >> i'm just saying, yes. i'm just saying we did that, too. >> congressman, ruminate on that while you also think about the fact that the new york times is reporting since the disclosure of these boumtys, no new national security council interagency meetings on the topic have been scheduled, adding officials were alarmed about the bounty's intelligence and the lack of a response, that they have essentially given up, because the white house's narrative made it politically impossible to reverse course and treat the intelligence as a serious matter. your thoughts, congressman? >> it's see no evidence, hear no evidence, and speak of no evidence, that's the way the president works. he still can't accept that the north won the civil war. he won't accept that russia interfered in our election. and with overwhelming evidence, he won't accept credible evidence that russia is putting bounties on u.s. troops. there are blue star families across america right now who want the president to defend our troops, and he needs t

. >> -- the transfers from the russian gru to a taliban-backed group. this is getting more and more focused. and like we said from day one, they might as well not lie about it. the lies are going to be found out. >> yeah. >> but here you have, once again, whether you're talking about russia, whether you're talking about the coronavirus, whether you're talking about "the new york times" reporting this morning that donald trump insists on having his twitter feed look like a local crime blotter. just, again, donald trump wildly out of step with the american people. and willie, we're about to show a poll. it just keeps showing up and more and more republicans are expressing more and more concerns, saying, is this guy really going to be around? is he going to run for re-election, if he knows he's going to lose badly? >> and really, we'll talk much more about the russia story, but the more reporting that comes out, not just from charlie savage and "the new york times," but nbc has new reporting this morning as well. there's nowhere for them to go at the white

and i am more concerned at this point because now having heard from taliban leaders that they're assessing and claiming it to be true that we still have not seen a full throated denunciation coming out of this white house and in our briefing yesterday that is what i said to the chief of staff, was that i want to see this president, this white house say that they will get to the bottom of this. if there is any doubt in their mind as to whether or not it is true, i expect that they're going to lean into it, aggressively determine whether it is true or not and take action. but the fact that we haven't heard anything to the effect of if this is true we wholeheartedly denounce it and defended that bounty would be put on u.s. soldiers by an adversary nation, it is unthinkable we haven't seen that level of a response out of this white house. >> "the new york times" is reporting that there is a financial trail between the gru in russia and taliban linked bank accounts in afghanistan. are you getting enough information to satisfy your questions on that link? >> what is important to me and i'm a for

they are arming the taliban. >> i don't know. when you say arming, is the taliban paying? >> russia is supplying weapons and money to the taliban. >> i have heard that. but, again, it's never reached my desk. >> joining me now for more on the president's continued refusal to stand up to russia, member of the senate foreign relations committee. you are shaking your head because it is truly a bizarre exchange to watch the u.s. president. >> yeah. i mean, it is no more bizarre than any other exchange with the president over the last three years. but this claim that the intelligence never reached his desk is just impossible to believe. i have seen the intelligence. it's serious. it's concerning. and any president that read that intelligence wouldn't go six conversations with vladimir putin. that's the number that donald trump has had, the number of talks he's had with them since march without bringing this up because if we don't respond to the heads of american soldiers, then it sends a dangerous signal all around the world that there is very little cost to be paid for coming

both the afghan forces who can turn guns on them, the taliban haqqani network. so i would not think they would be shocked or particularly disturbed that the russians put a bounty on their head. just another threat out there on the horizon. the people who are concerned about this right now is what the centcom commander and his staff think about it. what about the afghanistan joint commander in country? the interagency all over? i assume that what went on in mr. trump's mind was i'm trying to get putin into the g8, re-establish the g8. i don't want to confront him on any issues. the russians think they can manipulate him and have been successful in doing so. and so i think the word went out he doesn't want to hear this. so maybe he wasn't officially briefed, but there's no way he didn't know about this consensus emerging from the intelligence community. mr. esper shouldn't have put that statement out. >> all right. general barry mccaffrey, thank you as always for your time. appreciate it. >>> and coming up, mitch mcconnell now knows who he's going to run against i

has intelligence indicating that russia paid bounties or offered to pay bounties to taliban fighters to kill american soldiers. you had a phone call with vladamir putin on july 23rd. did you bring up this issue? >> no, that was a phone call to discuss other things. and frankly, that's an issue that many people said was fake news, who -- >> who said it was fake news? >> a lot of people. >> you never discussed it with him? >> no. you know -- >> you don't believe the intelligence, that's why? >> you know, it's interesting.

we have the taliban on television saying in fact it's true. we've got multiple sources across news outlets giving very detailed information, detailing a plot and a scheme. there is no reason that we shouldn't be preparing retaliatory steps and actions to take to demonstrate to the russians that the united states will not stand for bounties to be put on the heads of our men and women in uniform in afghanistan. unequivocally we can make that statement. and then as we continue to get more information and as a former intelligence officer, i can tell you that's the nature of intelligence. you never know anything 100%. you build and layer upon layer information from various sources to ensure a high degree of credibility. but when it comes to protecting our u.s. service members abroad, we should be taking every action possible to make sure that they are safe. >> congresswoman, your cia experience is invaluable to us in covering this story. thank you very much for joining us tonight. >> thank you for your coverage as well. please stay safe. >> thank y

troops in afghanistan and even downplayed russia supplying weapons and money to the taliban. >> john nicholson, former head of forces in afghanistan said, and this is when he was working for you, that russia is supplying weapons to the taliban. isn't that enough to challenge putin over the killings of soldiers? >> we supplied weapons too. when they were fighting, when the taliban in afghanistan -- >> that's a different era. >> i'm just saying, yes. no, no, i'm saying we did that too. >> joining me now is democratic congresswoman from alabama, terri sewell, a member of the house intelligence committee. i want to ask you about the specific allegation and the specific intelligence in a minute. but i'm curious if you had a reaction to the president's what aboutism? it was an -- you heard it almost as if, well, we did it to them, so of course, they're doing it to us. your reaction? >> you know, i think that the least this president should do is care about the life and wellbeing of american soldiers that are fighting on the front lines. and clearly, it is distressing that this president ha

we have the taliban on television saying in fact it's true. we've got multiple sources across news outlets giving very detailed information, detailing a plot and a scheme. there is no reason that we shouldn't be preparing retaliatory steps and actions to take to demonstrate to the russians that the united states will not stand for bounties to be put on the heads of our men and women in uniform in afghanistan. unequivocally, we can make that statement. and then as we continue to get more information, and as a former intelligence officer, i can tell you, that's the nature of intelligence. you never know anything 100%. you build and layer upon layer information from various sources to ensure a high degree of credibility. but when it comes to protecting our u.s. service members abroad, we should be taking every action possible to make sure that they are safe. >> congresswoman, your cia experience is invaluable to us in covering this story. thank you very much for joining us tonight. >> thank you for your coverage as well. i appreciate it very much

and there are plenty of instances in the obama administration when pakistan was funding the taliban or iran and perhaps the response wasn't what some people would have liked. the issue is the entire national security community, congress, and foreign government knew about the intelligence, but donald trump wasn't briefed orally on there is some suggestion that the people around donald trump are afraid to bring him a certain kind of intelligence, or they're strategic about it because they know the intelligence briefings could go off the rails if they bring up the wrong subject, russia included. that's really scary and bad in terms of u.s. policy towards russia. we don't know these bounties were paid and americans died because of it. it sure would be something you want to president to know when he's talking to president putin. he could have issued a warning saying you may not know this is going on, but knock it off. these are things presidents do all the time. >> one of the words that the white house is sticking on is that there are unverified -- it's unverified intelligence. does verifie

when you say arming, is the taliban paying? >> russia is supplying weapons and money to the taliban. >> i have heard that. but, again, it's never reached my desk. >> joining me now for more on the president's continued refusal to stand up to russia, member of the senate foreign relations committee. you are shaking your head because it is truly a bizarre exchange to watch the u.s. president. >> yeah. i mean, it is no more bizarre than any other exchange with the president over the last three years. but this claim that the intelligence never reached his desk is just impossible to believe. i have seen the intelligence. it's serious. it's concerning. and any president that read that intelligence wouldn't go six conversations with vladimir putin. that's the number that donald trump has had, the number of talks he's had with them since march without bringing this up because if we don't respond to russia putting the bounties on the heads of american soldiers, then it sends a dangerous signal all around the world that there is very lit

been pursuing a peace deal with the taliban. and now afghanistan has turned politically as an issue about him being perhaps too soft on russia or at the least, not paying a close enough attention to russian activity in afghanistan. and with traditional republican hawks and other hawks in the independent side, that would be a political issue. >> all right. robert, i have to ask you this question, and i should know the answer. but every single time i see their pictures up, i'm like, how did they -- the gang of eight. how did that posse get that nickname? >> it's because of the number of people who are sitting in the meeting. you have the congressional leaders, eight of them, coming together to talk through the intelligence. and what the gang of eight has established to make sure all members of congress, at the leadership level in both parties are involved. the intelligence committee chairman, marco rubio right there from florida. you see the minority leader, the majority leader in the senate, the ranking member of intelligence in

soldiers was included in the daily briefing before he signed this paeeace dl with the taliban. you have family of the military including a father of young man who was killed in afghanistan, demanding answers from the u.s. government because everyone including of course these military families are wondering what the united states is going to do if this turns out to be true. >> frank, i dare this president to look a family member grieving the most horrific loss and call it a hoax, i mean, i've lost the thread on his stupidity. do we have a president on his fourth year as the country's commander in chief doesn't understand what intel is, they're all leads until the explosions go off, until the bombs go off, this says something really, really scary about his fundamental lack of understanding what the intelligence product is and does. >> this piece of intelligence, nicolle s no more a hoax than the covid virus was a hoax. to admit that this was in his pdb understand would to be admit incompetence, to reveal all of the issues once again between him and vladimir putin. let's be absolu

about what the president knew about bounties allegedly being paid by the russian government to the taliban to kill american troops. the family members of american troops who have been killed since the russians have been doing that now want to know what the president did with that information. after he was briefed on it. that story and more next. [ thunder rumbles ] [ engine rumbling ] [ beeping ] [ engine revs ] uh, you know there's a 30-minute limit, right? tell that to the rain. [ beeping ] for those who were born to ride, there's progressive. that's why i've got the power of 1,2,3 medicines with trelegy. the only fda-approved, once-daily 3 in 1 copd treatment. ♪ with trelegy and the power of 1, 2, 3, i'm breathing better. trelegy works 3 ways to open airways, keep them open, and reduce inflammation for 24 hours of better breathing. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk

over the past several years it has been quietly working in the background to enhance its ties with the taliban wit purpose of expanding its strategic interesting in fs fs once nato and afghanistan leave and russia will have an opportunity once again to step in." discuss with a former assistant secretary of state for european and you're asi eurasian affairs and jeremy bash, msnbc national security analyst. good to have you both with us this morning and ambassador newlin, let me start with you. what do you think putin's strategy is when it comes to afghanistan? particularly how that strategy might be served by putting out hits on american service members? >> well good to be with you this morning, joshua. look, putin wins either way. whether he's done it or whether he has only summed out about his ability to do it, beaux it complicates the u.s. ability to withdraw in afghanistan. you know, you could argue this round or flat. if u.s. soldiers are losing their lives in afghanistan and we decide that it is too soon for us to withdraw, then putin gets a more stable afghanistan on his border where he

. >>> we have new reports suggesting how much money russians were willing to pay taliban militants to kill american troops in afghanistan. that's according to "new york times" and afghan officials. it was up to 1$100,000 per soldier. the details of how the money was actually dispersed to those carrying out the fatal attacks and to what level the coalition occurred, those details still remain unclear. according to u.s. intelligence reports cited by "the times" the middle man is a businessman who say among those who reportedly collected the bounty cash in russia, which intelligence officials described as multiple payments of, quote, hundreds of thousands of dollars. afghan security agencies, they carried out sweeping raids to arrest dozens of his relatives and associates six months ago but found he had fled the country and was likely back in russia. "the times" is reporting $500,000 in cash was found in one of his homes during the raids. nbc news has not confirmed bounty payments were made as part of the reported russian plot. and even as his own administration is working to brief lawma

up bright and early rage tweeting at the media over reports that russia offered to pay bounties to taliban linked militants in afghanistan to kill american troops. he tweeted it was another hoax designed to slander him and the republican party. as the intelligence committee received intelligence that trump tweeted that he said he never saw. donald trump was happy to offer up vitriol, saying painting black lives matter on new york's 5th avenue would be denigrating this luxury avenue with what he called a symbol of hate. a symbol of hate? says the same donald trump who just days ago retweeted, with comment, a video of an apparent supporter yelling "white power." other symbols of hate are those confederate statues he's protecting. trump tweeted people damaging monuments could face up to 10 years in prison. poet caroline randal williams writes of the efforts to take down those efforts -- >> i'm joined now by caroline randal williams, poet and writer in residence at vanderbilt university and author of that incredible "new york times" op-ed. tim o'brian from bloomberg opinion and tom any nollnic

it's clear that russia has been supporting the taliban for quite some time. but these most recent reports about bounties, donald trump had an obligation to the american people to let putin know in very clear and direct language that this has to stop and that we're going to get to the bottom of this. it is clear with his answer at the press conference today donald trump continues to give putin a pass, even on something as appalling as russian efforts to potentially spill american blood. >> congressman, you are a combat veteran. what is it like for you to have this question asked of the president today? and it's one thing for him to hide behind we don't talk about what we talk about, which is not true. he has in the past talked about his conversations of vladimir putin. but there is an opportunity for the president of the united states to address this country on this report about intelligence reports indicating that russia had been paying, has been paying to kill american soldiers in afghanistan. and donald trump does not say one word to this country about that

being part of a ring of middle men who, quote, operate between the russian intelligence agency and taliban-linked militants. a white house spokesperson declined to comment on the times' reporting. meanwhile, abc has so lid slid learning about it. claiming no one had briefed him about the matter. the associated press reports that trump's national security adviser at the time, john bolton, told colleagues that he briefed the president about the intelligence in march of 2019. nbc news, though, has not confirmed that reporting. the trump administration insists the president was never briefed on the matter. the source added that the information was, quote, out there, at least a month before the april 2019 car bomb attack in paff began stan that killed three u.s. marines. nbc news has not confirmed a link between the bombing and any alleged offers of bounties by the russians. and white house press secretary kayleigh mcenany told reporters that trump has now been briefed and attacks "the new york times" for publishing the allegations in the first place. >> president has been briefed on what is unfortuna

a reporting shows that the white house was aware of russia paying taliban fighters to kill americans as early as 2019 and the president was briefed on it in late february. here's what he said just three days ago. >> i think it's a hoax. i think it's a hoax by the newspapers and the democrats. >> back with me now is my panel, noah and dawn. dawn, the president says it's a hoax intelligence says it is not. what is also disturbing is that even when the president was briefed, he continued to talk about recruincluding russia in 7 again and he had several calls with the president of russia, vladimir putin, and interest's no record or reporting that he ever even raised the question to him about they were engaged in this. how can you be the commander in chief and not be at least concerned about the report, if you don't believe the report which seems credible to some in the military community that they were putting bounties on americans' heads to be killed by the taliban. >> not only do some of the reports seem credible they said the president is a threat because of his relationship with puti

about what the president knew about bounties allegedly being paid by the russian government to the taliban to kill american troops. the family members of american troops who have been killed since the russians have been doing that now want to know what the president did with that information after he was briefed on it. that story and more next. frustrated that clean clothes you want to wear always seem to need an iron? next time try bounce wrinkle guard dryer sheets. just toss it in the dryer to bounce out wrinkles. we dried these shorts with bounce wrinkle guard, and a pair without. the bounce wrinkle guard shorts have fewer wrinkles and static, and more softness. it's the world's first mega sheet that does the job of three dryer sheets. it also comes in unscented. if you don't love bounce wrinkle guard, we'll give you your money back. >>> considering that my son, isaiah, was killed during an insider attack and that, you know, it's almost been a year later and i don't have any reports on the final findings, you know, i can't help but wonder if his death was caused by this. i would like to

that the intelligence community that they believed russia was paying cash bounties to fighters of the taliban to kill u.s. troops. in afghanistan. he got that february 27th. the president says he didn't get that briefing. politico said they have confirmed he was briefed on it. the national security adviser explained on the day it was in the briefing, no one read the briefing out loud to him. no one acted it out for him. i guess that means he didn't really know about it. because unless you say it to him like a story and the president doesn't bother to read it. he didn't bother to read what was in his daily brief. and we know from his schedule he was really busy. he had to meet with the person who wrote the musical. they made a play about it! tripled the meeting time for it. later that day, he did take this meeting with fox news personality diamond and silk. >> we love america. here is my last thing. everybody make sure you vote right so you won't get left. vote red. remove every democrat by voting them out. >> february took that meeting on february 27th. and that was the meeting where he said

committee today where he was finally asked about intelligence reports on vladimir putin paying the taliban to kill american troops. >> do you think it would be helpful for president trump to talk to vladimir putin and tell him that he needs to back off in terms of paying the taliban to kill american troops? >> i will leave to the president what he wants to say to other leaders. i don't think there is any doubt in the mind of every russian leader about the expectations of the united states of america not to kill americans. >> okay. but donald trump told jonathan swan in an interview we showed last night on this program that he did not bring it up in his recent phone call with vladimir putin. so does that mean that there is no doubt in vladimir putin's mind that donald trump doesn't care that vladimir putin might be trying to kill americans? joining our discussion now, a member of the foreign relations committee, t-- wait. was elizabeth warren in the senate before you? >> six months before me and then john kerry became secretary of state and i won the special election. >> yeah. it's very clo

committee today where he was finally asked about intelligence reports on vladimir putin paying the taliban to kill american troops. >> do you think it would be helpful for president trump to talk to vladimir putin and tell him that he needs to back off in terms of paying the taliban to kill american troops? >> i will leave to the president what he wants to say to other leaders. i don't think there is any doubt in the mind of every russian leader about the expectations of the united states of america not to kill americans. >> okay. but donald trump told jonathan swan in an interview we showed last night on this program that he did not bring it up in his recent phone call with vladimir putin. so does that mean that there is no doubt in vladimir putin's mind that donald trump doesn't care that vladimir putin might be trying to kill americans? joining our discussion now, a member of the foreign relations committee, the junior senator -- no, wait. elizabeth warren came first. so wait, i've lost track. was elizabeth warren in the senate before you? >> six months before me and then john kerry bec

was not doing enough to counter russia's support for the taliban. >> i can tell you some of that is done. are we doing as much as we could or should? perhaps not. not only to the russians but to others. a lot of it is being done, some quiet, some not so quiet. >> he also broke with president trump by calling on the united states to take a hard look at renaming army bases named for confederate officers saying there is no place in our armed forces for manifestations of symbols of racism, bias or discrimination. he condemned confederate leaders and called it an act of treason. at the same time, as esper and milley were testifying, geoffrey berman was on capitol hill. we'll talk to one of the lawmakers who questioned him after investigating the president's inner circle. him after investigating the president's inner circle ♪ ♪ now is the time to support the places you love. spend 10 dollars or more at a participating small business and get 5 dollars back, up to 10 times with american express. enroll now at shopsmall.com. it's called ubrelvy. the migraine medicine for anytime, anywhere mig

the story broke that russia paid bounties to taliban fighters for murdering american soldiers. "washington post" at least three deaths might have been tied to that program. the president has said nothing. it's been written inside the cia we joke to putin win win means i beat you twice. good intention from the u.s. side has been proven futile. >> yeah, yeah. i appreciate nicolle you keep bringing this up and bringing it back to russia and to the bounties because i think -- i mean, all americans probably feel this way. i come from a military family. i worked in the white house for a long time. you know how that is. it makes you feel physically ill to know that that intelligence is there and nothing was done, nothing was acted on and we continued to -- the congress doesn't do anything and the senate doesn't. you have -- there's just -- in terms of how the public is taking this all in, consider you have ads being run now where they see former military talking about the president not protecting american troops. there was a poll today that showed only 29% of americans are okay with t