it is not just john mccain and lindsey graham. there are others raising questions about the potential for susan rice to be elevated to secretary of state. they have serious questions they say while the president says that susan rice was giving information given to her by the intelligence community, the questions these republicans are asking include why did the station chief in benghazi report in realtime, they say, it was a terrorist attack right away? there is a definite disagreement about the facts and question of republicans why susan rice was put in this question. they say as u.n. ambassador, why was she the spokesperson on the issue of benghazi in the first place and appeared on the morning shows as you discussed. senators point out it's their constitutional role to advise and consent on the nominations and push back when they see fit. they said what about condaleeza rice? wasn't that disqualifying and those was -- that was a different time and other countries agreed with the u.s. at that time that there was a danger of weapo

and in fact lindsey graham, i was the person who asked both lindsey graham and john mccain the question about susan rice because it was clear they were so hot on this issue, and he made the point separately that he has supported the president's supreme court nominees when most of his party has not. but this is a situation where they are going to go to war to try to block it if, in fact, susan rice is nominated or as they said for that matter, anyone else who is currently serving in the administration who they think did not do their job properly when it comes to benghazi and the attack in libya. >> i want to discuss more on this with our panel in a moment. ali velshi, i want to bring you into this conversation, talk about the so-called fiscal cliff. the president was firm saying the rich people -- the people who make more than $250,000 a year presumably will have to pay some more in taxes, but i didn't hear that firm shermanesque line about rates, about tax rates or numbers for that matter. he was very, very willing to compromise if they have good ideas, bring them up, let's avoid this l

both senators mccain and lindsey graham previously vowed to block her possible nomination. i'm joined now by dan lothian at the white house for us. and dan, what do we hear from mccain and graham this weekend? it seems maybe they provided a little bit of wiggle room now. >> it certainly does appear that way. what we're seeing is a change in tone. there had been sort of this harsh rhetoric they wanted to block this nomination, said they would block this nomination. and now there seems to be this tone where they want to give susan rice a chance to explain herself, that they're willing to sit down and talk over these issues with her. at a listen to what senator mccain had to say about this over the weekend. >> i think she deserves the ability and the opportunity to explain herself and her position, just as she said. but she is not the problem. the problem is the president of the united states. >> now, again, we should point out that she has not been nominated for this post, but there's a lot of speculation that she is the top choice from this white house to replace secretary c

so we were talking about john mccain and lindsey graham. what is behind this obsession and the personal attack on susan rice? >> it is very odd because you know, she had a meeting at her own request with all of these senators and she has more meetings today. >> bill: yes. >> at first it wasn't clear when they came out and said they were more troubled at what the problem. then they put out a statement the essence of it seems to be that acting c.i.a. director michael morrell said that the talking points have been changed by the fbi because of an on-going criminal investigation. and they were very troubled by this because of course we had already been told it was the dni that changed them. then they got a call at 4:00 p.m. from the c.i.a., actually, no it wasn't. it was us. we changed them. so then they're going what the bleep is going on? they can't get their act straight. and yet the focus of their rage when they came out from the meeting was susan rice, not michael morrell. >> bill: right. so susan rice, first of all not responsible for sec

and lindsey graham is his mini me. what's going on here is that they had a theory, a conspiracy theory about libya. mitt romney tried to elaborate it in the second debate. he got slapped down. couldn't even talk about it in the third debate. the more we learn about this, the more we learn that this was a very standard procedure in terms of reaction. you put out there what you can put out there. you don't put out there things that would reveal sources and methods of intelligence or minimize the chances that you would catch someone. one of the things that's most disturbing about this, ed, once again, you have the republicans going after an african-american. we saw it with eric holder, we're seeing it with susan rice. it's the same old politics they've played since 1968 in the southern strong and it's not about national security, it's about politics. >> well, let's throw in shirley sherrod's name, and also, there have been a number of others out there as well. tara, are mccain and graham not giving up on libya because the

i think lindsey graham was right. general petraeus should exercise. he should testify to lay those doubts to rest. i don't know what happened and why he resigned. i don't know the internals. i will bet dollars to donuts that there was a voluntary aspect to this, that he himself felt under the circumstances he should resign, that that was the honorable thing to do. >> distinction is whether he should lose his reputation and his job and i think david is right, don't let the worst thing about a person become the true thing about him. what is the standard for everybody in the sky? they would probably be out if the person they had an affair with had access to their e-mail as a security breach kind of thing. so he probably has to if-- >> why did she have acitose hi access to his e-mails? >> we don't know. but in terms of his job, keeping secrets and not letting people have access to secret things tseems to me you can't stay in that job, separate and aparent from his reputation. it seems lindsey graham, even if you're on the left or right, even if you have t

graham from john mccain, lindsey graham and kelly ayotte after their meeting with ambassador rice. >> we are significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got. >> bottom line, i'm more disturbed now than before. >> i'm more troubled today. >> senator mccain's embarrassing past with libya includes a meeting in tripoli in 2009 with gadhafi to discuss the possible delivery of military equipment to that dictator at his side at that meeting, as usual of course, was lindsey graham. also joining him was senator joe lieberman. today sh after meeting with ambassador rice, joe lieberman chose not to join the baseless criticism of ambassador rice. >> based on what she has said as clearly as possible, backed up by the director of the cia, i think it wouldn't be fair to disqualify her based on what she said. >> ambassador rice released this statement after meeting with the republican senators. while we certainly wish we had >> ambassador rice released this statement after meeting with the republican senators. joining me now, msnbc's karen finney and howard fineman. howard, what is your un

mike rogers has questions, lindsey graham. i believe the administration if it has as strong a case as it does, secretary clinton should brief them in private, public would be better, she would make more progress in private, to let them know what the facts are. >> chris cizilla, what about hillary clinton trying to put this to rest for the administration when, in fact, she could have testified in the first place or not testified, could have come on the sunday talk shows but it was not something she does and it was a hot potato and the white house seemed eager to put susan rice in that seat. >> i agree totally. i think mark is right, that the right thing probably to do is more information is better than less information on this topic. i watch "meet the press" yesterday, i watched your reaction after mike rogers. i had a similar reaction. kind of throwing that allegation of maybe the president knew without any evidence behind that claim, is particularly when it relates to foreign policy this is a serious charge here. i would say

what would a john mccain or lindsey graham say about a woman like that's qualifications for secretary of state?

you have john mccain and lindsey graham both saying if her nomination is put forward, they will filibuster it. are there any indications that that would become an official republican party position, because if the republicans unite, they would have the 40 votes to kill it by filibuster. >> there is a lot of opposition among republicans to a potential susan rice nomination. people are not actively talking about filibuster, although that's the obvious presumption if you talk about members trying to block something like this. in some was they are saying that she was schoezen bied white

lindsey graham is utterly terrified as the senior senator from alabama against someone. i'm not surprised by something like that. the question is if they want tovp an investigation, vote to have one. let's have the investigation, and shut the hell up until the investigation is final and done. then if there's a problem, say there's a problem. >> quickly, rachel, can they get to the bottom of who changed the talking points? is that something -- again, i was watching "morning joe," and there was a difference of opinion if you can pinpoint that kind of information. >> i think they'll keep asking questions until they do get an answer. i think it is likely that more information will emerge about this. you know, the controversy over susan rice is so particularly interesting because the charges that are flying around have gotten so personal. we heard the president call out senators mccain and graham by name at the news conference last week and saying if you want to come after someone, come after me. they answered by saying, all right, mr. president, we'll come after you. >> than

. >> what's so interesting, lindsey graham was on, and he was talking about immigration. i got to play his comment, and i want your thoughts on the other side of it. let's play it, please. >> it's one thing to shoot yourself in the foot. just don't reload the gun. i intend not to reload this gun whether it comes to hispanic. i intend to tear down this wall and pass an immigration reform bill that's an american solution to an american problem, but we have nobody to blame but ourselves when it comes to losing hispanics. >> i intend to tear this wall down, and it's an american solution to an american problem. where were those comments during the republican primary when governor rick perry was all but run off the stage. again, this was before he couldn't name the three agencies that he would eliminate. where was this sentiment then, and will it work on latino voters? >> well, i think that sent want was certainly behind the scenes. you had moderate republicans cheering rick perry because of his approach to latinos in texas, his familiarity with that important group. again, he

it was with senators lindsey graham and kelly ayotte and john mccain. >> they were upset. john mccain over the weekend backed up a little. >> he backed up. >> which is really cool. she went up and said i'm sorry. >> she did the brave thing and went right in there and said i want to address this. >> how did that work? >> she talked about her initial account of the attack. she explained to them that she was relying on faulty intelligence, faulty talking points from the intelligence communities. >> and they said? >> they said, you know what, we still don't get it. >> go to video. >> we are significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got and some that we didn't get. it is clear that the information that she gave the american people was incorrect. >> bottom line, i'm more disturbed than i was before. if you don't know what happened, just say you don't know what happened. people can push you to give explanations and you can say i don't want to give bad information. >> i am more troubled today knowing, having met with the acting director of the cia and ambassador rice.

senator john mccain and senator lindsey graham both said today they want to have watergate style hearings on the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi and said if you nominate susan rice to be secretary of state they will do everything in their power to block her nomination as senator graham said he simply doesn't trust ambassador rice after what she said about benghazi. would those threats deter you from making a nomination like that? >> first of all, i'm not going to comment at this point on various nominations i'll put forward to fill out my cabinet for the second term. those are things that are still being discussed. let me say specifically about susan rice, she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interests in the united nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. as i've said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house. in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after m

it's lindsey graham and he is most likely going to attract a primary challenger. this is not without risk but it's significant. it's not only the senators. you have senator coburn and saying it won't be terrible to raise taxes on the rich. i think we are starting to see a shift. the key is, is it just reductions or will some be willing to raise tax rates on the wealthy? that is going to be the real sticking point and ed, you heard what congressman king said. he said, look, it all has to be on the table. then you have speaker boehner saying that he wants obama care on the table in the fiscal cliff negotiations in reality will that be on the table, obama care in. >> you know, this is a a genius move by republicans. they wanted to repeal obama care. they would have done it had mitt romney been elected and they can't do that. boehner has said repealing it entirely is a moot issue. but getting some concessions is probably the way to do it. in part because there are democrats who agree that changes should be made and even the president has said that it's not a perfect l

let me salute lindsey graham. what he said about revenue in needs to be said on his side of the aisle. we put everything on the table. >> does that include raising the age for medicare eligibility? >> here's my concern about that. what happens to the early retiree who needs health insurance before that person's eligible for medicare? i had it happen in my family and i bet a lot of your viewers did, as well. we have to make sure there is seamless coverage of affordable health insurance for every american. my concern about raising that medicare retirement age is they'll be gaps in coverage or coverage that's way too expensive for seniors to purchase. >> is that a fair point, senator graham? >> not really. i don't think you can look at entitlement reform without adjusting the age for retirement like tip o'neill and ronald reagan did. it goes to 66, 67 here pretty soon for social security. let it float up another year or so over the next 30 years, adjust medicare from 65 to 67 over the next 30 years. means test, benef

you've got lindsey graham trying to say something happened in this meeting to make the situation worse. what could that have been? >> well, from talking to a top official in the white house and to senator mccain, behind closed doors, the meeting wasn't as contentious as those statements after ward made it sound. at least as regard to ambassador rice. i think both sides agree that there are legitimate questions to be asked about the timeline of what happened in benghazi. about the state of knowledge at the time, about security protections and so forth, but as far as holding ambassador rice personally accountable for the incomplete and in some cases wrong story she gave on five different shows that sunday, i don't think that behind closed doors the republican senators were going after her personally. they came out afterwards and made it sound like the grave matter it was involving her. i don't think that's where they're at behind closed doors. >> let's listen to president obama on november 14th. about the senator's attacks on ambassador rice. >> when they go after the u.n. ambassador, ap

and look, i know lindsey graham well. saxby chambliss, peter king, these are thoughtful, smart, principled leaders. and they are fiscal conservatives. they are anti-tax. i don't think a pledge should define anybody. i'm not a fan of pledges. i think you pledge to your god. i think you pledge to your constituents. you pledge to your country. the kind of representative i want going to washington is somebody that's going to act out of conviction, out of conscience, out of what his constituents want and not because they are being told to through a pledge. it's taking a lot of cowage for what saxby chambliss and lindsey graham are doing. both of these guys just earned themselves a primary as a result of these statements. and i will tell the people of georgia and of south carolina, you are very well served by those two senators. i hope they win. i hope they get re-elected. they're doing a fine job. saxby, lindsey, call me, no pledges for me. i pledge to help you. >> i think they're doing what they should do, which is their job

john mccain and lindsey graham know this is much ado about nothing. are there legitimate questions to ask, bureaucratic questions about how information moves up the chain of command? of course. there always are in these sorts of situations. especially when they're tragic like this. but does that mean it's some sort of scandal, you know, watergate style cover-up or there was an effort to have people, quote, stand down in the fashion of terrorism? it's ridiculous. >> it's worth mentioning the president at the press conference made it clear that four americans did lose their lives and he's deeply concerned about that. and we all should be. but republicans e especially senators mccain and graham, have been beating up on u.n. ambassador susan rice every single day for the last two months. and the president stood up to that bullying today. take a listen. >> to bring those who carried it out to justice. they won't get any debate from me on that. but when they go after the u.n. ambassador, apparently because they think she's an easy target, then they've got a

lindsey graham from south carolina, the most recent saxby chambliss did it the other day. those republicans senators up for re-election in 2014. maybe they'll face a challenge from the right. take a look at what lindsey graham said on the sunday talk shows. >> when you're $16 trillion in debt the only pledge we should be making to each other is to avoid the coming grief, and republicans, republicans should put revenue on the table. we're this far in debt, we don't generate enough revenue. >> and that's his key difference here. he says he's okay with the no taxes but we do need to raise revenues and if that means cutting back on such things as tax rates, he will do it. also he says the democrats have to come forward here, as well. they have to do entitlements if he's going to break his pledge. zoraida? >> paul steinhauser live in washington for us. thank you. >> we're in the midst of the shopping frenzy and some people are seeing encouraging starts to the holiday shopping season. a record 247 million shoppers hit the stores and websites over the weekend. the national retail

>> senator john mccain and senator lindsey graham said today they want watergate-style hearings on the attack on the consulate in benghazi. >> i want to ask about the families of four killed. >> general petraeus is where we begin at the white house. i guess it's a good bet they would be coming up today. >> reporter: yeah. you saw the ap ask it. it didn't dominate as much as we thought. our friends at telemundo asked a question and coming back on immigration. he talked about the fiscal cliff. he laid down the law you saw him there. he wants the tax cuts extended for everybody under $250,000 and got to general petraeus and this whole intertwined story with benghazi, that's when it got really rough. the president took out after republicans namely john mccain and lindsey graham for the criticism leveled at susan rice. the u.n. secretary, shortly after the attacks that resulted in the death of four americans, she went on "meet the press" and other sunday shows and said what happened in benghazi was the result of a spontaneous protest that morphed in to something else and resulted in the dea

earlier today she met with senators john mccain, kelly ayotte and lindsey graham. this meeting with senator lieberman approximately if it started on time, it was set to start around 2:00 eastern time. we got this video in. about a 20 minute or maybe less meeting. we'll hopefully have more insight in the latest meeting centering around the investigation of the deadly attack in the consulate in benghazi. in an hour president obama meeting with mexico's president-elect at the white house to discuss border security, immigration and trade. we'll get a preview. a record powerball jackpot soars higher for tomorrow night's big drawing. we'll tell you how much it's worth now. it's a story around the "news nation" for you. check out the tumblr page. you find behind the scenes pictures. we have to update the picture, because today -- tomorrow they reveal the big tree. that scaffolding is no longer up. we'll take a new picture and have it updated for you in the break. oh, let me guess --ou see this? more washington gridlock. no, it's worse -- look, our taxes are about to go up

and lindsey graham needs to give it up too. and they need to suck it up and start to work across the aisle like they have in the past, and show some basic respect for the president of the united states. >> i mean, this is the first shot over the bow, as to how the next congress is going to feel about one another. i mean, do you think mccain and graham would have the troops to stop her if she does, and the president says today he hasn't made that determination yet, whether he's going to nominate her or not. do you think they have the chops to do that? >> sure. in the senate, it only takes a couple of people to filibuster. and then there aren't the 60 votes. and if they go through with this, if they don't back down, it will be hard for her to get confirmed. that's the reality of the u.s. senate. so it seems to me and i think a lot of other people that the president and senator mccain need to get together, you know, not have a beer summit, maybe drink something harder, and, you know, try to work this out and establish some kind of

i'm certain my colleague from new hampshire, and of lindsey graham. so i do believe that it's in the country's interest to give her a fair hearing and to let her explain the situation, the position that she took on benghazi. >> senator, good to have you on the program. thank you. >> nice to be with you. >> let's go back to the strategy on the part of the white house. and obviously we're in this mess because they couldn't make a deal the last time. if the president's backup strategy is, and susan, this is what the l.a. times is reporting that they have to go off the fiscal cliff, they're willing to paint the gop as villains. i'm wondering about that strategy and does it appeal to moderate americans who clearly just want something done? >> well, you know, every time we do a poll and talk to americans, they say they want a deal, want both sides to compromise, to give a little. and i wonder to what degree the white house saying they are willing to go off the fiscal cliff is a, you know, a strategy that you would have right at this point to hold the feet t

the senior senator from south carolina, republican lindsey graham. senator, let's get right into it. you just heard the chairs of the intelligence committees on benghazi. bottom line point, did director petraeus call this terrorism from the get go? they say yes. they don't understand why the administration didn't call it the same two days later. how do you react? >> well, i think one of the reasons that susan rice told the story she did, if the truth came out a few weeks before the election, that our consulate in benghazi, libya, had been overrun by an al qaeda-sponsored militia, that destroys the thinking that al qaeda is dead, bin laden is dead. susan rice did not say it was the result of a mob spawned by a cairo. she said i want to remind the american people this president promised to go after bin laden, refocus on al qaeda. he got bin laden. al qaeda has been dismantled. and the truth of the matter nothing could have been further from the truth, and the story she told reinforced a political narrative helpful to the president. but disconnected fro

the senior senator from south carolina, republican lindsey graham. senator, let's get right into it. you just heard the chairs of the intelligence committees on benghazi. bottom line point, did director petraeus call this terrorism from the get go? they say yes. they don't understand why the administration didn't call it the same two days later. how do you react? >> well, i think one of the reasons that susan rice told the story she did, if the truth came out a few weeks before the election, that our consulate in benghazi, libya, had been overrun by an al qaeda-sponsored militia, that destroys the thinking that al qaeda is dead, bin laden is dead. she said i want to remind the american people this president promised to go after bin laden, refocus on al qaeda. he got bin laden. al qaeda has been dismantled. and the truth of the matter nothing could have been further from the truth, and the story she told reinforced a political narrative helpful to the president. but disconnected from reality. >> let's be clear about what you're saying. you also heard

it's just a simple question about john mccain and lindsey graham and john mccain and lindsey graham, do you think they are crazy and you can answer yes or maybe. >> what i believe is that susan rice is an incredible person with a great deal of intelligence and integrity and n ought to be taken r for her word. i think it's really unfortunate for her. >> i don't think senators are crazy in my experience, so i've been theorizing this is about opening up the secretary of state job for john kerry, so if they then reopen a massachusetts senate seat r for scott brown. is that your sense of the game that's being played? >> i have no idea. you are much more mcvalue yan thinking than am. >>> coming up, we'll find out about ari melber and guess who's coming to dinner? mitt romney's last chance to get into the white house is coming up. >>> what could they have to talk about? maybe they can reminisce about their days at harvard law coschl where the president was president of the law review and mitt romney wasn't. mitt romney's trip to the white house tomorrow where barack obama is president and m

it's just a simple question about john mccain and lindsey graham and john mccain and lindsey graham, do you think they are crazy and you can answer yes or maybe. >> what i believe is that susan rice is an incredible person with a great deal of intelligence and integrity and ought to be taken for her word. i think it's really unfortunate for her. >> i don't think senators are crazy in my experience, so i've been theorizing this is about opening up the secretary of state job for john kerry, so if they then reopen a massachusetts senate seat r for scott brown. is that your sense of the game that's being played? >> i have no idea. you are much more mcvavalian thinking than 1 am. >>> coming up, we'll find out about ari melber and guess who's coming to dinner? mitt romney's last chance to get into the white house is coming up. [ male announcer ] we all make bad decisions. like say, gas station sushi. cheap is good. and sushi, good. but cheap sushi, not so good. it's like that super-low rate on not enough car insurance. pretty sketchy. ♪ and then there are the good decisions. like esuranc

graham needs to give it up, too. they need to suck it up and start to work across the aisle like they have in the past and show some basic respect for the president of the united states. >> this is the first shot over the bough as to how the next congress are going to feel about what another. do you think mccain can stop her. >> oh, sure, they can stop her in the senate. it only takes a couple of people to phil buster start. then in i they don't back down, did will be for confirm. >> a lot of the -- maybe drink something harder and try to work this out and establish some kind of relationship on behalf of the american public. >> mccain has not shown any interest to work anything out with the president. think think you wee can hold on both on that one. next up, mitt romney talks to big money donors and doubles. >> the new class of win has arrived on capitol hill. i always wait until the last minute. can i still ship a gift in time for christmas? yeah, sure you can. great. where's your gift? uh... whew. [ male announcer

senator lindsey graham got a lot of flack for saying pointly, blankly, these are live pictures from chicago we're looking at right now. this is president obama's election headquarters. senator lindsay graham says that the republican party was not manufacturing enough angry white men. he meant that as a cautionary tale to republicans. are we seeing measures of that tonight, that mitt romney is not able to stitch enough places? >> bob mcdonnell said that the politics or the arithmetic of politics is addition, not subtraction. you're got to widen the base and the point of it is that ed rollins, four years ago said the same thing that lindsey graham said, it was a campaign manager for ronald reagan said we cannot just be the party, the republican party of white males. especially when you have a growing latino group, and asians, and other people and young people, you can't just be segmented to have one constituency. >> 25 years ago, the former republican governor of new jersey came out with a book called the politics of inclusion. kaine was talking about how he was able to stitch together two re

and lindsey graham and john mccain are a committee of two in wanting a select committee to investigate watergate style benghazi. i don't even think most republicans have the appetite for. that secondly, john mccain just did an enormous favor for susan rice because he just boosted her chances that she is likely to be nominated because the president doesn't want to look like he's walking away from a fate. this is a fight that he can win, should win, early in his second term. he can't allow these two war hawks on the hill to roll him. so it's tough to get a nomination through, but you've got an invigorated party with two more seats. if they want to filibuster her nomination the president can make a big issue of that and the republicans aren't going to look like a winner going after a woman what had nothing to do with the benghazi attack. >> susan rice can answer this on sheefer's program, "face the nation," and the question is do you think that she got her talking points for that program from the white house? >> she got the same talking points as the administration was giving to the house

now south carolina republican senator lindsey graham. take a listen. >> when you're $16 trillion in debt, the only pledge we should be making to each other is to avoid the coming grief, and republicans, republicans should put revenue on the table, we're this far in debt, we don't generate enough revenue. i want to buy down debt and cut rates to create jobs. but i will violate the pledge, long story short, for the good of the country, only if democrats will do entitlement reform. >> and i think that's important what he said there. only if democrats will do entitlements, as some democrats have pushed back on that. they do not think that that should be on the table. as f americans, they believe that there should be a balance between spending cuts and tax increases. about 67%, according to a new cnn/orc poll say that 29% say only spending cuts. and who will get the blame if we don't reach some kind of agreement here? gop clearly gets the brunt of the blame here. 45% say the gop, 34% say president obama, 15% say both. now as congress returns