Show: 11TH HOUR WITH BRIAN WILLIAMS Date: January 4, 2019 Guest: Jill Colvin, Josh Gerstein, Barry McCaffrey
BRIAN WILLIAMS, MSNBC HOST: Tonight Donald Trump threatens our government shutdown lasting months or years if need be. He says he could try to order his wall to be built, though, Democrats and the Constitution may differ.
Also Robert Mueller lays out the groundwork for even more. His grand jury has been extended by a judge tonight. We`ll talk about the consequences.
And speaking of the Russia matter, it was something the President said just days ago seeming to endorse the soviet invasion of Afghanistan decades ago, seeming to take the Russian line and rewriting history. Well, tonight we`ll talk about why federal investigators might be replaying that televised moment as THE 11TH HOUR gets under way on a Friday night.
Well, good evening once again from our NBC News headquarters here in New York. This first Friday night of the New Year brings an end today 715 of the Trump administration. Tomorrow begins week three of this government shutdown.
Today brought what the White House likely viewed as good and worrisome news. First the good stocks surged nearly 750 points after taking a dive yesterday. That bounce back came after a robust jobs report, over 300,000 jobs added in December.
There was also a new and potentially ominous development however in the Mueller investigation, more on that just ahead.
We begin here tonight with this ongoing, yet still urgent shutdown. And the breathtaking reporting from "The Washington Post" tonight saying the White House may have been cavalier about a shutdown because they didn`t fully understand what it entailed.
And we, "The Trump administration which have not anticipated a long-term shutdown, recognized only this week the breadth of the potential impact, several senior administration officials said. The officials said they were focused now on understanding the scope of the consequences and determining whether there is anything they can do to intervene."
The President met with Democratic Congressional leaders again today. He`s holding firm on his demand for $5 billion for his wall. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described that as "contentious."
Tonight, the "Wall Street Journal" described it this way, also breathtaking, "Mr. Trump opened Friday`s meeting with lawmakers with a 15- minute profanity laced rant about impeachment, according to people familiar with the meeting. Mr. Trump also told lawmakers he didn`t like the word shutdown and preferred the word strike. One of the people said."
That, of course, would be the opposite of a strike, where workers choose to walk off the job. At any rate, the after action reports on the meeting didn`t offer a lot of hope.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHUCK SCUMER, (D) NEW YORK MINORITY LEADER: We told the President, we needed the government open. He resisted. In fact, he said he`d keep the government closed for a very long period of time, months or even years.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That`s where we are. DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Absolutely I said that. I don`t think it will, but I am prepared.
I`m very proud of doing what I`m doing. I don`t call it a shutdown. I call it doing what you have to do for the benefit and for the safety of our country.
So you can call it whatever you want. You can call it the Schumer or the Pelosi or the Trump shutdown, doesn`t make any difference to me. Just words.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: have you considered using emergency powers to grant yourself authorities to build this wall without congressional approval?
And second on Mexico --
TRUMP: Yes, I have.
We can call it national emergency because of the security of our country, absolutely. No, we can do it.
(END OF VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: That last part, declaring a national emergency to build the wall got everybody`s attention late today. Tonight our NBC News colleague Julia Ainsley reports that according to two sources as Trump administration lawyers are already meeting to figure out if the President can in fact, do this. Earlier on this network long time Republican commentator Charlie Sykes raised the alarm precisely about this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHARLIE SYKES, AMERICAN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: This idea that he might invoke a national emergency powers, this should be a fire bell in the night in terms of constitutional division of power.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: As for the Democrats while they continue to insist the President will get no money for the wall. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi seemed to hint at least, of movement on some of her party`s demands.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you make ant progress on a dollar figure for what the President wants or what you all want from him?
REP. NANCY PELOSI, (D) CALIFORNIA SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: How do you define progress in a meeting? When you have a better understanding of each other`s position? When you eliminate some possibilities? If that`s a judgment, then yes, we made some progress.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: So there`s that. Remember, as these talks continue there are some 800,000 federal workers left in Limbo. Eighty percent of these folks work outside Washington. Their next scheduled payday, January 11th. And unless there`s a deal this weekend, not looking likely, that it will very likely not mean -- it means they will not get their paychecks.
But today we learn from the "Washington Post" that senior officials in the Trump administration are to start getting $10,000 raises. This afternoon, the President was asked about these raises.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAJOR GARRETT, CBS NEWS CHIEF WH CORRESPONDENT: The $10,000 raise that your Cabinet Members and Senior Administration Officials are due to receive tomorrow, will you ask them not to accept that at least during the shut down itself?
TRUMP: Well I might consider that. You know, that`s something I may consider.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: After today`s Rose Garden event Vice President Mike Pence said he won`t accept the increase during the shutdown. Meantime, furloughed federal employees waiting to go back to work are now left to figure out how to cover their family expenses. Even some government workers who supported the President say they`re having second thoughts about his determination to hold out for that wall.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIARD JENKINS, GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE: If this did not affect my household directly, I would tell him to stand tall because something needs to be done. But since it does affect me, and, again, we`re talking myself and my wife are government employees. so therefore if this doesn`t -- if this continued we would not have a paycheck. But I can definitely understand where Donald Trump is coming from.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: While citing nothing specific the President insists federal workers are behind him and share his views about the border.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What`s your message for federal workers, sir, who have been impacted by the shutdown?
TRUMP: Many of those workers have said to me and communicated, stay out until you get the funding for the wall. These federal workers want the wall.
A lot of people are looking to get their paycheck. We are not giving up. We have to have border security.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you have in mind a safety net for those who need their checks?
TRUMP: Well, the safety net is going to be having a strong border. Many of the people you`re discussing, I really believe that they agree with what we`re doing.
HALLIE JACKSON, NBC WHITEHOUSE CORRESPONDENT: I want to understand how you expect federal workers to last that long without getting a paycheck.
TRUMP: Look, if we have to stay out for a very long period of time we`re going to do that. And many of those people, maybe even most of those people that really have not been and will not be getting their money in at this moment, those people, in many cases, are the biggest fan of what we`re doing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: As we reported here last night the budget still may be creating a fracture within the President`s party as Republican Senators worry now about the shutdown`s political and personal damage. Today one of those senators spoke out.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GARETT HAAKE, NBC CORRESPONDENT: I just want to be super clear here, though, I mean, you calling to reopen the government now, and as -- if even if this wall issue isn`t entirely solved yet, getting the government reopened now.
SEN. CORY GARDNER, (R) COLORADO: The reality is this, the Senate Appropriations bill had by in part stressed the wall in it. Yes, let`s get the government open and we can have a bigger fight for the rest of the funding anyway. That was kind of going to happen whether or not you got $5 billion or more.
I support getting the $5 billion. I support getting more. But let`s get the government open.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: Senator Gardner interviewed by the extremely tall Garett Haake on Capitol Hill. Let`s bring on our leadoff panel on a Friday night Jonathan Allen, NBC News National Political Reporter, also happens to be co-author of "Shattered," the story of the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. Jill Colvin, White House Reporter for the Associated Press. And Josh Gerstein, Senior Legal Affairs Contributor for Politico. Welcome to you all.
Jill, let me take you to the Rose Garden event this afternoon. Do they seem, this is the White House at large, to understand either the actual gravity of this going on too long, or even just the superficial optics, the damage of this going on for too long?
JILL COLVIN, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: No. at this point it really doesn`t seem like they do. The President still believes that this is a winning issue for him. And you saw him standing out there, you know, twice in the last two days. We`ve had the President semi-surprise appearances yesterday in the White House briefing room and today coming out and delivering this Rose Garden press conference after his meeting are really trying to kind of double down, making clear that he has no interest in this wrapping up anytime soon, confirming, in fact, that he`d said that this could last for days, months, even years.
And digging in still on this demand for his border wall money, the President has tried to make the case again and again and again that this money is necessary for border security. Clearly Democrats are not willing to budge at all. And the President still, though, feels like this is a winning issue with his base. He`s had so much pressure, so much feedback from people on the right, you know, the top radio people, folks who worked on his campaign who keep telling him that this is the way to go.
And you`ve got other people, though, in the White House who are looking at this and saying, "Well look, what is the off ramp here?" At some point this can`t go on forever and what are we going to do? And that`s why you see discussion popping up over the last 24 hours or so talking about potentially including DACA in some type of fix.
You had again discussion today about using the -- this emergency declaration that we`ve heard the President now, I mean it`s been months that he has been floating this idea, even during the midterms. We heard him talk like that when he, for instance, deployed as the military down to the border there. So they`re just trying to figure out, trying to come up with potential off ramps to end this.
WILLIAMS: Josh, I don`t know if folks have taught through the equation of upwards of 800,000 federal workers having to choose gasoline or health care starting round about next week, folks who, for no fault, of their own live paycheck to paycheck as millions do, is any party, is either side in this feeling more heat than the other?
JOSH GERSTEIN, POLITICO SR. LEGAL AFFAIRS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think that the White House will begin to feel more heat. I don`t know right at the moment how much heat there is. And the President keeps expressing this confidence that there are many, many federal employees that back his approach here.
And it may be true that there are some, you just have to wonder, as you say Brian, as you go from week to week or possibly on to months, certainly there are very few people that could sustain a year or more without a paycheck. I don`t see how the President can even remotely claim that.
So I think you will see the heat going up on both sides. And I did think despite his bluster today, as Jill says, there were signs that he was looking for a way out of this dispute, whether it be through the emergency declaration, or through some further negotiations and concessions to Democrats that might be able to bring this to a close. I didn`t think that he was as confrontational, he`d been and maybe as he`d been in some of those videos, for example, that were produced by the White House a week or two ago.
WILIAMS: John, I want to play you something and we`ll share it with our wider audience. Let`s just call it the President`s migrating remarks when describing this wall he wants.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We`re going to build a big, beautiful wall. A big, beautiful wall.
The wall just got 10 feet taller. Ten feet taller.
You`ve got to be able to weave and bob. You don`t have to go through a concrete wall when you can go over it or around it.
You have to have see through. You have to know what`s on the other side of the wall.
The barrier wall or steel slats, whatever you want to call it, it`s all the same.
We don`t use the word wall necessarily, but it has to be something special to do the job.
Steel is stronger than concrete. If I build this wall or fence or anything the Democrats need to call it because I`m not into names, I`m into production, I`m into something that works. A see through wall made out of steel is far stronger than a concrete wall. It actually will be a more powerful wall. And it will be a more beautiful wall than having a concrete wall.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: So, John, we`ve gone from concrete to steel wall to fence. People are aware of this in realtime. They have seen his comments change. They`ve seen the goal posts move on the part of this White House.
JONATHAN ALLEN, NBC NEWS NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER: Yes, brain, I don`t expect that the 2020 campaign chant is going to be build that concrete or steel or whatever the Democrats want to call it. His campaign chant has always been build that wall.
I think he is looking for an exit ramp, as Jill called it. If you look at what`s going to happen with the federal government over time, if you actually shut it down for months or years, as he suggests, you`re going to see an expansion of the shutdown. Right now you`re talking about several agencies.
The rest of the agencies would run out of funding in September of this year. So at that point you would see the Defense Department shutdown among those that are currently funded, which would sabotage his own wall efforts to circumvent a deal on the wall because the way that he`s looking at drawing funds for it now is to transfer $4 billion of Defense Department spending, which you can do under the law by declaring it in the natural interests. The Defense Secretary has to do that. I think that`s what he was talking about today.
Usually they get consent from Congressional leaders historically. That`s the way it`s been done. It sounds like the White House is willing to steam roll Congress if the Democrats object to that.
But what you would see is an expanding shutdown of the government. You would see things get much, much worse over time. So I think he`s looking for an exit ramp, looking perhaps for a fig leaf, something that he can say is a wall or a concrete barrier or a steel reinforced concrete or something to give his base.
One point I want to make, though, about the federal workers, Brian, living here in Washington, D.C., the highest concentration of federal workers in the country are in this area, Montgomery County Maryland, Prince George County Maryland Washington, D.C., Arlington and Fairfax County, Sparta Virginia and Alexandria Virginia and these are some of the most overwhelmingly Democratic parts of the country.
The idea that federal workers are supporting the President in general is one that is just not borne out by the numbers politically.
WILLIAMS: And, Jill, irony of ironies, Homeland Security is among the most greatly affected Cabinet agencies. This entire debate is supposed to be about Homeland Security. When the President floats this idea, or specifically a reporter did today of declaring a national emergency, a, what about constitutional issues, the House after all, is supposed to start all revenue. And b, is anyone within the White House taking at a option seriously?
COLVIN: You know, at this point it`s something that is under discussion, as I said earlier. I mean, this is something an idea that has been floated after several months now as they`re trying to figure out ways to circumvent Congress, understanding that it was very unlikely that Democrats would sign off on, you know, any kind of wall that the President is envisioning here. And so, you know, this is an idea that they`re throwing back and forth. It would, you know, there`s theoretically allow the White House to be able to activate the Department of Defense, to start constructing this wall.
But as the President has even alluded to over the last couple of days, you know, when the President starts signing executive orders or emergency proclamations, opening up these new scopes of power it`s something that even he has described as, you know, very, you know, significant step and something that`s kind of a scary thing that he could be getting into here.
And I also want to say, you know, as you talked about this kind of -- the fact that this is impacting Department of Homeland Security, you know, CNN had a stunning reported today that talked about TSA agents, who weren`t showing up for work. You have e-verify, for instance, that is not operational right now.
And so, as the President is up there talking about the need for national security, how this is all about border security. You see the impacts of the shutdown really starting to show themselves in the Department of Homeland Security and across the government. And we`re going to start seeing over the coming days how this impacts real people, how it impacts real lives. And the calculus for the President could begin to change very quickly.
WILLIAMS: And Josh, we`re told that at the staff level, there will be meetings all weekend. The new Chief of Staff, Mick Mu -- acting Chief of Staff, Mick Mulvaney is supposed to take the core West Wing group to Camp David on Sunday for an idea session. Any of this amount to anything in your view?
GERSTEIN: Well, I think it`s interesting that the White House wants the message out now that they`re working on resolving this shutdown. It seemed like early on, the President was willing to just sit there and project this image of him sitting alone in the Oval Office waiting for the Democrats to call. There`s near -- now clearly a more forward lean to what the White House is doing to at least create an impression that there`s progress and I think that`s why some of us think that they are searching for an off ramp.
But I was also struck, Brian, in the President`s comments when he decried liberal judicial court rulings that, if he goes ahead with this emergency option to try to get this wall built, he`ll be running headlong into another sort of hail of legal ritz with people trying to block him again and whether that will actually help him make any progress on building any kind of a physical barrier along the border. I`m very doubtful. He might do better, even in that department, by trying to cut a deal here rather than trying to assert his own power to do this on his own.
WILLIAMS: How tough as it is to avoid a good juicy shiny object for the news media to look at. To John Allen, Jill Colvin, Josh Gerstein, our thanks for starting off our first Friday broadcast of the New Year.
And coming up for us, what the President just said about Russia, it`s the kind of thing you only hear from senior Russians, one of them named Putin, eager to rewrite history. And why this can get the attention of the feds?
And then later, the uproar over a profane pledge to impeach that has some Democrats on the defensive, others willing to forgive what`s been called a rookie mistake. THE 11TH HOUR just getting underway on this Friday night.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WILLIAMS: Let`s face it, folks are still getting their 2019 sea legs, the New Year is merely four days old and already the President has said a lot. But it was something he said on Wednesday that is getting a lot of attention, and not just because his version of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan is completely wrong and attempts to rewrite history.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: The reason Russia was in Afghanistan was because terrorists were going into Russia. They were right to be there. The problem is, it was a tough fight. And literally they went bankrupt. They went into being called Russia again as opposed to the Soviet Union. You know, a lot of these places you`re reading about now are no longer part of Russia because of Afghanistan.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: Today the normally Trump friendly "Wall Street Journal" weighed in and, "We cannot recall a more absurd misstatement of history by an American president. The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan with three divisions in December 1979 to prop up a fellow communist government. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was a defining event in the cold war, making clear to all serious people the reality of the communist Kremlin`s threat. Mr. Trump`s cracked history can`t alter that reality."
Indeed, several people have noted a piece from Jonathan Shade of the New York Magazine who writes, "The Russian government is moving an official resolution," this is present day, "defending the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The approval scheduled to take place next month. Russians have previously called the invasion a tragic era, but Putin`s regime which regards the collapse of the Soviet Union as a world-historical tragedy is systematically rehabilitating various Soviet crimes."
Shade linked to this op-ed from Russian dissident, Vladimir Kara-Murza, who wrote about the resolution just last month.
Well, with us for more tonight, General Barry McCaffrey, former battlefield Commander in the Golf War, retired U.S. Army, Four-Star General, a veteran of the Cold War and a couple of hot ones, he is a Decorated Veteran of Combat as well. And with us tonight, also Frank Figliuzzi, former FBI Assistant Director for Counterintelligence who in the past has worked for one, Robert Mueller.
General, short and sweet, first question to you, will you please tell folks the real history?
GEN. BARRY MCCAFFREY, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Well, it`s an astonishing assertion by the President. It sounds as if the talking points are written by the GRU. December 1979, the Soviets went into Afghanistan under the depression of doctrine to take a socialist friendly government and keep them in power. They brutalized the country. They were there for a decade. They took 50,000 killed and wounded.
They killed a couple of million Afghan civilians. They drove 4 millions Afghans into exile in Iran and Pakistan. It was a tragic operation from the start. It had nothing to do with terrorism and the Soviet Union.
I think he must have grabbed pieces of history and he`s thinking of Chechnya or whatever. But this is a truly astonishing, ignorant statement by the President.
WILLIAMS: General, it was so scarring, I know you know this is the case. It`s hard to visit Afghanistan and not come face to face with the shards of the old Soviet military. You`ll see a tank track, you`ll see pieces of artillery. It litters the countryside.
MCCAFFREY: Yes. It was a disaster for the Soviet Union. A bunch of 18- year-old draftee boys fighting these. You know, nationalist, patriotic Afghans who were basically responding to communism as an atheistic, you know, affront to Islam.
So, you know, it`s hard to imagine what the President was thinking of when he made this assertion. There`s certainly no comparability at all between the Soviet experience in Afghanistan, which was stamped the civilian population into the ground and the attempt by the NATO allies, and much of the world community to support putting Afghanistan back together.
I think that must be his purpose, to delegitimize what we`re now doing in Afghanistan, given the fact he tweeted out this unilateral, we`re going to going to cut our troop presence in half in Afghanistan, which I might add, now essentially ends the likelihood of a diplomatic initiative to end the war.
WILLIAMS: Frank, you and I always talk about things that take place in plain sight. I`m just a civilian. I always think the feds are operating at a higher level. But the President says this on television, his words. Are you telling me the feds will stop, rewind and take notice because he`s parroting talking points that are limited to the closest circle around Putin?
FRANK FIGLIUZZI, FMR. FBI ASSIST. DIRECTOR FOR COUNTERINTELLIGENCE: Certainly the counterintelligence investigation that re -- if you`ll recall, was the impetus for this entire Special Council. The counterintelligence side is going to take a look at why it is our President is siding with a communist regime claiming that the Russians were "right" to go into Afghanistan. They`re going to want to know the reasoning behind that, and where it`s coming from.
Now, General McCaffrey has suggested a fairly benign reason, which is he`s trying to cover his tracks as to why we`re pulling troops out of Afghanistan. But the FBI is going to look at it even more deeply to say, "Look, there are a couple of other options, once you set aside incompetence, and inability to understand history and layered new ones and facts and conflating the rise of the Taliban and Osama bin Laden with Russia`s presence."
Once you get rid of that, there`s another option which is that the President has deliberately chosen to regurgitate the Putin line, the Russian line on this because he somehow needs to paint Russia in the most favorable light. And why is that? And we need to help understand whether that`s because it serves his agenda to appease Russia, to say to them, "You may have compromised me. We may have a problem here, but I`m on your side."
And, look, while this sounds like conjecture to many people, this is what counterintelligence agents do for a living. And when you combine it with the facts coming out of the Special Counsel inquiry, you`ve got to assume Mueller`s going to look at this. What is the motivation to make a comment that simply paints Russia in the most favorable light? And that`s what counterintelligence is about.
WILLIAMS: And Frank, also in your bailiwick, the question we asked rhetorically at the top of the broadcast, what does it mean for the Russia effort for the President when you hear that Mueller`s grand jury has been extended for six months, a time they don`t necessarily have to use, but time they needed to reserve?
FIGLIUZZI: Well, I`m going to state the obvious. It means this thing`s far from over and it means there`s more indictments coming. General -- grand juries sit, Brian, for a number of reasons. But one of them that we really care deeply about is to issue indictments.
So there`s more coming. There`s more people on the radar screen of the Mueller inquiry. And this thing`s not over yet.
WILLIAMS: If you have a question, always ask a former fed, our thanks to two of them. General Barry McCaffrey, and Frank Figliuzzi, gentlemen, we appreciate it.
And coming up, today the President claim drugs are pouring into our country because we don`t have a wall. We happen to have President Clinton`s former drug czar standing by to talk about that very point when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES: We think this is a much bigger problem. The border is a much more dangerous problem. It`s a much bigger problem. It`s a problem of national security. It`s a problem of terrorists, but a lot of people don`t say we have terrorists coming through the southern border because they find that`s probably the easiest place to come through.
They drive right in and they make a left. We right now are losing approximately 100, hard to believe, and this doesn`t include the drugs pouring in, and just remember human traffickers, remember drugs. The drugs are pouring into this country. They don`t go through the ports of entry.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: If they`re making a left, they may be doing it wrong. But be that as it may, those claims you just heard there from the President were also relayed to members of Congress during that meeting in the situation room this week. They are talking points our President has repeated in an effort to convince Democrats to approve the wall funding. The only problem is, they`re not true.
As NBC News is reporting, "According to Justice Department public records and two former counter-terrorism officials no immigrant has been arrested at the southwest border on terrorism charges in recent years. And we must confess to engaging in some television slight of hand here.
We told you we had President Clinton`s former drug czar standing by, and we do. He looks a lot like General Barry McCaffrey because he was, among his many other titles, including US Military Commander for all of Latin America, General McCaffrey was Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President Clinton.
So, General, this is a simple question, the answer might be tougher. Would a wall, as the president contends, make us safer? What would it do to drug flow? What would it do to our relationship with our neighbor to the south?
GENERAL BARRY MCCAFFREY, FORMER DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY: Well, I tell you, I certainly was a drug policy director during a different era where we actually had bipartisan support in Congress, and reasoned dialogue. And we had Department of Justice and Treasury and a Defense Department, and others with a coordinated, respectful approach to Mexico. That`s what`s lacking here.
Look, when you look at the southwest border, 3,000 mile frontier, 700 miles of fencing already in, does a lot of good, particularly in the populated areas, no longer have 10,000 people run through the port of entry in, you know, San Diego. When it comes to its function, it assists the 45,000 men and women of the customs and border protection, no question.
If you want to deal with a drug issue, you don`t do it with the southwest border. You`ve got to get addiction in Baltimore and in Detroit, and other cities across United States. You`ve got to operate against Mexican cartels who are the most organized criminal element in America`s two largest cities.
But the drugs that do come through the southwest border tend to come through the ports of entry, hidden in compartments in trucks, they are on trains or an individual passengers. They come in by air. They come in by submarine out of Colombia into Central America. And then get moved in a different manner.
So you simply can`t deal with the drug issue through the border. The border shouldn`t be open. It should be protected. We should -- we need a better way of managing asylum. But this is not the way you deal with a chronic problem of addiction in America.
WILLIAMS: Well, on this question of the President perhaps declaring a national emergency, and ordering it built. Your fellow west pointer Senator Jack Reed, Democrat, Rhode Island says this, "The idea that President Trump is considering declaring a phony national emergency as a pretext to take billions of dollars away from our troops and defense priorities in order to pay for his wall should alarm all Americans." General, do you concur?
MCCAFFREY: It looks to me like it`s flat illegal. It`s moving into dictatorial powers. You can`t spend money that isn`t appropriated by the Congress. That`s what the constitution says. You can`t divert a fighting force, the US Department of Defense which has tremendous challenges in the global community and use it as a domestic police function. This is not American values.
You know, if we want to enforce the law in the southwest frontier, add more money to Customs and Border Protection. And by the way, we have a problem there. We`re not paying these men and women enough for the demanding duties trying to protect our frontiers. So I think the president would be right into transparently illegal activity if he tried to unilaterally direct the pentagon to build a border.
WILLIAMS: Thank you for both of your appearances tonight, General Barry McCaffrey, always such a pleasure to have you on.
And coming up, President Trump`s response to an explicit call for his impeachment by an unapologetic freshman member of Congress on her first day on the job, when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I think it`s very hard to impeach somebody who`s done a great job, that`s number one. And we even talked about that today. I said, "Why don`t you use this for impeachment?" And Nancy said, "We`re not looking to impeach you." I said, "That`s good, Nancy, that`s good." But you know what, you don`t impeach people when they`re doing a good job. And you don`t impeach people when there was no collusion, because there was no collusion.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: That was the President today addressing the possibility of impeachment now that the Democrats control the House, as you might have heard. His comments were in response to a freshman member of Congress who used some very colorful, non-family language to push the issue on her first day on the job.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. RASHIDA TLAIB (D), MICHIGAN: People love you. And you win. And when your son looks at you and says, "Mama, look, you won, bullies don`t win." And I said, "Baby, they don`t because we`re going to go in there and we`re going to impeach the (inaudible)."
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: So use your imagination there. The new House leadership isn`t necessarily ready to commit to making impeachment a priority. Here is the new speaker.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: We have to weigh the equities. That is not the position of the House Democratic Caucus. The equity to be weighed is that`s freedom of speech of an individual member. As I say, generationally that would not be the language I would use. But nonetheless, I don`t think we should make a big deal of it. I really don`t.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: Now, NBC`s Jonathan Allen who joins us again in a moment summed this dynamic today. And this got our attention, "It didn`t take long for newly empowered House Democrats to lose control of their message on the possible impeachment of President Donald Trump, less than a day. "
So back with us, the aforementioned Jonathan Allen who we talked into spending even more time with us. And, Jonathan, a friend of mine likes to say never underestimate the Democrats` ability to screw things up, A. B, a lot of these young Democrats were elected, they believe on a voting wish in the liberal districts on a platform of impeaching this guy.
JONATHAN ALLEN, MSNBC POLITICAL REPORTER: Absolutely, Brian, and even a lot of Democrats in districts where they`re represented by more moderate members believe in that. Potentially, you`re seeing right now is there`s you`re seeing right now is there`s a Democratic base that is hungry to see Donald Trump removed from office. Obviously a lot of them would like to see that happen in 2020 at the ballot box. But a lot of people believe that there is already evidence enough for impeachment. There is this push among the Democratic electorate for that.
And the counterweight right now is that there are varying degrees among the Democratic elected officials as to what the merits of that are right now. Whether it`s wise to do it both in terms of the prudence of the constitutional question of whether anything Donald Trump has done rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors. And that, of course, the political question of whether it`s advantageous or disadvantageous for them to move forward right now.
Obviously, Nancy Pelosi`s argument is that they should wait for the Mueller report to come forward. Most of the Democratic elected officials I talked to today, House Democrats I talked to said that they believe that they should wait for the Mueller report, and that it made sense to wait for that to see what he comes to, what conclusions he draws before they decide whether or not to move forward.
WILLIAMS: I believe, watching a good bit of the other network, that Fox News is planning to run, and Republicans are, against the Democrats as if Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez, the new very young Democrat from New York is President of the United States, even though her name will not be on the ballot she is pushing a goal of being free of fossil fuels in 12 years, forget about cars, no one has said how we would fly. And in an interview coming up this weekend on "60 Minutes" she`s talking about a 70 percent tax bracket for those "at the tippy-top" of the American earning population.
So this is going to be a real learning experience for a young Congresswoman, for this political party, and for the Republican Party.
ALLEN: And we found out today exactly what it takes to knock Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez off the top of the newscast and out of the front page of the paper, if you`re another freshman Democrat and that`s to call the President an MF, her colleague Rashida Tlaib having done that.
Look, I think the Republicans have this infatuation with Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez. They like to use her as sort of a boogie woman for Democrats. They are certainly elevating her, what she is doing in the process is creating a tremendous, a tremendous following outside of the House of Representatives. She started that when she won her primary against Joe Crowley last year. And that`s only been growing. And what it`s doing is raising her profile and giving her influence within the Democratic Caucus.
WILLIAMS: I want to thank you very much for being with us tonight as we mentioned one of the banner headline graphics on Fox News earlier this evening, radical Democratic agenda. And that`s going to be the crux of this, I think, going forward. Thank you for your journalism on this topic today and thanks for sticking around with us, Jonathan Allen, our own Jonathan Allen.
Coming up, the President says the shutdown could last years, perhaps, but just 14 days into it we have a look at the real life, personal, and sometimes hazardous impacts of this shutdown across the country.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WILLIAMS: Coming up here about eight minutes away, the top of the hour Eastern Time begins week three of this government shutdown. Washington Post just reporting the White House may not have initially understood the scope or the stakes of a shutdown but they are very real. For 800,000 federal workers and their customers, that would be us, the taxpayers, beginning with our shared national treasures are normally pristine national parks.
Now in the past parks were closed to visitors during extended shutdowns but not this time. Visitors are still allowed on park lands even though 16,000 of our 19,000 park employees are no longer on their jobs along with all the others they have been deemed non-essential. That means roads are left unplowed, garbages left uncollected, bathrooms no longer worked or being maintained, trash is piling up, there are health hazards and park visitors in some places are taking care of business shall we say along pathways or in the woods. And white the parks are unattended, at least three people died inside our parks since the shutdown began.
Then there are the farmers already under duress from the President`s trade war with China. The shutdown means they`re not getting those stimulus payments promised by their government, the Department of the USDA is closed along with 95 percent of the work force that handles food, assistance, payments. The SNAP program not funded beyond January. There`s only enough money and its emergency reserve to cover payments until mid February.
Same goes for Native American tribes to rely on federal funding for essential services like healthcare and law enforcement. With most of the IRS now closed, the shutdown may, may mean a delay in tax refunds. That will get everybody`s attention. Federal courts run out of funding next week but not the Russia investigation.
Funding for the Special Counsel continues, so does government money helping the people of California. Those still recovering from the devastating wildfires last month, hundreds of FEMA workers are still getting paid on the ground running badly needed relief centers, helping people find shelter and providing loans to them. And where public safety is concerned, let`s not forget, the TSA agents and air traffic controllers working despite not getting paid. It`s a lot to consider.
Coming up, Paul Ryan back home in Wisconsin no doubt enjoying his freedom while now having to earn a living, he may be interested to learn how another former speaker is making money. That story when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WILLIAMS: There he is. Last thing before we go tonight, quick question. When I say the name of Former House Speaker John Boehner, what`s the first thing you think of? Now who among you answered legalized weed? We know from numerous profiles of him that the Ohio Republican was already known to embrace the holy trinity of modern day vices, alcohol, tobacco and sun exposure, less well-known is his relationship with the cannabis industry unless and until you see this TV ad as we recently did.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Marijuana has unleashed a green gold rush across our nation. It`s creating $10.8 billion in your wealth a year and every day it`s transforming more and more Americans into millionaires. In an historic event, Former Speaker of the House John Boehner reveals how you could become one of them. Join him online for the American Cannabis Summit. To secure your spot, text JOIN to 44055. It`s free to attend. Text JOIN to 44055.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: Can`t honestly tell you what happens when you text the number. None of us wanted the record of it on our company phones. Now Boehner was once vehemently anti-cannabis. He has said publicly sense that his mind was changed by a military veteran for whom it treated a previously untreatable condition.
Americans have slowly embraced it and are slowly learning things like the difference between THC and CBD. Across the USA, 33 states now have legalized it, 10 states and the District of Colombia have legalized recreational use and yet the crazy part of it is all of it violates federal law. But let it also be said, the former Speaker of the House knows a growth industry when we see one.
That is our broadcast for this Friday night and for this week. Have a good weekend. Thank you so very much for being here with us. Good night from our NBC News headquarters.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. END