tv MSNBC Live With Katy Tur MSNBC September 5, 2017 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
would there be funding for the border wall. would he be willing to sign simply daca immigration. >> he wants to see responsible immigration reform, and wants that to be part of it. we can't take a one piece fix. we've got to do an overall immigration reform that's responsible. and frankly that's lawful, and that's what the president wants to see congress do. >> what will be the priorities for him in a comprehensive foreign package? >> to control the border, to improve vetting and immigration security, enforce our laws and do things that protect american workers. >> let me ask you a question on north korea. in the president's mind, is it an option to simply contain a north korea that possesses nuclear weapons? >> certainly the priority of the administration is to have denuclearization of the korean peninsula, and it's also so protect american citizens. certainly the priority would be
that. >> you're talking about a comprehensive immigration fix from congress in a span of six months. much to the president's frustration, congress hasn't been able to do much at all this year. what gives him confidence they're going to be able to act on immigration, has he spoken to any congressional leaders since making this daca decision? >> he's spoken to a number of leaders. hopefully as you all know they came back from a three-week vacation, they should be rested and ready to take on some big challenges that america faces. >> the lives of 7800,000 people -- >> it's congress's job to legislation. it's not the president's job to create law. it's congress's job to create legislation. i think that's something we all learned in eighth grade civics. i know i certainly did. every member of congress should know that is their duty and we're asking them to fulfill it. it's simple. i think the american people elected them to do it. if they can't, they should get out of the way and let someone
else take their job that can get something done. >> what consideration are you giving to negotiations with north korea over the nuclear program? >> i think in terms of negotiations, we're looking at putting aggressive measures both diplomatically, economically, and as we said, all options are on the table and we're going to continue to push for a safer and denuclearized korean peninsula. >> it sounds like the president is saying, and you're saying, rear going to allow the dreamers to stay in this country, we want a wall, is that accurate? >> i don't think the president's been shy about the fact that he wants a wall. and certainly something that he feels is an important part of a responsible immigration reform package. >> why did the president not come out and make this announcement himself today. why did he leave it to his
attorney general? it's his decision. these kids, their lives are on the line because of what he's doing? >> it's in large part a big part of the legal process, this was deemed illegal by just about every legal expert you can find in the country including many of obama's own attorneys said this was not lawful program. and, therefore, it would be the department of justice to make a legal recommendation and that's what they did. >> thank you, sarah. >> quick question yes or no. would the president sign a stand alone daca extension. >> i've addressed this. the president is hoping to work with congress on responsible immigration reform. i laid out the priorities that the add ming station has on that front. >> the president's voiced some new objections to the constitutionality of daca. where does the president stand on daca itself?
>> the answers i've given, the president has been. and i think part of the reason this is complicated and one of the reasons he's wrestled with this back and forth in large part is because this is not an easy one. and certainly, something where he wants to be able to make a decision with compassion. but at the same time, you can't allow emotion to govern, and this has to be something where the law is put in place, it's something he would support if congress puts it before him. >> i'm just trying to -- >> responsible immigration reform, we can't just have one tweak to the immigration system. we need really big fixes and big reform in this process, and we've laid out the principles we feel are important to that. >> thank you, sarah. >> john decker. >> the president has recently as february expressed sympathy for the daca recipients. today we heard in a statement from house speaker paul ryan who
said that these so-called dreamers have done nothing wrong. was this a difficult decision for the president to take this drastic action given what he said as recently as february? and does he agree with house speaker paul ryan. that these individuals, 800,000 individuals have done nothing wrong? >> i think largely yes. and that's why i said it was one of the things that the president wrestled with this decision all throughout the weekend. so i kind of addressed that, i think it's clear. >> it was just this weekend that he wrestled with it? it wasn't leading up to it? >> i think we've been clear throughout the process, there wasn't a final decision made until over the weekend because of the back and forth and the complexity of the issue. and the ability to make the right decision and allow congress to actually do their job and provide a fix instead of just stopping the program. and that was a big point for the
president. jordan? >> i want to drill down on what you mean when you say, the president acts -- does that mean offering them the pathway to citizenship? >> i think it means providing a more permanent solution that's done through the legislative process. done legally and responsibly, unlike the previous administration. >> permanent solution, does that mean you're giving them legal status legislatively? what is the permanent solution? >> i think that's something we want to work with congress to determine what that looks like. there has to be -- something needs to be done. it's congress's job to do that, and we want to be part of that process, and make sure there's a fix put in place, and this isn't ignored like it has been for the last five years. >> if congress doesn't get it done, considering the president's personal feelings, will you consider giving them additional time to get the solution passed? >> we'd like to have confidence
that congress will do their job. we're going to ask that they do that, wane if congress doesn't want to do the job they were elected to do, then maybe they should get out of the way and let someone else do it. steven? >> he repeatedly referred to daca recipientses as illegal ilians. hundreds of thousands of americans did not get jobs that were taken by daca recipients. does the president share that view? >> i think that it's a known fact that there are over 4 million unemployment americans in the same age group as those that are daca recipients that over 950,000 of those are african-americans in the same age group, over 870,000 unemployment hispanics in the same age group. those are large groups of people that are unemployment that could possibly have those jobs, but again, we're looking for fixes. we're not looking for complaints, but we're looking for solutions and that's our focus moving forward.
>> the idea that hundreds of thousands of people that the president gets what he wants. would achieve legal status. how do you reconcile those two competing interests. >> the president is looking to create a whole lot more jobs in america. it addresses both problems. there's a reason he's focused largely since day one of taking office. in creating a better market for businesses to create jobs, to hire more people, higher wages. he's gotten rid of over 800 regulations that do just that. 1.2 million jobs have been created since he came into office. every day we're looking for more ways to grow that number. we're doing our part to address and create an environment that allows people to have more jobs. we're going to continue doing that. kristen? >> the president vowed to treat dreamers with great heart. how is this move treating them with great heart? >> i believe by allowing an orderly process to take place. there's a lot of people i have seen attacking the president for not showing the level of
compassion they feel like he should. to me, the most heartless thing i've seen all day today is that democrats like nancy pelosi are using this decision today for fund-raising while the president's trying to fix the situation. they're politicize an issue, instead of doing their job. if they would spend less time fund-raising and more time focusing on solutions, we wouldn't be in this problem in the first place. >> the president's decision where all this stems from. dreamers, supporters of dreamers say this is cold hearted. you're leaving the future of 800,000 people uncertain, up in the air. >> it's not cold hearted for the president to uphold the law. we are a nation of law and order. and the day that we start to ignore the fact that we are that, we throw away everything that gives these people a reason to want to come to our country. >> if we stop becoming the country we were envisioned to be, we throw away what makes us special. this president's not willing to do that. the previous administration was,
this one isn't. we want to have real solutions. we want to have laws that address these problems. it's congress's job to legislate, not the president, and we actually want to uphold the constitution, i think people across this country should be celebrating the fact that they have a president that is standing up and upholding the constitution as he was elected to do. >> i'd like to ask you, quickly on daca. to -- is the president committed to honoring the will of congress, essentially? whatever congress passes on daca, or does he reserve the right to veto daca. a bigger picture thing that touches on some -- >> we want responsible immigration reform, and that would be part of that package and process. >> from the north korea -- vladimir putin has said he doesn't believe that sanctions are going to work at all against
north korea. i'm wondering whether the president is coming around to that perspective on whether he still believes sanctions can be affected. and if he has any plans he can share with us, to talk with the chinese president or the russian president himself? >> we've been clear about what our priorities are, now is not the time for us to spend a lot of time focused on talking with north korea, putting all measures of pressure that we can, and we're going to continue through that process. we've also said that everybody including russirussia, includin china needs to do more to address the threat. this is a global threat, and everybody needs to take part in putting pressure on north korea. as we've said both times before, that all options are on the table and we're going to continue to keep them on the table until we get the results that we're looking for. >> sarah. the president has said that the daca recipients should rest easy. he's also said on several occasions that he loves that.
is he giving them his personal assurance that at the end of six months they will not be deported? >> i think he's giving congress the ability to do their job. i've said that earlier -- >> they should rest easy? >> the president gave the ability for us to have a six-month process for congress to actually step up and fix this problem. and they certainly have the ability to and should take that opportunity. >> during the other immigration moves that the administration has made. you've made the argument that the president's powers of immigration are very, very raw. and unquestioned. why in this case does he feel he can't do anything by himself and he has to turn it over to congress. >> that was a specific statute within the constitution, that allows the president to take action to protect americans, these are two very different things and certainly not apples to apples. >> thank you, sarah.
>> two questions. on daca. >> two question tuesday. >> kansas secretary of state a close ally of the presidents denounced the decision because of the six-month delay in it. and said there should be no phase out, it should have been implemented immediately. what's your response to that criticism from a strong supporter and ally of the president? >> i think our response is pretty clear. the president made a decision, we feel very much that it was the right one. >> the thing is, you talk about forming jobs that could go to other people. has the president ever discussed this part of daca with some of the leaders of organized labor, try to involve them in the process? the afl-cio, the teamsters and others they've worked with. >> i'm not sure about specific
conversations on that exact figure. i know he's had conversations with individuals and relevant stakeholders in this process on both sides that know that that is an issue, whether daca exists or not, the fact that there are 4 million people in this age group that are unemployment and certainly why creating a better job market is a priority for the administration. >> francesca? >> thank you, sarah. i wanted to follow up on what jim said. you said that the reason attorney general jeff sessions put out the earlier statement on camera is because it was a legal argument. a lot of what we've been talking about here is a legislative argument. why have we not heard from the president directly on this day? and can we expect to hear from him later today on this? >> he issued a lengthy statement directly from the president. >> why was it attorney general jeff sessions that went on camera, when the president hasn't gone on camera to make
this case today about what a big heart he has and how compassionate he is, and how he wants congress to take legislative action on this to save daca. >> the president has spoken about this numerous times in the past. at the same time, this was a legal issue, because there was a court decision that had to be made with a time line not placed that the administration created, but a time line that was created by the attorney generals in those states that were forcing this issue and this decision to take place by today. it was a legal decision, and that would fall to the attorney general, and that's why he would be the one making the announcement. >> sarah? >> peter? >>. [ inaudible ] >> i believe he has had several conversations with enrollees and those in the program. >> contacts and information you've gotth from those conversations? >> i think the president's goal was to talk to both sides and
uphold the law, up hold the constituti constitution, but also allow congress too create a perm nasht solution, which he's done by allowing for that six-month period. >> reasonably as part of this recent deliberation? >> i'm not sure on the exact time line, i know he's had many conversations with people on both sides of this issue. certainly people that support keeping it as is. and those that support getting it removed. >> right, again, like i said, i know he's had conversations with people that have been part of the program. >> katherine? >> you said the president wrestled with the decision all weekend? can he walk us through any of the process he went through to get to this, who was he consulting with? >> he made the final decision over the weekend. as i said, he spoke to many relevant stakeholders and individuals that support a variety of positions on this program. >> also -- >> noah. >> can you tell us anything about the meeting today, what are you expecting out of that?
>> we'll continue to keep you guys posted. i think the ultimate goal is as congress is coming back into session, to talk about some of the big priorities, certainly tax reform, immigration reform, among many other things that are going to be on the agenda for the fall. >> the president -- >> i'll go here and then come back to you. >> the president told congress to do this, but he hasn't written any legislation, similar to how he approached. >> i didn't know it was the president's job to write out specific details of legislation. i think that's exactly what the -- >> the major initiatives, have taken a greater role in helping to craft that legislation, they found friendly allies in congress to be the ones to propose it, this president is not. why has he made that decision. and does he think -- is he reconsidering it in light of the fact that some of the other major pushes he's tried to make have not been successful? >> we've laid out detailed principles and worked with members of congress on specific pieces of legislation and will continue to do that. >> quick international question.
the situation in myanmar is quickly escalating into a major humanitarian crisis, has the president been briefed on the situation in myanmar? if so, is he planning to speak to the leaders at upcoming meetings about this situation? >> i know this is something that we're monitoring closely, but not aware of any specific conversations that are planned at this time. as always, in calls like that, we will keep you guys posted and put a read out after. >> the dreamers won't be a priority for enforcement, but that's not a guarantee of protection. is this white house willing to offer one? >> those are certainly again -- they're not a targeted priority. the goal is that congress fixes the problem, and then that isn't an issue, so that's the focus over the next six months, making sure that something takes place, that congress does their job in a real solution as implemented. >> is there a way to put this in writing so these 800,000 people
who are very fearful of ending up in if a country that they don't know, have some guarantee? that in fact they won't be deported in six months? >> i think that the statement the president put out earlier today, lays out what the priorities are, and lays out what the focus of the administration is, they are not targets, they are not priority targets of this administration, they weren't before, and they won't be now. and again congress has six months, which is a pretty long time to get something done. and we hope they do, and there's a solution in that, so that this isn't a problem moving forward. >> i was wondering, you mentioned that the president spoke over the weekend or in recent days to various stakeholders. we talked to the attorney general's office in texas and they said they did not get a heads up or any -- nobody conferring with them about this. did you all talk to the states, and are you positive they are not suing? >> i know that various members of the administration have been in contact with individuals in
those states. i'm going to wrap here, but i have one note to -- >> sarah -- >> i have one thing i'd like to just add, the president will be announcing the donations he'll be personally making to the various charities and thank you to those of you who have submitted. we had several people put in submissions, he'll be doing that tomorrow. and again, i know there are a lot of questions over the weekend that will be a personal donation of a million dollars from the president to various organizations and charities, many of which came from this room. thank you again for that. hope you have a good day. >> sarah -- >> you have been listening to the white house press briefing with sarah huckabee sanders. the story that dominated that briefing was dreamers. the trump administration's decision to throw their fate into limbo. while that briefing was going on, protesters gathered by the hundreds from d.c. to denver voicing their fear and frustration for what happens next to those who have called
this country home for most of their lives. some of those protesters were arrested outside of trump tower. the ball is now in congress's court. they have six months to come up with a legislative plan b for those 800,000 people brought here as children. our reporters and analysts are covering all angles of this story. let us start with nbc's kristen welker, live at the white house in that press briefing. kristen. sarah huckabee sanders said that this was something the president ran on, also, when asked if he has faith on whether congress will actually act on this, and get something done, she said, it's not about faith, it's about the fact that the american public voted them into office so they would get something done. give me more. >> that's right, katy. that was effectively the theme of this briefing, sarah huckabee sanders saying it is up to congress to take action on this very critical issue. she was pressed over and over
again on why the president would have the attorney general come out and make this announcement and this decision, which presumably is the presidents. she said, this has to do with the rule of law, and that is why we had the attorney general come out and make this announcement. as for the legislation itself, you heard her there at the end, pressed on whether the president or the white house would submit some type of legislation. she said no, it is up to congress to write this legislation. so what will it look like? there's a lot of buzz about the possibility that the white house may support some type of bill that ties a daca fix to funding for the president's border wall. take a listen to what she was asked about that. >> you're saying that if we're going to allow the dreamers to stay in this country, we want a wall, is that accurate? >> i don't think the president's been shy about the fact that he wants a wall. and certainly something that he feels is an important part of a responsible immigration reform
package. >> sarah huckabee sanders said the president wrestled with this decision, it's one that he ultimately made over the weekend and after campaigning, katie, as you know better than anyone on a vow to end daca. once in office, seemed to change his tone, saying that he would treat dreamers with great heart. i asked her about that, take a look. >> the president vowed to treat dreamers with great heart, how is this move treating them with great heart? >> i think by allowing an orderly process to take place. you know, there's a lot of people that i've seen attacking the president for not showing the level of compassion that they feel like he should. to me, the most heartless thing that i've seen all day today is that democrats like nancy pelosi are using this decision today for fund-raising while the president's trying to fix the situation. they're politicize an issue, instead of actually doing their job. if they would spend less time fund-raising and more time
focusing on solutions, we wouldn't be in this problem in the first place. >> sanders also stressed if congress doesn't come up with a fix within the next six months, the dreamers won't be prioritized for deportation. when she was pressed on what type of guarantees the president could provide to dreamers, to those 800,000 people. could the president put something in writing, sarah huckabee sanders went back to that original talking point that it is ultimately up to congress. >> it's clear they want congress to act on this, i wab the to hold you for one more second. he ran on putting an end to dreamers and putting an end to that executive order. he ran o this idea that presidents should govern through executive order. he slammed president obama for that a number of times. so far this year, donald trump has issued 45 executive orders, in the first 100 days alone, he issued more executive orders than president obama did in his first 100 days. sarah huckabee sanders was asked
if he sees a disconnect saying congress needs to act but he uses executive orders quite a bit. kristen? >> katy, that's right, i'm sorry, i thought we were going to a sound byte. the administration's argument there would be that yes a president can use executive orders, but not when it comes to immigration reform 37. >> got it. >> that's really where the crux of this argument comes from, that's where the crux of this debate has been, and will continue to be. now, of course, if you talk to officials with the former obama administratio administration, they will say look, the president pressed congress to get something done on immigration reform, they didn't take any action, and that's why former president obama carved out this space for those 800,000 people who were brought here, yes, illegally, when they were very young, but who have lived here for most of their lives and working and contributing to the economy going to school, what many have
called model immigrants. >> is congress going to act on this? and what would their opinion be of donald trump trying to attach this to a border wall? >> they're not in any hurry too, katie. it's tough to see how this would become something congress would act on in the short term. their schedule is packed. and in the long term, you have a couple different senators who are saying they have efforts out here, we're going to hear from lindsay gram in the next hour, talking about the dream act again. you heard from a republican senator from north carolina saying he's ready to write a bill to try to protect some of these folks. the overall appetite within the republican party is not to rush out and get this done. paul ryan, the speaker of the house voted against the dream act the last time it was up. we just got a statement from mitch mcconnell three hours after this announcement from jeff sessions. it's only three sentences long. the last sentence is basically, we're going to continue working on immigration and border security. nothing suggests this is something they're in a hurry to
get done. i talked to senator tim kaine from virginia a few minutes ago who said, i thought mexico was paying for the border wall? democrats are viscerally opposed to the border wall itself. tying the idea of protections for the dreamers to additional funding for border security or some kind of different smarter package of border security issues, that's something that might have legs down the road. but a direct wall for dreamers trade off, i think would be a very tough sell. >> we also have matt miller, former chief spokesman. sarah huckabee sanders was talking about why jeff sessions was the one to make this announcement. she kept saying it was about rule of law. >> yeah, first of all, given jeff sessions history of not telling the truth to congress. i think it's -- i think he
should spare people lectures on rule of law as he did in his statement todayp the actual content of his statement was also entirely misleading. this is a fiction that they made this decision based on a legal rationale. this was a policy decision, and they've used the law to hide behind and excuse it. i've never seen an administration cave on a policy and rescind a policy, just on the threat of litigation, no lawsuit has been filed against daca. if a lawsuit would be filed they have ample arguments to fall back on. this administration for nine months has talked endlessly about the president's authority in the space of immigration, and in defending its travel ban. there are a number of arguments they could have made in this case, despite what the attorney general said. they didn't want to defend it, they want to make a policy choice. >> is it so terrible to push this off into congress, though. there are questions about the
executive overreach of that initial executive order that president obama put in place. there were questions among his own administration at the time. is it a terrible thing to put the pressure on congress to come up with a more permanent legislative fix? >> of course congress should come up with a permanent legislative fix. that's what president obama urged them to do. the only reason he instituted this executive order in the first place is because congress was broken, and congress after talking about this issue for years, didn't do anything at all to fix it. congress should be coming up with a fix. but the solution isn't to just yank this order without the court having struck it down and urge congress to -- that leads it -- that leads these people in the lurch. the president should show some leadership, work with congress and at the same time, defend this order as long as he can. up until it's struck down by courts. and again, there is it no definitive reason to think it would be. that would be the best outcome,
the most humane outcome for the hundreds of thousands of dreamers in the country. >> thank you very much. and now we have leonard lance who represents the state of new jersey and opposes daca. he's a member of the house energy and commerce committee. he joins us now. congressman, thank you very much. earlier my colleague hallie jackson was talking to your colleague, and he was talking about some potential legislation that could be put forward. take a listen. >> just in the last few days, i've gotten calls from many republican colleagues asking about this legislation. the recognizing america's children act. today we just got a new co sponsor before coming on the air with you all. let him make the news. >> who is it? >> republican, democrat? >> it's a republican from the state of new jersey. >> so congressman, do you want to make the news here. were you the one that was calling him? >> yes, i am going on as a co
sponsor of that legislation, katie. carlos is an excellent member of the congress. i would hope that the white house might look at his legislation, i know there are others who have suggestions. senator tillis for example, i hope the white house and administration may look at carlos's legislation. >> what is in the legislation, sir. >> it says if you're a dreamer and in school, higher education or employed or in the military that there is a path to legalization, and it's a long path and a difficult path, i think it's a good legislation. and i hope we're able to consider it, and it is the responsibility of the congress, katy, to get this right. it is our responsibleability. >> what is the long and difficult path. what does that mean? >> a five-year period, and then another five-year period, it doesn't happen overnight. >> a five year period while liar law abiding, while they're
continuing to be employed? that sort of thing? >> yes, that's correct. and i have confidence in these 800,000 young people. they were brought here as children. and i hope we're able to address this issue, and, katy it is the responsibility of congress to do so constitution ali. >> these children that were brought here, these people that were brought here as children, who are now -- who have come out of the shadows, gotten gainful employment, who are in school, the federal government knows about now, can you look them in the face and promise them that congress is going to find a way to fix this for them now, when they haven't so many times in the past? >> i certainly will do my best, katy to bring about that result. i will lobby our leadership to bring this to the floor. i think carlos' bill is an excellent bill. i hope the white house and the administration will look at it as well. there may be other ideas in the senate, but i think we have a responsibility to address this, and i hope we're able to do so.
>> talking about executive order. the president campaigned on rescinding this executive order from president obama. he also talked about not using executive orders in general to govern. do you find a disconnect between his desire not to govern using executive order, but his use of them as frequently as he has so far? >> certainly presidents have the right to use executive orders where appropriate, but regarding the issue of immigration, where there have been court decisions on this so far, the courts have ruled that there has been an executive overreach, that is not always the case regarding executive orders, but constitution ali, i think that may be the case in this situation. and certainly regarding stability, congress ought to address this issue statutorily, that is a way to have a finality regarding the situation. >> congressman leonard lance, republican of new jersey. thank you very much. >> thank you katy.
this afternoon, we're tracking the biggest hurricane of its kind, hurricane irma is now a category five storm, and it's heading up the caribbean, and potentially toward florida. when could it make landfall here? also this hour, north korea says it will keep doing nuclear tests. the u.s. wants more sanctions. now lindsey graham is agreeing with vladimir putin when it comes to north korea. we'll tell you why in just a moment. your brain is an amazing thing. but as you get older, it naturally begins to change, causing a lack of sharpness, or even trouble with recall. thankfully, the breakthrough in prevagen helps your brain and actually improves memory. the secret is an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember.
i enjoy the fresher things in life. fresh towels. fresh soaps. and of course, tripadvisor's freshest, lowest prices. so if you're anything like me... ...you'll want to check tripadvisor. we now instantly compare prices from over 200 booking sites... ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. go on, try something fresh. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices.
but on the inside, i feel chronic, widespread pain.like most people. fibromyalgia may be invisible to others, but my pain is real. fibromyalgia is thought to be caused by overactive nerves. lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. i'm glad my doctor prescribed lyrica. for some, lyrica delivers effective relief for moderate to even severe fibromyalgia pain. and improves function. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions, suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worse depression, unusual changes in mood or behavior, swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects: dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain, swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who've had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. with less pain, i can do more with my family. talk to your doctor today. see if lyrica can help.
we have just started the long process of cleaning unafter hurricane harvey in 24 country. and already, hurricane irma is now a category five storm. and is barreling toward the caribbean. the national hurricane center, tweeted that irma is the strongest hurricane ever recorded in the atlantic basin, outside the caribbean sea and the gulf of mexico. residents are boarding up buildings, filling gas tanks and stocking up on food and water. the city is doing all it can to prepare for the storm. >> nobody's ever ready for a category five hurricane, but we've done everything that is humanly possible to be done, at least in the city of san juan. we have generators, batteries, food, water, enough prescription drugs for people to go to the
hospitals. our hospitals will continue to work 24 hours a day. >> and florida has already declared a state of emergency with visitors being told to leave the keys starting tomorrow. rapheal miranda joins us with the latest. what can we expect? >> when the tweet went out from the national hurricane center, irma was 180 mile per hour winds. it's still getting intensity, this is something we haven't seen in the atlantic basin since records have been kept. it may not be done strengthening, this is a huge deal, it looks like this will be catastrophic for portions of the northern lee ward islands. you can see there's irma making its move. puerto rico a little bit of a better news for you. the storm will graze puerto rico to the north. that is some good news, too close for comfort for sure. here's a look at the winds over the next few hours or so where
you see the red, that's the center of the storm. you can see raking the northern lee ward islands right there. those spots could see catastrophic damage. by tomorrow afternoon, puerto rico seeing tropical storm forced winds and the british virgin islands getting the worst of it by tomorrow afternoon. the winds at 185 miles per hour, irma will likely remain a cat 5 storm through the night and into tomorrow. tomorrow passing by puerto rico. dominican republic thursday morning, just far enough to the north where it doesn't look like it's going to be a major impact there. still needs to be watched and this is where we're all watching here, into the weekend, irma is likely to turn north somewhere around florida or maybe before florida. maybe heading into the gulf depending on where high pressure is setting up. to have a category four storm near southern florida at that
point will be dicey to say the least. i'll be tracking the models as they come. >> in chance at all florida avoids this? >> it seems very unlikely it's going to be avoided. it may be the gulf coast that sees the worst versus the east coast. unless there's a real southerly trend across cuba that would take the storm far ah enough away from florida. even then, it's likely to turn toward the panhandle. for florida as a whole, it looks like there's not much chance of escaping, some major impacts from irma. >> rapheal miranda, thank you. we're going to keep an eye on hurricane irma right here on msnbc. a new arms deal with south korea and japan, just days after north korea revealed that it tested a hydrogen bomb. the president made that announcement on twitter saying he would allow the two countries to buy more highly sophisticated military equipment from the u.s.
the south korean military put on another show of force today with war ships conducting live fire exercises at sea. and there's a new warning today against the use of military force in north korea from russia's vladimir putin. putin cautioned it could lead to a global catastrophe, this after some tough talk from america's defense chief and top diplomat at the u.n. >> any threat to the united states or its territories, including guam or our allies will be met with a massive military response. a response both effective and overwhelming. we are not looking to the total annihilation of a country. namely north korea, as i said, we have many options to do so. >> we have kicked the can down the road long enough. there is no more road left. >> and nbc's pentagon correspondent hans nichols joins us now. hans. it looks like both secretary
mattis and nikki haley are saying that enough is enough. and they're talking about military action. what could that possibly look like? >> well, katy i'll ans the good question with a caveat. it's an entirely different caveat here at the pentagon. they have options. i'll also say in terms of options, most of this comes from former pentagon officials. it's difficult to find someone inside this building to talk on the record on what those options are. that's the throat clearing. they could send up a massive amount of aircraft trying to take out both their nuclear program, their missiles, their launch sites as well as the estimates 11,000 pieces of artillery. and then frankly it becomes a mathematical equation. how many precision guided munitions can you drop on how many pieces of artillery, before they can start unleashes rounds in south korea.
that's where this thing gets complicated. it gets messy, and what everyone here stresses, you would have civilian casualties at a level none of us have seen in our lifetime. >> do they even know where all the missile silos are in that country? >> yes, and no. >> they have a pretty good sense of where the missile silos are. they see them loading them up with liquid fuel. they have solid fuel ones that are a little more mobil. the missiles, i think they have a better sense. that's the sense the you get here. a lot of that is camouflage, buried, hidden in caves. they've been looking at this and flying over assets for 10, 15, 20 years. the latest technology -- they might have a good sense of where pieces of artillery are, they look different on radar than say a big tree. >> hans nichols at his post at the pentagon, hans thank you very much. >> joining me now from washington, president of the plow shares fund and author of nuclear nightmare, securing the world before it is too late.
here in the newsroom, former under secretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs. former managing editor of time magazine an msnbc political analyst. rick, i'm going to start with you. >> long titles. you. >> always give me a mouthful when it comes to introducing you on set here. >> talking about the arms deal we are potentially going to make with south korea and japan, how is that going to affect the calculus here? >> it's a good thing, but i think the calculus for the south koreans, he gives with one hand, takes back with another. he gives us military weapons, threatens to undo a trade deal. i have to say, hans did an admirable job of describing what the potential military scenarios are, they all are catastrophic and there are no good military options here. and i think that's clear to everybody. and we -- with all due respect to nikki haley, there's a lot
more road to kick the can down. >> maybe. joe, if there is a lot more road to kick the can down, what is the point of being so hard nosed with our rhetoric, the president's calling -- talking about fire and fury, maybe that's not tough enough. nikki haley saying the time has come. secretary mattis is talking about a military force to use it if we need to. why start talking in those tough terms if there's room for negotiation. >> they seem to believe this tough talk will cause either north korea to back down or north korea's allies, china and russia to impose crippling sanctions on north korea. i think those are pipe dreams, i don't think either one of those is likely, frankly. the administration's north korea policies is incoherent at this point. we're alienating our allies by threatening to pull out of a trade zeal with south korea, at
the time we're ramping up talk of war. this is just getting worse and worse. i think the north korea crisis right now is a category 2 catastrophe. and it's strengthening, it is getting worse day by day. >> while we're hearing about this, we're hearing about more sanctions. steve mnuchin over the weekend said we weren't going to deal with anybody who deals with north korea. vladimir putin came out and said, sanctions are not going to work. had is a country that's hell bent on getting and keeping a nuclear weapon as they have. senator lindsey graham has come out and said he agrees with vladimir putin, he was surprised by that in a tweet. will sanctions work? >> we don't have much road left with sanctions. in the sense that we have no trade with north korea. south korea has no trade. the chinese, we're going to stop trading with the chinese, basically our largest trading partner, unless they stop supplying north korea with oil.
what the chinese are worried about is north korea imploding from within, and they have millions of people on the border. we don't have the kind of leverage over the chinese that president trump thinks we do. our policy is absolutely incoherent. >> what do you do? >> there's only two things you can do at this point. if there's no military solution, and there's not, as rick points out. and you have a hard stop on the amount of sanctions people are willing to impose, because they don't want to see a collapse in the korean peninsula. you think the syrian migration problem is a disaster? that will look tame compared to the kind of chaos the north korean collapse that will cause for the people of the korean pen lans. >> you carpet do sanctions, the only thing you're left with is negotiations. we have not attempted serious negotiations for years. when we did in the 1990s, nearly 2000, that's when we got north korea to stop their nuclear program. you could try the neck other
yags path, even if it failed you would have built up diplomatic chips you could use to strengthen the international blockade against north korea. if all else fails, you have to fall back to a strategy of deterrence and containment. we have deterred north korea for over 67 years. they know that if they use military force against us, conventional or military, they will be met by a devastating response, that's the policy options you have realistically, negotiation, containment. >> i'm going over time, is this like what steve bannon said, they got us? >> they got us. >> well, they got us, except we can have containment, we can continue talking. what i would say to donald trump, you want the greatest reality show of all time, you and kim john eun one on one. >> see, katy, i made you laugh. >> you did make me laugh. rick stengle, appreciate your
time. thank you, guys. daca, you've heard a lot about the program today, and the president's plan to end it. what about the people who depend on it? and what do they do now? one of the first students ever protected by by daca joins me to answer that question and more. boost. it's about moving forward, not back.
it's looking up, not down. it's being in motion. boost® high protein it's intelligent nutrition with 15 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. boost® the number one high protein complete nutritional drink. (woman) there's a moment of truth.etes, and now with victoza®, a better moment of proof. victoza® lowers my a1c and blood sugar better than the leading branded pill, which didn't get me to my goal. lowers my a1c better than the leading branded injectable. the one i used to take. victoza® lowers blood sugar in three ways. and while it isn't for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. non-insulin victoza® comes in a pen and is taken once a day. (announcer) victoza® is not recommended as the first medication to treat diabetes and is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer,
multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or if you develop any allergic symptoms including itching, rash, or difficulty breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis, so stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. the most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. now's the time for a better moment of proof. ask your doctor about victoza®.
it's unknown. this unknown is shocking. >> you described this situation in houston as dealing with two storms. can you elaborate on that a little? >> for my family, for myself, it's just really hard. we're trying to rebuild our home and now we have this going on. i'm devastated. >> d.r.e.a.m.ers across the country are worried today what happens to them now president trump has rescinded daca. will congress find a solution, or will the 800,000 kids and young adults who were brought here as children who have called this home for most of their lives and know no other home be forced to leave? nowhere is this unease being felt more than california where there are 223,000 d.r.e.a.m.ers and texas, home to 124,000 others. how will those trying to rebuild from harvey be affected?
and it's not just those states. illinois and new york follow with 42,000 dreamers each. i'm now joined by one of the first 25 people in the country to be protected under daca. she came to texas from canada on a visa with her family when she was 6 years old. she went on to graduate from high school with honors. she is now a communications associate in d.c. you didn't know you were undocumented until just a few years ago, right? >> thanks for having me. i did not know until my junior year of college when my dad said i had a knots to appear in immigration court. fortunately the daca program was announced on my college graduation day and since then i went through an extensive
background check. i've met certain military requirements and soon that was able to earn daca which provided me with a temporary reprieve and a two-year renewable work permit which has allowed me to do incredible things. because of the program i've been able to buy a home. i've been able to buy a car. i got a job and now i pay taxes, both state taxes and federal taxes. i also have a business where i help u.s. citizens find jobs. it has been transformational as well as the 800,000 others who rely on dat ka program to be able to live and work legally here in the united states. >> what happens to all of that stuff if you are forced to leave? secondly, where would you go? >> i migrated from canada but all of the progress i made in the united states would end. many of us have built a life here. this is where we grew up and this is our home.
through the daca program i would no longer be able to work. i would no longer be able to pay taxes, to pay my mortgage. there are severe consequences both economically and morally for every day daca renewals are put on hold, 1,400 young people will lose their ability. daca recipients live in all 50 states. we are teachers, nurses, engineers. we work in retail. we have a tremendous economic impact and eliminating would slash our gdp by billions and billions of dollars over the next decade. >> president obama said he would come out and have to make a statement if president trump rescinded it and so far he has. we just got this on facebook from president obama. let's be clear, the action is a
political decision and moral decision. whatever complaints americans may have about immigration we shouldn't threaten the future of this group of young peer who pose no threat, who are not taking anything away from the rest of us. they have that pitcher on our son's baseball team that cadet in the rotc who wants nothing more than to wear the uniform of the country that gave him a chance. kicking them out will lower the unemployment rate or lighten anyone's taxes or raise anyone's wages. are you confident congress will be able to come up with a fix? >> we've seen great support for dreamers because they know we are an economic multiplier and allowing us to stay here is the right thing to do. last week we saw senator hatch
come out and support d.r.e.a.m.ers. we saw speaker ryan say he wants to see a bi-papartisan legislat solution. d.r.e.a.m.ers deserve a permanent solution, so i am confident members of congress with work together to find a bipartisan solution because there is no other option. i think congress has an important choice to make at this point. they can either turn their backs on 800,000 young people who came to this country as children, or they can do the right thing and come together to pass a permanent legislative solution that allows us to stay, to be productive members of society and allow us here to stay home. >> critics would say you're not legal and there are many people waiting to do it legally. you came here when you were 6 years old, right? >> i did. >> did you have a choice? >> well, i did not have a choice. nobody asked my permission.
i didn't raise myself. i think that for me personally, the reason we became undocumented is one time our lawyer filed our paperwork late and another time the employer sponsoring us sold his business. because of that change in ownership we had to restart the entire application process. it's been 21 years. there are d.r.e.a.m.ers waiting for decades for a permanent solution. i think we deserve it. >> daca recipient, thank you very much. >> thanks. >> and that will wrap things up for me. ali velshi picks things up. what strikes me when you talk about coming in legally versus coming in illegally, it's important to remember these were children brought in by their parents. they didn't have a choice. many have been here so long. where do they go back to? >> this is a difficult situation and it is, you know, at least we're getting past the argument they're a drain on the econom