terrorists so that's one thing. >> neil: and this will test our relation ship with russia. >> it is. it's a different policy as in eastern europe. so between all of this, you have a deal maker with president trump that will leak at the strategic alignments of interests and say hey, mr. putin, it's time to talk. and the same with north korea and the chinese. we haven't put pressure on them in the past. these meetings will give a new opening for that. they're doing things in the south china sea and building islands that we don't like. let's get concessions elsewhere as part of a larger deal. >> neil: well-put, pete. thank you. meantime, the president has made it clear he's not a fan of susan rice and thinks she might have committed a crime. a key house intelligence committee will be looking at that and also looking at how soon and how quickly she can testify. after this.
part of what we've seen is as we talk about that trajectory, a huge part of playing the role is partisan alignments have supervened over these institutional ones. there's fidelity to your party over fidelity to the legislative branch. and with merrick garland, people felt like that's what happened. ultimately it was our team says we're not giving this guy a vote so we can preserve it for our party as opposed to we will play the constitutionally prescribed role of advising and consenting. >> well, the legislature didn't consent so you're right there was a decision not to consent but your broader point is surely true which is the founders envisioned a world where when you serve in the legislature you don't have partisan lenses as the first thing you think about. you should think about jealously guarding your prerogatives for the branch. i'm the third most conservative guy by voting record but i'm not
executive? part of what we've seen is as we talk about that trajectory, a huge part of playing the role is partisan alignments have sup supervened over these institutional ones. there's fidelity to your party over fidelity to the legislative branch. and th merck garnd, people felt like at's what happened. ultimately it wasur team says we're not giving this guy a vote we can preserve it for our party as opposed to we will play the constitutionally prescribed role of advising and consenting. >> well, the legislature didn't consent so you're right there was a decision not to consent but your broader point is surely true which is the founders envisioned a world where when you serve in the legislature you don't have partisan lenses as the first thing you think about. you should think about jealously guarding your prerogatives for the branch. i'm the third most conservative
manipulator. it's overused this term that he's a kgb guy. he's a kgb guy from east germany, forged in that mentality. the problem is where trump has seemed to back away from a tougher stance of what russia is doing around the world, whether it be in europe, alignments with china or, of course, in the middle east, i think it weakens the position. my great hope is this is part of mr. trump's, the art of the deal, he's trying to put on a good tone and when he enters office he'll take a tougher stance. one indicator that might be true is when putin said he was going to increase russian strategic deterrent force, trump said we're going to do the same thing. that's a good thing, quit pro quo. >> we had a professor on earlier saying putin is in it for the long haul, a game of chess for
i say that not being cute. the democratic nominee won the popular vote. obviously, this is an extremely competitive race and i would expect that future races will be expected as well. i certainly think it's true that politics in america right now are a little up for grabs. some of the old alignments within both parties, democrat and republican are being reshaped. although the results of this election involve some of the specifics of the candidates andn every election, democrats do have to do some thinking about how do we make sure that the message we have is received
and i say that not being cute. the democratic nominee won the popular vote. obviously this was an extremely competitive race. i would expect that future races will be competitive as well. i certainly think it's true that politics in america right now are a little up for grabs. some of the old alignments within both parties, democrat and republican, are being reshaped. although the results of this election involved some of the specifics of the candidates and aren't going to be duplicated in every subsequent election, democrats do have to do some thinking about how do we make
>> what is it about mckinley that you rest of you overlook? >> we have political scientist talk about five real great alignments of american politics and we talk about four of them in terms of the person who brought them about. jefferson in 1800, lincoln in 1860, fdr 1932. we have an enormous realignment in 1826. for 24 years the american political system is broken. go back to the guilded age. we have five presidential elections in which the country is so polarized nobody gets to 50% in 24 years. we have two presidents elected with the minority of the poplar vote and one of those elections has a five month long dispute. by 7,000 votes and along comes 1896, along comes mckinley and
along here with these unainspected children at the border. the question is how do you get there? you're hearing cries on the right already that, you know, this is going to be another blank check to the president and i wonder what happens when you kind of fuse that tea party austerity message with the hostility and how complicated it becomes for republicans to approve this. of course, ultimately you need the house to sign off on this. the other interesting thing here is how this issue has really kind of scrambled republican, democrat, liberal, conservative alignments because a lot on the left who think what the president has asked for in this authority to deport these kids goes too far. you have dianne feinstein, dick durbin, the number two senate democrat, who told me yesterday that we need to be very careful about where we are sending these kids. >> the president has not shied
secretary of state john kerry is in a race against time to try to help build a coalition government in iraq before the fighting breaks the country completely apart. the kurdish regional president today and he talked with chief correspondent andrea mitchell to talk about what he's up against. >> the next week is going to be critical in their own discussions, in their own coalitions, alignments and decisions and proof will be in the pudding as of july 1st and thereafter as to whether or not they get the job done and get it done quickly. >> you can see andrea's full interview with secretary kerry in less than three hours on andrea mitchell reports.
issues for very selfish reasons. there are opportunities to develop new kinds of alignments and collaborations that don't ignore the more conventional operations but strike out in new ways that could be very fruitful. i think that's an area where bold leadership is possible. >> if we have a deal -- we'll look at the big calendar for next year coming up in a few minutes -- if there were to be a deal with iran in the middle of next year, how does that impact diplomacy around the regions? does that help to burn out the syrian civil war? does it have impacts beyond that? >> i think actually the iranians, having just come back from iran, are quite interested in seeing a settlement in syria, that they understand the damage and the dangers to the region because of all the factors that elliott mentioned. this is terribly destabilizing in a way far in excess of what afghanistan and its conflict did so that i think they're prepared at this point to lob off the head, in other words, assad, but