Then there is scott pruett. They are asking about his security profile. The companys owner is a wellknown friend and supporter of donald trump. And of course there is there is white house physician dr. Reasony jackson. He is President Trumps pick to lead the Veterans Affairs department. The white house continues to support jackson who is facing allegation ranging from drinking on the job to overprescribing medication that got him the nickname mr. Candyman among subordinates. Number one is improper doling out of prescription drugs. The second bucket is intoxication on the job. Being drunk. He has actually passed out in a room that there were some fix that needed some help. And another person got what they needed out of the medical kit and took care of the problem because he was too intoxicated. The third resolves around a toxic work environment, belittling those around him, screaming hollering. Sarah Huckabee Sanders was pushed on the matter multiple time during the briefing last hour. Doctor jacksons record as a white house physician has been impeccable n. Fact, because dr. Jackson has worked within arms reach of three president s he has received more vetting than most nominees. Given his unique position of trust and responsibility, dr. Jacks jacksons background and character were evaluated during three different administrations. Nbcs Kristen Welker is at the white house. Four different background checks but they didnt know about the i. G. Report . Ert that. I can tell you white house officials echo what sarah Huckabee Sanders said from the podium, bottom line, he has the right to go through his confirmation hearing and to defend him against these allegations which he denies. As you point out the allegations include excessive drinking on the job, overprescribing pills and creating a hostile work environment. Sarah Huckabee Sanders asked specifically about the allegations today. Take a look at how she responded today. Sit the position of the administration that the people who raised these allegations are lying . Thats not what i said. I said weve done multiple background checks have taken lays and we are continuing to look at the situation. Do you not find them credible in other words, these allegations. Again, these are new. I can only speak to political motivation behind them . I can only speak to. So of the personal accounts that those of us have as well as the records that we have that are substantiated through a very detailed and thorough Background Investigation process. Reporter we are learning more details katy about that meeting that President Trump had with dr. Jackson in the oval office yesterday. According to a white house official, the president asked him how he was doing. Dr. Jackson firmly denied the allegations and effectively said he wants to push forward. He wants to essentially fight publicly and not have this cloud hanging over him, if you will. President trump making it very clear hes going to stand behind him. So thats the state of play right now. Of course, katy, there is a political reality to all of this. And it goes back to the very beginning of this announcement with a lot of people criticizing the nomination of dr. Jackson to serve as the next v. A. Secretary pointing to the fact that he has no Major Management experience and that could be a real challenge trying to run the nations second largest government agency. And so there is an acknowledgment really on both sides of pennsylvania avenue that, look, the fact that there is this new hurdle for him to get over is going to make it difficult. Its going to make the confirmation process itself very difficult. When is that confirmation process going to get going again . Thats the big question. Of course he was supposed to have a hearing on capitol hill today. That has been postponed indefinitely. White house Officials Say they want to see it started by mid may. Postponed indefinitely is never a good sign. Kristen welker at the white house thank you very much. An Embattled Environmental Protection Agency head scott pruett will testify tomorrow in front of two committees. The controversy sounding the empattleed epa administrator is fwoun to come up. Now there is another headline he may have to answer. The New York Times reports the head agent of his security detail moonlighted for american media, inc. Whats the big deal in there are restrictions barring federal Law Enforcement personnel from holding outside jobs to avoid conflicts of interests. As the New York Times writes, amis chairman, david j. Pecker is a friend of President Trumps and his publications. The National Enquirer and radar chief among them, have put an emphasis on helping mr. Trump and hurting his rivals, including endorsing his president ial bid. Joining me now is ken vogel, one of the authors of the New York Times piece. Good to see you. Welcome. Hey katy. What is the deal with this. Scott pruett has new controversy every day. Why is this one potentially a big deal as well. This guy, the head of his security detail, was instrumental in clearing the way for some of the spending on travel and other sort of perks of office that have come under scrutiny from both congress and the epa inspector general. There were objections at the agency from senior Staff Members who thought that this type of spending was improper and unnecessary. And this guy, pratta was the guy who both signed off on it and who tried to tamp down on opposition from within the agency. He was successful on that front. At least one of the contracts has now come under skrutny. That for a surveillance sweep for bugs in scott pruetts office was steered by this guy, pratta to an official or a Business Partner of his who works with his outside firm. So you have the merger of the outside employment, which is controversial and something that the federal government tries to restrict, particularly when it comes to federal agents, and scott pruetts spending in a way that is sure to draw additional scrutiny from lawmakers. Pratta dot a waver to have outside employment under the obama administration. Whats the deal with that . Thats correct. He got this waiver in 2013 that allowed him to start a Security Firm that would do a very narrow scope of work, that being mostly related to cyber security. However, what he is advertising on his website a website that does feature this guy how got the 3,000 contract for the security sweep is a much broader array of services, including sort of private intelligence, executive protection, even Background Investigations. And that is something that has piqued the interests of democratic lawmakers who sent a letter to the epa demanding answers. Even trey gowdy, chairman one of the committees that has oversight over the epa expressed interest in his role and asked that the epa provide mr. Perrotta and four other epa officials to the committee to answer questions. The other story thats bubbling today is mulvaney, Donald Trumps budget director talking before bankers and saying if you want to get influence with lawmakers, facetime with lawmakers you have got to pay themmer mo, basically saying pay to play is totally fine. Ken, donald trump campaigned against this. He talked about how he would pay to play and get lawmakers to kiss his a he actually said those words. Any indication that the president is unhappy with the budget director or is this thing totally fine . You would have to think he would be. That said we have any number of officials within his cabinet including pruett and some folks who have already got ten boot like tom price who did do things that sort of embodied the swamp that he pledged to drain. And this administration, i guess you could call it, by mulvaney is the type of thin we sort of suspect and sometimes we are able to peel back sort of pull back the curtain on and show as reporters but its not the type of thing that you should go out there and voice and articulate to lobbyists even though many of them understand thats the way it works. That is a faux pas even by the trump administration. We voted for him on a number of ideas, and this idea that politics was broken because people could pay their way in. Donald trump was saying im going to stop that. Now it seems perfectly okay for member of his own administration to go out there and all but brag about that being the way business works even as donald trump is president. Ken vogel New York Times political reporter. Ken thank you for coming on. I appreciate it. Thanks katy i enjoyed it. To more staffing troubles for the easy president s cabinet. His nominee for cia director gina haswell is meeting with joni ernst. Haswell is tied to harsh interrogation techniques. Following all of the action from capitol hill is msnbcs garrett haake. Pompeo got through the committee. Et cetera a likely he issing go to be made secretary of state. What sort of hurdle hads should we expect gina haswell to come across in this process. A small bit of news. I am told by the cia she is not meeting with ernst today. She has to do her day job currently as one of the deputy directors of the cia. She face as similar set of problems and a similar Political Landscape to mike pompeo but with a couple of differences. Democrats are skeptical about her record. She has not been a public figure in the past. She has been tied in various ways to the enhanced interrogation policies of the Bush Administration after 9 11. Specifically her environment in socalled black sites and potential involvement in covering up things that cia officers may have done during that time. I say may and potential and im very careful in the way i describe this because the real problem for gina haswell is that so money of this remains classified it means that senators cant even discuss it in what would otherwise be an open confirmation hearing. That has democrats and even some republicans frustrated at this point. Because so much of her record and her backgrounds, what would theoretically be her qualifications for the top job at the skrai is something they cant talk about. In developments today, a number of democrats senator on the Intel Committee sent a letter to the cia asking for some of the informing to be declassified. The cia essentially said we will let you review it but we will not declassify it broadly because it could put our people, our sources and methods in danger. What you might see is essentially a proxy fight over methods that the cia may or may not have used more than a decade ago being played out on gina haspel who will be getting her public introduction to the country no sooner than her confirmation hearing. Rand paul said he would be a no forrer had. He also said he would be a no for pompeo. Should we expect a phone call from the president will change pauls opinion on this as well . Paul has been asked about this. This is a question whether this diminishes his credibility as an opponent of the president on some of the issues he has cared deeply about in the past as a libertarian about civil liberties, enhanced interrogation. I suspect if he continues to hold out in the same way we might see more pressure from the president. He is not on the committee here. He had more say in the nomination of pompeo than he will for haspel. Pauls vote on the tloor could be important but you might also see a similar scenario where you have a couple of democrats willing to vote for haspel and it may make pauls vote on the floor irrelevant. Coming up, where will the Supreme Court stand . For the first time the court is hearing arguments over President Trumps controversial travel ban rgt at thatting people from many muslim majority countries. Hawaii Lieutenant Governor doug chin who has challenged all three versions of the president s ban joins me right after the break to weigh in. You are watching msnbc. Owners always seem so happy . Because theyve chosen the industry leader. Subaru forester holds its value better than any other vehicle in its class according to alg. Better than crv. Better than rav4. Better than rogue. An adventure that starts with a Subaru Forester will always leave you smiling. Get 0 apr financing on the 2018 Subaru Forester. Sometimes you need an expert. I got it. And sometimes those experts need experts. On it. [ crash ] and sometimes the expert the expert needed Needs Insurance expertise. Its all good. Steve, youre covered for general liability. And, paul, we got your back with workers comp. Wow, its like a party in here. Where are the hors doeuvres, right . [ clanking ] tartlets . We cover commercial vehicles, too. I think theres something wrong with your sink. Wyou know whats not awesome . Gigspeed internet. When only certain people can get it. Lets fix that. Lets give this guy gig really . And these kids, and these guys, him, ah. Oh hello. That lady, these houses yes, yes and yes. And dont forget about them. Uh huh, sure. Still yes xfinity delivers gig speed to more homes than anyone. Now you can get it, too. Welcome to the party. No one, even the president of United States, is above the law. We will we have challenged him. We will continue to challenge him as long as all americans, including new americans, are treated with equal dignity and equal fairness. That was gold star father khan whose some was killed in iraq. He spoke outside the Supreme Court. As the high court took up a challenge to the latest version of trumps controversial travel ban which he signed last september. A decision is expected by the end of june. The order put restrictions on visas for travelers from iran, libya, syria, somalia, yemen and north korea as well as some government officials from venezuela. Chad was part of the proclamation but was removed after the white house said it met new visa requirements. This version just like the two previous versions was blocked by federal judges but the Supreme Court allowed the administration to enforce the order while the legal fight is underway. White House Press Secretary sarah Huckabee Sanders had this to say in the past hour. Without the ability to impose entry restrictions, the United States may be forced to unsuspectingly allow dangerous criminals or terrorists into the country. Additionally, without the restrictions Foreign Governments have little incentive to improve their information sharing and Identity Management practices. The focus of this travel ban has been on safety and security. It is limited to a small number of countries. Doug chen is hawaiis lptd govern. As the states attorney general he challenged all three versions of the ban and he was at the Supreme Court for todays arguments. Lieutenant governor, thank you so much for being there. You were there inside court . You were able to get an ear on it in a way that we could not. What is your opinion of how the justices seem to be leaning . It was very active. Eight out of the nine justices, everyone except Justice Thomas asked good questions on both sides. And i can tell you one thing, its going to be a split decision. And it will all boil down to where the middle of the road justices end up deciding. Solicitor general francisco told the court this was a different version than the other two versions. Lets listen to how he described it. It is different than past proclamations but it is typical in the sense that it seeks to identify harmful conduct that a Foreign Government is engaging in. And then it imposes sanctions in order to pressure that government to change. Thats what president carter did rapt to iran, what president reagan did with respect to a. Here the harmful conduct is the failure to provide with us that minimum baseline of information. Lieutenant governor im sorry, the solicitor general is obviously arguing in favor of the travel ban on behalf of the administration. What is your response to that argument there . Heres the biggest difference of all. Both the carter and reagan order had end dates. This is a permanent indefinite travel ban that has no endate whatsoever. So thats the concern is that what the president has done is taken what we described as an iron wrecking ball to the immigration code that congress put out thats really congresss prerogative in terms of deciding what who can come into the country and who cannot. So that was our objection. And thats how we responded to solicitor general francisco. The government argues this is not a ban on religion. It is a ban on a country that has dangerous practices in place or lacking practices in place in terms of vetting or being able to offer materials on the people that are coming into the country. From a lot of folks that were inside the court today it seemed to them that the justices maybe were leaning more in favor of upholding this ban than they could have been for the past versions of the ban. And walking a way from this idea that is a muslim ban and trying to make it more focused on the countries themselves. Are you concerned that your argument not going to be as strong with these justices as it would have been for the others . We cited too Supreme Court precedent that each members this court looked to where they said the actual standard that you look at isnt just what the actual people have done but its actually what does a reasonable observer think if they are looking at what happened here. What we are arguing is that a reasonable observer, if they look at what trump said on the campaign trail but e