This plan being formulated, more power for the generals to determine troops levels. Lets head immediate ly to the white house with hallie jackson, analysis with dana milbank and george will. Hans, let me start with you. Tell us about the plan and how it differs from president obamas strategy. Its namely a directional shift. Obama clearly was winding down the war. He wanted to end up with around 8,400 troops. Thats how many are there, now theres an indication that it will be winding up. Its not a drastic increase. He had a variety of policy reviews when president obama took office, they did more than 30,000 troops for the second surge. One thing we need to be clear, this is still very much in discussion. An Administration Official just told me this has not gone to the policy committee yet the princip Principles Committee at the National Security council so it gives you a sense theres deliberating over this and that gets into the second question. Theres so many numbers out there in terms of how many might be nato and u. S. I think she should shy away. The important thing is the direction and this marks a shift in the direction. Thats the significance along with what youre saying which is to say more empowerment for ground commanders. Weve seen that in yemen and somalia and weve certainly seen that in syria and iraq. Whats the president hoping to accomplish, hallie and how is he explaining the change of heart, if you will . Or is the white house bothering to explain that . Let me take the second part first. The answer is not yet. We havent heard from the president publicly since this started to come out that hes weighing these new options in afghanistan and looking at the various presentations that have been given him so far. We expect to hear that from sean spicer some time in the next hour. It will likely be one of if not the first question posed to the press secretary at the white house. Let me answer the first part of your question about what the white house hopes to accomplish here. Sean spicer was asked about that and he answered that question with more questions, craig, which is an indication there is still some hammering out of strategy going on here on pennsylvania avenue. You know the administration has talked about wanting to protect u. S. National security interests. Thats a priority and how they answer the question on its face but there are more questions of how do we make that work . How do you remove troops from the country after you stabilize it if and when that happens. What you are hearing from the administration is were still working to figure out what those options are which is why that question is out there, craig. President trump also tweeting up a storm in reaction to the sally yates and James Clapper hearing around this time yesterday. What are we hearing from him about that . You said it, tweeting up a storm. After the sally yates hearing theres a question of how is the white house going to respond to this . More questions about this today. You can see these tweets sally yates made the make feed ya extremely unhappy today, she said nothing but old news. In another tweet director clapper reiterated what everybody including the fake media already knows. There is no evidence of collusion with russia and trump. And adding the russia trump collusion story is a total hoax, when will this taxpayer funded charade end . Lets be clear that the hearing focused on russian interference in the election and Michael Flynns role and what sally yates warned the white house. Thats real. That happed, chussle was on talking aut how there is new news coming out of the hearing, how sally yates went to the white house, came here twice in foreign talk with counsel don mcgahn in his office, her, him and two other staffers to explain why she was concerned that Michael Flynn was compromised by the russians. Michael flynn remained in that position for 18 more days and that is a question now, what happened in those 18 days . How does the white house explain to the American People why Michael Flynn remained in that position for more than two weeks after the first warning came out from sally yates, craig. A lot of reaction coming out here. Youve heard it, for example, from chris murphy as well talking about this, too. Naveed, what did you learn from sally yates and more about what you did not learn from her yesterday. I think exactly what hallie said. The burning question on the tip of my tongue is why, if the white house was informed of this concern look, im sort of agog why flynn was hired in the first place knowing he was fired by a previous president. That aside why once the president was informed by mcgahn that there was a legitimate security concern, the specifics dont matter but he was they was informed there was a legitimate security concern, why did he keep anymore place . Thats the question the American Publicies an answer to and one sally yates didnt answer and should havent answered but thats the big question. Why was he kept in place . The answer for that, frankly, craig, is going to be a political one. I think the president was faced with a question of if he cut anyone at that point it would have been simply to justify the concerns people had about his connection to russia so i think he made a political decision and swe kept someone who was a Security Risk in place for 18 days and the American Public is owed an explanation. Naveed jamali, thank you. Lets turn two opinion writers for the washington, george will, who is also an nbc news and msnbc contributor and dana milbank as well. George, let me start with you, sir. This is presint trump on afghanistan in late november of 2013. Here is his tweet, his often preferred method of communication with the masses. Heres his tweet we have wasted an enormous amount of blood and treasure in afghanistan. Their government has zero appreciation. Lets get out. How does this change in strategy . How does it jibe with America First . Well, clearly it doesnt. But it does jibe with the anxieties that are felt in the pentagon and elsewhere over the pocket that things would not have gone as far wrong in the middle east, particularly with the rise of isis, if the United States had negotiated a status of forces agreement sufficient to keep, say, 10,000 troops in iraq. Im not taking a position on this, but there are serious men and women who believe that things would be much better if we had left a residual force in iraq. That is now being applied to afghanistan. That there might be some Critical Mass of american troops that would be a stabilizing force there. The problem is that we all have to ask at all times the question that general petraeus asked when he first became began getting involved in iraq which is tell me how this ends. It probably doesnt end. This is a lowgrade fever, a lowgrade conflict and it could go on and on for many, many years involving a very light american footprint but one and this is the theory thats going to be tested one large enough to make a difference. Dana, the plan also reportedly includes handing off decisions like troop levels to the pentagon. Is that wise . Well, certainly when i talk to a lot of National Security expe experts theyre pleased the pentagon is taking the lead on this, on north korea, on developments in iraq and syria because they think that is where the expertise is and i think wh youre seeing ovell here is something of an acknowledgment by the president , by the white house that he is going to be shaped by events more than hes going to come in and have a wholesale new Foreign Policy and isolationist policy, America First. Well, reality is getting in the way so were seeing more continuity than a change or radical departure that this president promised and thats reassuring. George, when you look at whats happening right now, potentially whats going to happen in afghanistan, you look what the we did in syria, you look to iraq to a certain extent, how would you characterize this administrations approach to Foreign Policy so far . Improvisational. You say what we did in syria. I dont know how to characterize what we did in syria. It was a a that hard i can spasm 59 cruise missiles based on, apparently, the president ial daughter showing the president truly horrifying pictures of children suffering from a chemical weapons attack but beyond that it was a one off event that signalled no change in american policy towards sir which is remaining improvisational driven by events and photojournalism. Lets pivot and talk about what we saw play out yesterday what will continue to play out for some time the russia flynn controversy. A lot of folks want to hear from the white House Counsel because sally yates painted a very unflattering picture of how don mcgahn handled the information he was given. Take a listen to what she said. One of the questions mr. Mcgahn asked me when i went back over the second day was essentially why does it matter to doj if one white house official lies to another white house official . And so we explained it was a whole lot more than that. There was a request made by mr. Mcgahn in the second meeting as to whether or not they would be able to look at the underlying evidence that we had. I called him first thing monday morning to let him know that we would allow them to come over and review the underlying evidence. He had to call me back, he was not available then and i do not hear back until that afternoon of monday the 30th. And that was the end of this episode . Nobody came over to look at the material . I dont know what happened after that because that was my last day with doj. Dana, what do you make of the white house responses to this controversy so far . Its impossible, craig. To know what the response was. Sally yates was saying she didnt see any response that she could speak of during the time she was there but she was fired four days later in the whole travel ban imbroglio. Its been noted repeatedly he stayed on the job for 18 days. Its possible Michael Flynn would still be on the job if this had not leaked, his russian connections, to the Washington Post and others and even now donald trump is saying the issue isnt pliMichael Flynn, its ho the information sally yates had is public. So hes still saying its about the leaks. Clearly folks on capitol hill would like to question don mcgahn. Im sure the president would have some executive privilege things to say and we may never know but clearly President Trump still seems to be saying that Michael Flynn didnt do mig i dont think. George, this is this criticism that republicans many of them seem to care more about Donald Trumps judicial nominations than this particular controversy. This is what a top official in the Bush Justice Department wrote today for the National Security blog law fare. This is Jack Goldsmith several conservative friends have chastised me for being too hard on mcgahn, most importantly they said he was doing a great job in selecting conservative judges. Im not so sure the tradeoff is worth it for conservatives and the opportunity costs of dealing with the investigation will be large. Is he right here, george will . Because we did hear republicans yesterday talk far more about unmasking and Hillary Clintons emails than what flynn did. I think they can do both things. They can attend to their judicial nominations, of which they have an enormous number to make and also pursue this investigation but i think what some republicans are missing is the fact that attorney general yates went to the white house to protect two things. Obviously she went to protect National Security on the fear that mr. Flynn was susceptible pressure culminating in blackmail but she also went and i think first went to protect the Vice President who she said we now have evidence is saying things that are not true and hes not intentionally saying things that are not not true. He was saying things that werent true based on assurance he is received from general flynn and she wanted to stop that. Dana milbank, good to have you. George will, welcome aboard, sir. Good to have you on the team at msnbc and nbc news. Nice to be with you. Nbcs lester holt will be sitting down with President Trump for an exclusive interview. You can see that interview thursday on nightly news when lester anchors from the nations capital. President trump denying any campaign ties to russia. So then why is republican Lindsey Graham calling for an investigation into the president s business ties to moscow . Well ask House Intel Committee member Eric Swalwell about that and former president barack obama in italy for a conference on foot security and Climate Change. A live report from milan on his speech and what hes saying about some of the Trump Administrations policy and we are, as we frequently are, a few moments away from the White House Press briefing with sean spicer. When that happens, we will bring it to you live. David. Whats going on . Oh hey thats it . Yeah. Everybody two seconds dear sebastian, after careful consideration of your application, it is with great pleasure that we offer our congratulations on your acceptance. Through the Tuition Assistance program, every day mcdonalds helps more people go to college. Its part of our commitment to being americas best first job. All umm. Ed. You wouldnt want your painter to quit part way, i think you missed a spot. So when it comes to pain relievers, why put up with just part of a day . Aleve, live whole not part. You want this color over the whole house . With all the things youll never learn from a book. Expedia. Everything in one place, so you can travel the world better. Better than a manual, and my hygienist says it does. But. Theyre not all the same. Turns out, theyre really. Different. Who knew . I had no idea. So, she said look for. One thats shaped like a dental tool with a round. Brush head. Go pro with oralb. Oralbs rounded brush head surrounds each tooth to. Gently remove more plaque and. Oralb crossaction is clinically proven to. Remove more plaque than sonicare diamondclean. My mouth feels so clean. Ill only use an oralb the 1 brand used by dentists worldwide. Oralb. Brush like a pro. Our report will make some people mad and some people happy. I understand that. But what i dont want them arguing about is the that adam schiff had his thumb on the scale as a democrat or someone had their thumb on the scale as a republican, were doing one investigation. Its not republican, not democrat. One. Congressman mike conaway there. The texas republican now leading the house intelligence investigation into President Trumps white house. Devin nunes stepped down last month after an Ethics Committee investigation was announced. Eric swalwell sits on the House Intelligence Committee. Good to have you back, sir. Just throng that soundbite there from your colleague, how would you assess the House Intelligence Committee and its investigation into russian haing and e Trump Campaign . Craig were back on track and boy does it feel good to be back on track. This committee has always worked in a bipartisan fashion. Thats why ive enjoyed serving on it the past three years. This is what our constituents expect from us. This is our National Security and this is an attack on our sovereignty so the best thing we can do for our country and constituents is understand what happened, find out whether any u. S. Persons worked with the russians and then put reforms in place to make sure we never find ourselves or our democracy attacked like that again. Lets turn to our fuse of the day, the white house considering sending more troops to afghanistan. Whats your assessment based on what you know . Is that the solution . Do we need more boots on the ground there . We certainly never want to be attacked from a plot that comes out of fighters in afghanistan so im mindful of that but, craig, were operating under authorities that were granted back in 2001 so i think the president needs to tell the count play is the strategy in afghanistan . Go to the congress to get a new authorization and also tell us who are our friends because right now the president has gone out of his way to lal yen nate our nato partners as well as other partners in the region so we cant go it alone anywhere in the world let alone the middle east so he needs to do those three things. Senator Lindsey Graham, senior senator from south carolina, asked James Clapper, the former director of National Intelligence asked him about trumps business ties. I want to play that exchange. Heres the testimony from yesterday. Did you ever find a situation where a trump business interest in russia gave you concern . Not in the course of the preparation of the Intelligence Community assessment. Since . Im sorry. At all. Any time. M senator graham, i cant comment on that because that impacts the investigation. I have no evidence that the Trump Business Organization did anything illegal with the russians, i have no evidence of collusion but do i want to know about business ties